The Mayflower and Historical Culture in Britain, 1620-2020
The Mayflower and Historical Culture in Britain, 1620-2020
复制标题
五月花号与英国历史文化，1620-2020
DOI：
10.1093/ehr/cead152
复制
发表时间：
2023
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Downey E
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Downey E
2020年，英美世界通过一系列活动纪念跨大西洋五月花号航行400周年。对五月花号故事的强烈兴趣并不是什么新现象，尤其是在美国，五月花号是国家“起源故事”的基石。但清教徒的故事在历史上也激发了英国人的想象力。本文概述了从新英格兰编年史到当今历史学家的后殖民批评的年表，以帮助理解这次航行在英国的文化重要性。其间，它对不同群体进行了主题分析，这些群体可以利用这个故事来构建道德和身份，从浪漫主义者和废奴主义者到英美外交官和公民支持者。我们认为，从长远的角度理解这次航行的来世，可以让我们更细致地理解历史观念如何在更广泛的政治和公民社会领域中发展和演变。我们使用历史文化的概念：一种适应记忆、公共历史、遗产和流行历史之间相互作用的方法，以及跨媒体形式（小说、戏剧、电影）和互动空间（城市、政治、运动）的相互作用。随着纪念活动在英国及其他地区继续发挥影响力，以及对历史纠正的更批判性方法的需求不断增加，我们因此开发了一个批判框架，以理解“历史”的强大吸引力——无论是过去的还是现在的。
In 2020 the Anglo-American world marked the 400th anniversary of the trans-Atlantic Mayflower voyage with a programme of activities. Intensive and focused interest in the story of the Mayflower is not a new phenomenon—especially in the United States, where it is the bedrock of the nation’s ‘origin story’. But the tale of the Pilgrims has historically also captured the British imagination. This article outlines a chronology for understanding the cultural importance in Britain of this voyage, from the New England chroniclers to the postcolonial critiques of historians today. In between, it offers a thematic analysis of the different groups which could use the story in their construction of morality and identity, from Romanticists and abolitionists to Anglo-American diplomats and civic boosters. Understanding the afterlife of the voyage in this long perspective, we argue, provides us with a more nuanced understanding of how ideas of history develop and evolve within broader arenas of politics and civil society. We use the concept of historical culture: an approach that is attuned to the interplay between memory, public history, heritage and popular history, and across forms of media (novels, plays, film) and spaces of interaction (cities, politics, movements). As the vogue for commemoration continues to exert power in Britain and beyond, and so does an increasing demand for more critical approaches to historical redress, we thus develop a critical framework that understands the powerful draw of ‘history’—both past and present.