"The First History of Elizabethan England: The Making of William Camden's Annals"

自17世纪出版以来，威廉·卡姆登的《编年史》经常被描述为塑造伊丽莎白一世及其统治时期积极遗产的唯一最重要来源。该书最初于1615年和1625年以拉丁文印刷，在罗伯特·诺顿的英文译本于1630年出版后开始流行，卡姆登的同时代人因其坚持使用第一手资料而称赞它改善了英国的史学实践。事实上，它的声誉只会随着时间的推移而增长，因为许多现代学者仍然认为《编年史》是一部经过仔细研究的历史，由卡姆登撰写，受到他的赞助人威廉·伯利以及古代历史学家塔西佗和波利比乌斯的影响。然而，尽管有大量的材料证据可以从这一时期的工作的创作-即卡姆登的年鉴草案和他的信件-没有一个上述学者深入研究，以证实他们对历史的主张。关于塔西佗的《编年史》和波利比乌斯的《历史》等二手资料如何被用于卡姆登的作品，也没有足够的文学研究。因此，这留下了许多关于卡姆登历史的疑问：到底是谁帮助创作了这部作品、使用了哪些具体来源、如何使用它们以及为什么使用它们。因此，本项目的目的是研究上述四个领域，以产生对卡姆登编年史作者身份的第一次全面研究，并提供对作者来源和意图的迫切需要的见解，因此，该项目的第一部分将开始，对两份基本完成的大英图书馆保存的编年史，突出了不止一位作者如何帮助制作这部作品。毕竟，罗伯特·科顿爵士的手在过去的古地理研究中已经在草稿中得到了承认，但学者们注意到，其他手还有待确定。因此，通过研究卡姆登的信件，在博德利图书馆和其他地方举行，目的是发现谁，除了卡姆登和棉花，共同撰写的年鉴。接下来，所有这些文件将被分析，试图汇编一个目录的古代和当代的来源中使用的历史。这份目录对项目的最后阶段至关重要--对《编年史》与这些资料的关系进行文学分析，特别是与塔西佗和波利比乌斯的著作的关系--因为卡姆登在《编年史》的序言中提到了他对这些历史学家的感激之情。因此，塔西佗和波利比乌斯的著作直到世纪的传播将被考察，与此同时，古典教育的性质，在这段时间，以确定如何密切年鉴的作者（S）遵循古代史学传统。毕竟，正如接受研究领域的许多主要学者所证明的那样，只有在研究特定时期古代文本可及性的物质证据时，才能对古典作品和后来的相关作品进行富有成效的互文性分析。人们也普遍认为，每一代读者都会对特定的文本做出新的解释，因此，考虑围绕塔西佗和波利比乌斯的古典和早期现代观点，对卡姆登的（和他的合著者）的意图是跟随这些古代作家的脚步。最终，通过重新审视所有的材料，文学和文化的证据有关年鉴，这个项目将产生早期现代史学实践，英国古物教育，威廉卡姆登和他的同事，最后，当代对伊丽莎白一世和她的统治本身的态度更好的理解

William Camden's Annals has often been described as the single most important source in shaping the positive legacy of Elizabeth I and her reign since its publication in the seventeenth century. Printed initially in Latin in 1615 and 1625, it became popular after Robert Norton's English translation was published in 1630, where it was celebrated by Camden's contemporaries for improving English historiographical practices due to its insistent use of primary sources. In fact, its reputation has only grown with time, since many modern-day scholars have still referred to the Annals as an impeccably researched history, written by Camden, having been influenced by his patron, William Burghley, as well as the ancient historians, Tacitus and Polybius. However, despite ample material evidence being available from the period regarding the work's creation - namely Camden's drafts of the Annals and his correspondence - not one of the aforementioned scholars has studied it in depth to substantiate their claims on the history. There has also been insufficient literary research done in terms of how secondary sources such as Tacitus' Annals and Polybius' Histories have been used in Camden's work. This has consequently left many questions unanswered about Camden's history: who exactly helped to create the work, what specific sources were used to do so, how they were used and why. It is therefore the aim of this project to research the four above-mentioned areas to produce the first comprehensive study of the authorship of Camden's Annals and to provide much needed insights into the authors' sources and intentions, so that we may have a better understanding of the Elizabethan period overall.The first part of the project will therefore begin with a palaeographical analysis of the two largely completed drafts of the Annals kept at the British Library to highlight how more than one author helped to produce the work. After all, the hand of Sir Robert Cotton has already been recognised within the drafts by past palaeographical research, but scholars have noted that other hands are yet to be identified. So, by studying Camden's correspondence, held at the Bodleian Library and elsewhere, the aim is to discover who, aside from Camden and Cotton, co-authored the Annals. Next, all these documents will be analysed to try to compile a catalogue of the ancient and contemporary sources used within the history. This catalogue will then be crucial for the final stage of the project - a literary analysis of the Annals in relation to these sources, in particular, to Tacitus' and Polybius' works - since Camden mentions his indebtedness to these historians in the preface of the Elizabethan work.As a result, the transmission of Tacitus' and Polybius' works up to the seventeenth century will be looked at, alongside the nature of classical education during this time, to determine how closely the Annals' author(s) followed ancient historiographical traditions. After all, as evidenced by many leading scholars in the field of reception studies, it is only in studying material evidence regarding the accessibility of ancient texts during a given time period that a fruitful intertextual analysis of classical and later linked works can follow. It is also widely acknowledged that each generation of readers bring new interpretations to a particular text, so it will be important to consider both the classical and early-modern viewpoints surrounding Tacitus and Polybius to make valuable conclusions as to what Camden's (and his co-authors') intentions were by following in the footsteps of these ancient writers.Ultimately then, by taking a fresh look at all the material, literary and cultural evidence available regarding the Annals, this project will produce a greater understanding of early-modern historiographical practices, of English antiquarian education, of William Camden and his associates and finally, of contemporary attitudes towards Elizabeth I and her reign itself