A History of the Representation of 'Gypsies' in Early Modern Britain

对被称为“埃及人”、“吉卜赛人”、“吉普赛人”、“罗姆人”和“流浪者”的人的态度从来都不是单一的。相反，这种名称的多样性表明了对这个多样化社会群体的持续文化重新解释。我的项目从一开始就考察了这一过程：在近代早期的英国。在最糟糕的情况下，关于这个问题的学术研究通过依赖简化的漫画，促进了罗姆人的历史边缘地位。我的项目试图通过考虑吉普赛人形象的表现与历史上罗姆人的生活经历之间的关系来纠正这一问题。档案i将从研究早期现代立法描述“埃及”人民的变化方式开始。从1530年到1597年，他们被与国内流浪汉分开对待，受到不同程度的惩罚，我将通过国家档案馆的档案来探索。然后我将继续展示吉普赛人的形象是如何被其他社会群体的形象所影响的。Dekker称吉普赛人“比犹太人更分散，更令人憎恨”，1569年一项关于天主教“伪装牧师”的法案草案将反吉普赛人立法作为其框架。我将研究对埃及人和吉普赛人的双重理解，以及这种同音字对档案研究构成挑战的方式。文学文本本章将研究吉普赛的文学表现和罗姆人生活经历的档案证据之间的鸿沟。它将研究“假冒埃及人”的法律概念，它建立了“吉普赛人”作为表演的地位，为戏剧表现奠定了基础。它将作为我接下来探索吉普赛人身份的文化建构的概念介绍。在文学和非文学文本中构建的吉普赛社会最常见的特征是它在更大的社会网络中的处境。这些社会结构涵盖了宗教、军事、家庭和国家，通过竞赛既威胁又加强了“合法”的社会秩序。我将研究里德的“马丁·马克·奥尔”和“小埃及国王”约翰·法奥在苏格兰的到来，作为吉普赛人社会作为反文化的建设的例子。本章将探讨吉普赛人的社会身份是如何通过预言的实践来调解的，反之亦然。我将考察约翰逊的《吉普赛人的变形》和莫尔的《关于异端的对话》，作为吉普赛人手相术在搞笑的同时也促进社会发展的例子。我将探索算命的戏剧性表现，并回到基思·托马斯（Keith Thomas）的作品中，提出作为一种伪科学实践，算命在近代早期的英国是被社会接受的。这一时期现存的关于罗姆语的记录有两份，一份是布尔德的《知识入门第一卷》，另一份是1615- 1616年的《温彻斯特自白》。然而，罗姆人最常被描述为说方言。本章将研究这一现象，作为理解他们与国内流浪汉明显接近的一种手段，同时也是考虑该时期种族学术中该群体的隐形性的一种方式。

Attitudes towards those called, variously, 'Egyptians', ''Gyptians', 'Gypsies', 'Roma', and 'Travellers' have never been singular. Rather, this multiplicity of names suggests a continual cultural reinterpretation of this diverse social group. My project examines this process at its outset: in early modern Britain. At its worst, scholarship on this subject has facilitated the historical marginality of the Romani people through reliance upon reductive caricature. My project seeks to redress this by considering the relationship between the representation of the figure of the Gypsy, and the lived experience of the historical Roma.The ArchivesI will begin by examining the changing ways in which early modern legislation delineated the 'Egyptian' people. From 1530 to 1597, they were treated separately from domestic vagabonds and with varying degrees of penal severity, as I will explore through The National Archives' assize records. I will then move on to show how representations of Gypsies were informed by and informed representations of other social groups. Dekker calls them 'more scattered than the Jewes, and more hated', and a 1569 draft bill concerned with Catholic 'Disguised Priests' uses the anti-Gypsy legislation as its framework. I will examine the twin understandings of Egyptians and Gypsies, and the way in which this homophone poses a challenge to archival research.The Literary TextThis chapter will examine the gulf between the literary representation of the Gypsy and the evidence from the archive about the lived experience of Romani people. It will examine the ways in which the legal concept of the 'counterfeit Egyptian,' which established the status of 'Gypsy' as performative, lays the ground for theatrical representation. It will serve as a conceptual introduction for my exploration of the cultural construction of Gypsy identity which follows.Social OrderThe most common feature of Gypsy society, as constructed in literary and non-literary texts, is its situation within larger social networks. Encompassing the religious, military, familial, and the national, these social structures both threatened and bolstered 'legitimate' social order through emulation. I will examine Rid's 'Martin Mark-All' and the arrival of John Faw, 'King of Little Egypt', in Scotland, as examples of the construction of Gypsy society as counter-culture.Fortune-TellersThis chapter will ask how the social identity of the Gypsy was mediated through the practice of prognostication and vice versa. I will examine Jonson's 'Gypsies Metamorphos'd' and More's 'Dialogue Concerning Heresies' as examples of the construction of Gypsy chiromancy as ludic but also socially facilitative. I will explore the dramatic representations of fortune-telling and return to the work of Keith Thomas to suggest that, as a pseudo-scientific practice, fortune-telling was socially acceptable in early modern Britain.LanguageThere are two extant records of the Romani language from the period, Boorde's 'Fyrst Boke of the Introduction of Knowledge', and the Winchester Confessions of 1615-16. However, Roma are most commonly depicted as speaking cant. This chapter will examine this phenomenon as a means of understanding their apparent proximity to domestic vagabonds, but also as a way of considering the invisibility of the group within the scholarship of ethnicity in the period.