Catalonia since the Spanish Civil War: reconstructing the nation
Catalonia since the Spanish Civil War: reconstructing the nation
复制标题
西班牙内战以来的加泰罗尼亚：重建国家
DOI：
10.1080/01419870.2014.885552
复制
发表时间：
2014
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
J. Etherington
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Etherington
该书回顾了1927年佛朗哥镇压在20世纪40年代和50年代;第三章着眼于加泰罗尼亚主义的复兴开始于20世纪50年代中期，直到1970年;第四图表加泰罗尼亚民族主义的轨迹在佛朗哥政权的黄昏和它的灭亡;而最后一章分析了从20世纪80年代中期到今天的这段时期，其特点是西班牙国家的区域化和加泰罗尼亚民族主义的制度化。这本书以一个受欢迎的尾声结束，讨论了最近的独立动员。尽管研究过加泰罗尼亚案例的人对本书所涉及的大部分内容都很熟悉，但道林的叙述的独创性或许在于他强调了天主教神职人员在佛朗哥镇压期间在促进加泰罗尼亚事业方面所发挥的主导作用。这不仅有趣地揭示了教会中亲佛朗哥的西班牙等级制度和神职人员中重要的亲加泰罗尼亚部分之间的分歧，而且有助于解释天主教对加泰罗尼亚民族主义的持续影响，即使前者受到更广泛的世俗化社会进程的深刻影响。虽然这篇论文本身并不是原创性的，但它对一场在最近的研究中经常被遗忘的辩论做出了有趣的贡献。然而，另一方面，这本书也代表了一个错失的机会。首先，出版的时机虽然恰当，但意味着作者无法进行更深刻的思考，在更广泛的历史背景下解释支持独立的民族主义。第二点和相关的一点是，道林的叙述无法解释--而不是描述--加泰罗尼亚民族主义随着时间的推移而发展。如前所述，作者提出并发展了一个有趣的观点，即神职人员在加泰罗尼亚民族主义中所扮演的角色，但他随后未能将这一见解置于对加泰罗尼亚民族主义的更广泛解释中。有人可能会说，忠实于其具体方法的基本历史研究应该集中于发现历史文物，使我们能够以新的眼光看待历史事件，而将理论化留给更具规则性的社会科学家。但是，即使这样的具体和nomethetic策略之间的二分法是可持续的-许多学者怀疑这一点-道林的帐户可能过于依赖二手资料，他能够构建一个原始帐户从历史文物，他发现。
Book reviews 1927 of Francoist repression in the 1940s and 1950s; the third chapter looks at the revival of Catalanism beginning in the mid-1950s until 1970; the fourth charts the trajectory of Catalan nationalism during the twilight of the Franco regime and its demise; while the final chapter analyses the period from the mid-1980s until the present day, characterized by the rolling out of the regionalized Spanish state and the institutionalization of Catalan nationalism. The book ends with a welcome epilogue discussing the recent proindependence mobilization. Although most of the ground covered will be familiar to those who have studied the Catalan case, perhaps the originality of Dowling’s account rests on the emphasis that he places on the leading role played by the Catholic priesthood in promoting the Catalan cause during the years of Francoist repression. This not only casts an interesting light on the division in the Church between the pro-Franco Spanish hierarchy and an important pro-Catalan sector within the priesthood, but helps explain the continued influence of Catholicism over Catalan nationalism even when the former was deeply affected by the wider social process of secularization. While this thesis is not original per se, it is nonetheless an interesting contribution to a debate that has been too often forgotten in more recent studies.On the other hand, however, there is a sense in which the book represents a missed opportunity. First, the timing of the publication, while apposite, has meant that the author has been unable to develop a more profound reflection that explains pro-independence nationalism within the wider historical context. The second and related point here concerns the inability of Dowling’s account to explain–as opposed to describe–the development of Catalan nationalism over time. As noted, the author raises and develops an interesting point concerning the role played by the priesthood in Catalan nationalism, but he subsequently fails to place this insight within a broader explanation of Catalan nationalism. It might be argued that a basically historical study, faithful to its idiographic method, should focus on discovering historical artefacts that allow us to view historical episodes in a new light, while leaving theorizing to the more nomothetically orientated social scientists. But even if such a dichotomy between idiographic and nomethetic strategies were sustainable–and many scholars doubt this–Dowling’s account is perhaps too reliant on secondary sources for him to be able to construct an original account from the historical artefacts that he does uncover.