Cultural Projections of Royal Authority in England and Scotland, between the 1580s and the 1640s

1580 年代至 1640 年代英格兰和苏格兰王权的文化投射

• 批准号: 2460656
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: University of St Andrews
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2020
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2020 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2460656
• 关键词: Cultural; Projections; Royal; Authority; England

My thesis will combine cultural with intellectual history to offer a significant contribution to both academic and public history that innovatively incorporates attention to space, place, and change over time. It will provide the first comparative analysis of cultural projections of royal authority in England and Scotland, between the 1580s and the 1640s; i.e. from James VI's personal rule and the onset of what Guy terms Elizabeth I's 'second reign' to the Civil Wars and regicide. How differing, and at times, conflicting ideas of royal authority were projected and articulated in performance, encompassing royal progresses, entries and processions, pageants, masques, plays, tournaments and kingly rites of passage is a subject that has received little, if any, sustained comparative analysis. My thesis will investigate three key questions. Firstly, how were imperial and increasingly absolutist tendencies expressed and challenged, co-existing theories articulated and advocated, and how did royal behaviour and performance location affect ideas projected? Secondly, what was the purpose of such articulations? Were they acts of propaganda, counsel, petition, or nostalgia, and, if divergent from established orthodoxy, forms of resistance? Thirdly, how did such projections work in the context of dynastic Union? Only a comparative study can tell us the relative significance of a changing ideological climate, present or absentee monarchy, national or local traditions, and an individual ruler.Such a study is vital to historical research. England and Scotland in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries witnessed transformations in theories of kingship. After the Henrican Reformation, English rulers asserted secular and spiritual supremacy, but the exact nature of this imperium was debated. In Scotland, a distinctly Stuart notion of imperium came into fruition, with roots in the 1400s, and defining moments during the 1530s and James VI's personal rule. In both countries, the period also saw increasingly prominent defences of absolute royal sovereignty and divine right monarchy, and the continued existence of the Aristotelian mixed polity model, in which authority resided in equal measure in monarch, council and parliament. Analysis of such ideas to date focuses predominantly on textual political theory, the origins of these ideas, and (for England) the innate tension in the theory of imperium resulting from original Henrican ambiguity over its precise definition (for England: Guy, Russell, and Rose; for Scotland: Mason and Cramsie). Despite the cultural turn and scholarly recognition that such developments in political thought were mirrored in political culture (Anglo, Yates, Strong, Smuts and Sharpe), with early modern Tudor and Stuart monarchs increasingly fashioning themselves as Renaissance rulers and court culture and public ceremonial expanding exponentially, cultural projections of key ideas of royal authority have mostly been ignored, save for Scotland in the 1530s (Thomas, Meikle, Harikae) and the examination of the imperial crown in the years preceding my period (Scotland: Mason; England: Hoak). Given the intrinsic connection between culture and politics in this period, examining cultural projections of differing ideas of royal authority in performance is crucial to fully understanding these ideas, as well as determining who pioneered them and to what end. It is vital for comprehending connections between English and Scottish ideas and the (possible) creation of a shared 'British' monarchy. Such a study has the potential to feed into wider areas of analysis, including Anglo-Scottish relations, kingship, constitutional and parliamentary history, as well as cultural politics.

我的论文将联合收割机文化与思想史提供了一个重大的贡献，学术和公共历史，创新性地纳入关注空间，地点，并随着时间的推移变化。它将提供第一个比较分析的皇家权威在英格兰和苏格兰的文化投影，在16世纪80年代和17世纪40年代之间，即从詹姆斯六世的个人统治和什么盖伊术语伊丽莎白一世的'第二次统治'的内战和弑君的开始。关于皇家权威的不同观点，有时甚至是相互冲突的观点，是如何在表演中被投射和表达出来的，包括皇家的进步、参赛和游行、选美、面具、戏剧、比赛和国王的成年仪式，这是一个很少得到持续比较分析的主题。我的论文将探讨三个关键问题。首先，帝国主义和日益增长的专制主义倾向是如何表达和挑战的，共存的理论是如何阐述和倡导的，皇家的行为和表演地点是如何影响所投射的思想的？第二，这种表述的目的是什么？他们是宣传、咨询、请愿或怀旧的行为，如果与既定的正统思想不同，是抵抗的形式吗？第三，在王朝联盟的背景下，这种预测是如何起作用的？只有通过比较研究，我们才能发现思想气候的变化、君主制的存在与否、民族或地方传统以及统治者个人的相对重要性，这种研究对于历史研究至关重要。英格兰和苏格兰在16世纪和17世纪见证了王权理论的转变。亨利改革后，英国统治者宣称世俗和精神至上，但这种帝国的确切性质是有争议的。在苏格兰，一个明显的斯图亚特帝国概念开始实现，起源于15世纪，并在16世纪30年代和詹姆斯六世的个人统治期间具有决定性意义。在这一时期，这两个国家也都日益突出地捍卫绝对的皇家主权和神权君主制，并继续存在着君主、理事会和议会权力平等的混合政体模式。到目前为止，对这些思想的分析主要集中在文本政治理论、这些思想的起源，以及（对英格兰而言）由于最初的亨利主义对其精确定义的模糊性而导致的统治权理论中固有的张力（对英格兰而言：盖伊、罗素和罗斯;对苏格兰而言：梅森和克拉姆西）。尽管文化转向和学术承认，这种发展的政治思想反映在政治文化（安格鲁，耶茨，斯特朗，史末资和夏普），随着早期现代都铎和斯图亚特王朝的君主越来越多地将自己塑造成文艺复兴时期的统治者，宫廷文化和公共仪式呈指数级扩张，皇家权威的关键思想的文化投射大多被忽视了，除了16世纪30年代的苏格兰（托马斯、米克尔、哈里凯）和我所处时期之前的几年对帝国王冠的审查（苏格兰：梅森;英格兰：霍克）。考虑到这一时期文化与政治之间的内在联系，研究皇家权威在表演中的不同观念的文化投射对于充分理解这些观念至关重要，也有助于确定谁是这些观念的先驱，以及为了什么目的。它对于理解英格兰和苏格兰思想之间的联系以及（可能的）建立一个共同的“英国”君主制至关重要。这样的研究有可能进入更广泛的分析领域，包括盎格鲁-苏格兰关系，王权，宪法和议会历史，以及文化政治。