Constructing the Early Modern Soldier: Military Masculinity and Violence in the British Imagination, 1560-1660

这项多学科研究考察了英国人想象中的军人阳刚之气和暴力之间的相互作用，以及1560年至1660年间早期现代士兵的塑造。近代早期受到了军事历史学家的特别关注，他们研究了1560年至1660年间军事和海军的发展是否以及如何导致了现代民族国家国际体系的建立，以回应迈克尔·罗伯茨的“军事革命”论文（罗伯茨，1956；帕克，1976；格莱特，1999；帕罗特，2011）。随着常备军队在陆地和海上成为持续的军事力量，最近的许多著作研究了欧洲国家如何试图垄断暴力（Tilly, 1985;Thomson, 1995）。然而，尽管目前新军事史的重点是普通士兵的经历，但关于早期现代军事身份的文章却很少（伍德考克和奥马奥尼，2019）。这些身份和对暴力的理解之间的联系，虽然经常被含蓄地承认，但在以前的史学中尚未被直接研究（Capp, 2012; Blakemore, 2013）。此外，尽管在现代女权主义思想中有大量关于性别和暴力的研究（bell hooks, 1984; Shepherd, 2019），但直到最近，性别历史学家才开始探索现代早期世界的男性气质和暴力，很少关注军事身份（Thomas and Feather, 2013; McCormack, 2015）。相反，迄今为止，大多数研究早期现代战争的性别研究方法都侧重于政治方法（Purkiss, 2009; Hughes, 2012）和女性研究（Hacker, 1981; Lynn, 2012）。

This multidisciplinary study examines the interaction between military masculinities andviolence in the British imagination and the shaping of the early modern soldier between 1560and 1660.The early modern period has received an exceptional amount of attention from militaryhistorians examining whether and how military and naval developments between 1560 and1660 led to the creation of the modern nation-state international system, responding to MichaelRoberts's 'Military Revolution' thesis (Roberts, 1956; Parker, 1976; Glete, 1999; Parrott,2011). As standing armies emerged as continuous military forces on land and at sea, numerousrecent works examine how European states attempted to monopolise violence (Tilly, 1985;Thomson, 1995). However, despite the current focus of new military history on the experiencesof the ordinary soldier, little has been written about early modern military identities (Woodcockand O'Mahony, 2019). The links between these identities and understandings of violence,though often implicitly recognised, have not yet been directly examined in previoushistoriography (Capp, 2012; Blakemore, 2013). Moreover, despite the wide array of work ongender and violence in modern feminist thought (bell hooks, 1984; Shepherd, 2019), onlyrecently have gender historians begun to explore masculinities and violence in the early modernworld, with little focus on military identities (Thomas and Feather, 2013; McCormack, 2015).Instead, most gendered approaches to early modern war to date focus on political approaches(Purkiss, 2009; Hughes, 2012) and women's studies (Hacker, 1981; Lynn, 2012).