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

对詹姆斯六世/我统治的研究传统上强调他的著作、偏袒的后院政治以及他与政治精英的关系。然而，只有在解决了他的进步的史学缺陷之后，才能完全理解一个新的英国君主制的建立和王室权力的变化。通过在首都王室管理的环境--道路、城镇、村庄、乡村别墅--之外的环境中研究詹姆斯，该项目将改变17世纪初关于形象塑造的正统观念，以及什么构成了“政治”。伊丽莎白一世和查尔斯一世的进步受到了玛丽·希尔·科尔和西沃恩·基南等学者的相当大的关注。然而，我的硕士论文表明，与学术共识相反，詹姆斯在整个统治期间延续了斯图尔特进步的传统。因此，该项目努力全面挑战罗杰·曼宁提出的传统观念，即对詹姆斯来说，王室进步首先是一次狩猎假期。该项目采用“新英国历史”的方法，承认苏格兰和英格兰不同的政治背景，同时将不同的历史学联系在一起，将詹妮·沃马尔德关于詹姆斯是“两个国王还是一个”这一引人注目的问题进一步发展。此外，根据安德里亚·托马斯对前苏格兰君主巡回宫廷的研究，它将考虑1603年詹姆斯是否带着一种明显的苏格兰进步文化向南旅行。为了推进科尔关于伊丽莎白进步的性别本质的工作，它还将研究詹姆斯的配偶丹麦安娜的工作；到目前为止，研究的重点是宫殿周围的环境。这将阐明女性领导的进步如何使安娜本身成为一名政治人物。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。第一个研究问题问雅各布进展是如何组织的：他们是如何获得资金的，维持巡回法庭的机制，以及政府是如何在路上进行的。这将突显詹姆斯在旅行决策中迄今未被承认的参与。其次，詹姆斯和安娜是如何利用进步来投射王室权威的？通过考虑王室精英款待的文化-礼物交换、娱乐和狩猎-在一个漫游的背景下，该项目将剖析当它们部署在贵族自己的势力范围内时，它们的意义是如何转变的。它还将研究詹姆斯如何利用1617年向苏格兰的进步来推动他所认为的苏格兰教会的圣公会化。第三，进步对那些遇到它们的人有什么影响？该项目将考虑吸引法院的政治好处以及由此带来的财政负担。它还将考察非精英主体参与公民参与的情况，并衡量他们与雅各布的权力光学的接触；加强迈克尔·布拉迪克关于早期现代主权的合作性质的工作。研究将利用19世纪古物学家约翰·尼科尔斯汇编的关于詹姆斯进步的主要文献。在苏格兰国家记录中，司库帐目(E21)、家庭账簿(E31)和家庭文件(E34)提供了关于詹姆斯在苏格兰进步的后勤细节。在伦敦的国家档案馆，张伯伦勋爵的记录(LC1/9/10/11)和财政部的记录(E36/101)也包含了詹姆斯在英国旅行的类似启发性的证据。外国大使广泛报道王室的行为进步，并将被批判性地用来衡量公众对王室追求的看法。此外，公民记录揭示了许多关于王室访问的准备工作，而私人文件，如德文郡收藏的文件，将有助于评估进展对东道主和观众的影响。

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.