Keats`s Hyperion has been critically assessed as a less accomplished work than its revised version The Fall of Hyperion mainly because it is too Miltonic to be an original work. Sure enough, Keats`s personal urgency is fully impersonalized in the latter by working through an un-Miltonic Dantesque poetic mode as shown in the encounter between Moneta and the poet-narrator. In The Fall of Hyperion, however, the thematic focus falls on the establishment of the poet`s identity, so that the historical context where the very issue of identity comes into question is blurred in the poet-narrator`s dream vision. On the other hand, the central event of Hyperion, the fall of Titans and the advent of Apollo, alludes to the political situation and cultural ethos after Napoleon`s dethronement. Under this preposition this paper examines the relationship between Keats`s poetry writing and the internalization of historical knowledge. Keats configures various historiographies by reference to which some of the Titans interpret the fall in their own ways. Despite different and even contrary notions of history, their conceptual ground of history is derived from the world-view of the Enlightenment represented by Hyperion`s deity at the stake of falling with Saturn`s. The advent of Apollo replacing Hyperion, thus, raises a question as to what character a new "foreseeing" deity ought to have. In an encounter between Mnemosyne and Apollo, Keats makes it salient that such a deity presupposes the vitalization of historical knowledge to serve as a foundation of poetic creation.