The Royal Progresses of James VI & I, c.1567-1625: image-making, gendered authority and collaborative dual-monarchy on the road.

传统上，对詹姆斯六世统治时期的研究重点是他的著作、贝德班的偏袒政治以及他与政治精英的关系。然而，一个新的“英国”君主制的建立和王权的动态变化只有在他的进步的史学空白得到解决后才能完全理解。通过研究詹姆斯在远离皇室管理的首都环境的背景下——道路、城镇、村庄、乡村别墅——该项目将修订17世纪初关于图像制作的正统观念，以及什么构成了“政治”。伊丽莎白一世和查理一世的进展受到了玛丽·希尔·科尔和西沃恩·基南等学者的极大关注。然而，我的硕士论文表明，与学术共识相反，詹姆斯在他的统治期间延续了斯图尔特的进步传统。因此，该项目努力全面挑战罗杰·曼宁（Roger Manning）所阐述的传统观念，即对詹姆斯来说，“皇室的进步首先是狩猎假期”。采用“新英国历史”的方法，认识到苏格兰和英格兰不同的政治背景，同时将不同的历史编纂联系起来，该项目将进一步发展Jenny Wormald关于詹姆斯是“两个国王还是一个”的著名问题。此外，根据安德里亚·托马斯（Andrea Thomas）对前苏格兰君主巡回宫廷的研究，本书将考虑1603年詹姆斯一世是否带着一种独特的苏格兰进步文化南下。它将推进科尔对伊丽莎白发展的性别性质的研究，也将研究詹姆斯的妻子丹麦安娜的发展；迄今为止集中在宫殿周围。这将阐明女性主导的进步如何使安娜凭借自己的权利成为一名政治人物。因此，该项目的主题对于当代关于民族主义、性别政治以及视觉宣传如何塑造公众舆论的辩论具有重要意义。第一个研究问题是詹姆士一世时期的进步是如何组织起来的：他们是如何获得资金的，维持巡回法庭的机制是什么，以及政府是如何“在路上”运作的。这将凸显詹姆斯迄今未被承认的参与旅行决策的行为。第二，詹姆斯和安娜是如何利用进步来彰显王室权威的？通过考虑皇室精英的待客文化——交换礼物、娱乐和狩猎——在一个游移的背景下，该项目将剖析这些文化在贵族自己的影响范围内是如何转变的。它还将研究詹姆斯如何利用1617年的苏格兰之旅来进一步推进他所认为的苏格兰教会圣公会化。第三，进步对那些遇到进步的人有什么影响？该项目将考虑吸引法院的政治利益和由此带来的财政负担。它还将研究非精英主体在公民条目中的参与情况，并衡量他们与雅各宾权力光学的接触；加强了迈克尔·布拉迪克关于早期现代主权的协作性质的研究。研究将利用19世纪古物学家约翰·尼科尔斯（John Nichols）收集的关于詹姆斯进展的原始文件。在苏格兰国家记录中，司库账目（E21）、家庭账簿（E31）和家庭文件（E34）提供了詹姆斯在苏格兰发展过程中的细节。在伦敦的国家档案馆里，《大臣纪事》（LC1/9/10/11）和《财政纪事》（E36/101）也包含了詹姆斯在英国旅行的类似的有启发性的证据。外国大使广泛报告王室的行为和进展，并将被严格用于衡量公众对王室追求的意见。此外，公民记录揭示了许多皇室访问的准备工作，而私人文件，如德文郡收藏的文件，将使评估进展对主人和观众的影响。

Studies of James VI/I's reign traditionally emphasise his writings, the Bedchamber politics of favouritism and his relationship with political elites. However, the creation of a new 'British' monarchy and the changing dynamics of royal power can only be fully understood once the historiographical lacuna of his progresses has been addressed. By studying James in settings removed from the royally-managed environs of the capital -roads, towns, villages, country houses- the project will revise orthodox conceptions of image-making, and what constituted 'the political', at the turn of the 17th century. Elizabeth I's and Charles I's progresses have received considerable attention from academics such as Mary Hill Cole and Siobhan Keenan. However, my Masters dissertation demonstrated that contrary to scholarly consensus, James continued the Stewart tradition of progressing throughout his reigns. Thus, the project strives to comprehensively challenge the conventional notion, articulated by Roger Manning, that for James 'a royal progress was first and foremost a hunting holiday'. Adopting a 'new British history' approach, recognising distinct Scottish and English political contexts whilst connecting the disparate historiographies, the project will further develop Jenny Wormald's notable question on whether James was 'two kings or one'. Moreover, building from Andrea Thomas's work on the itinerant courts of preceding Scottish monarchs, it will consider whether a distinctly Scottish progress culture travelled south with James in 1603. Advancing Cole's work on the gendered nature of Elizabeth's progresses, it will also study those of James's consort Anna of Denmark; hitherto focused upon in palace environs. This will illuminate how female-led progresses rendered Anna a political figure in her own right. The project's themes are thereby significant for contemporary debates about nationalism, gendered politics and how visual propaganda moulds public opinion. The first research question asks how Jacobean progresses were organised: how they were funded, the mechanics of sustaining an itinerant court and how government was conducted 'on the road'. This will highlight James's hitherto unrecognised involvement in decisions regarding travel. Second, how did James and Anna use progresses to project royal authority? By considering cultures of royal-elite hospitality -gift exchange, entertainment and the hunt- in a peripatetic context, the project will dissect how their significance was transformed when deployed within a nobleman's own sphere of influence. It will also examine how James used the 1617 progress to Scotland to further his perceived Anglicanisation of the Scottish church. Third, what impact did progresses have on those who encountered them? The project will consider the political benefits of attracting the court against the financial burden this entailed. It will also examine the involvement of non-elite subjects in civic entries and measure their engagement with Jacobean optics of power; enhancing Michael Braddick's work on the collaborative nature of early modern sovereignty. Research will draw upon the collection of primary documents compiled on James's progresses by nineteenth-century antiquarian John Nichols. At the National Records of Scotland, Treasurer's Accounts (E21), Household Books (E31) and Household Papers (E34) provide particulars regarding the logistics of James's Scottish progresses. At the National Archives in London, Records of the Lord Chamberlain (LC1/9/10/11) and Exchequer (E36/101) contain similarly illuminating evidence of James's travel in England. Foreign ambassadors report extensively on royal behaviour on progress and will be used critically to gauge public opinion of royal pursuits. Additionally, civic records reveal much about preparations for royal visits, whilst private papers such as those of the Devonshire Collection will enable assessment of progresses' impact on hosts and spectators.