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

威廉·卡姆登的《编年史》自17世纪出版以来一直被认为是塑造伊丽莎白一世及其统治的积极遗产的最重要的来源。这本书最初在1615年和1625年以拉丁文印刷，在罗伯特·诺顿的英文译本于1630年出版后开始流行起来，卡姆登的同时代人因为坚持使用原始资料而称赞它改善了英国的历史编纂实践。事实上，它的名声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》是一部无可挑剔的研究历史，由卡姆登撰写，受到他的赞助人威廉·伯利（William Burghley）以及古代历史学家塔西佗（Tacitus）和波利比乌斯（Polybius）的影响。然而，尽管有大量的物质证据可以证明这部作品的创作——即卡姆登的编年史草稿和他的信件——但上述学者中没有一个人深入研究过它，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》等二手资料是如何在卡姆登的作品中使用的，文学研究也不够充分。因此，卡姆登的历史留下了许多悬而未决的问题：到底是谁帮助创作了这部作品，使用了哪些具体的资料，如何使用以及为什么使用。因此，本项目的目的是对上述四个领域进行研究，以对《卡姆登编年史》的作者身份进行首次全面研究，并为作者的来源和意图提供急需的见解，以便我们可以更好地了解伊丽莎白时代的整体情况。因此，该项目的第一部分将从对保存在大英图书馆的两份基本完成的《编年史》草稿进行古地学分析开始，以突出显示不止一位作者帮助完成了这项工作。毕竟，过去的古生物学研究已经在手稿中确认了罗伯特·科顿爵士的笔迹，但学者们注意到，其他笔迹尚未被确认。因此，通过研究保存在博德利图书馆和其他地方的卡姆登的信件，我们的目的是发现除了卡姆登和科顿之外，还有谁是《编年史》的合著者。接下来，将对所有这些文件进行分析，试图编制一份历史上使用的古代和当代资料目录。这个目录对于这个项目的最后阶段是至关重要的——对《编年史》的文学分析与这些来源有关，特别是塔西佗和波利比乌斯的作品——因为卡姆登在伊丽莎白时代的作品的序言中提到了他对这些历史学家的感激。因此，我们将研究塔西佗和波利比乌斯的著作在17世纪之前的传播情况，以及这一时期的古典教育的性质，以确定《编年史》的作者们在多大程度上遵循了古代的史学传统。毕竟，正如许多接受研究领域的主要学者所证明的那样，只有在研究特定时期内古代文本可及性的物质证据时，才能对经典和后来的相关作品进行富有成效的互文分析。人们也普遍认为，每一代读者都会对特定的文本带来新的解读，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，从而得出有价值的结论，即卡姆登（及其合著者）追随这些古代作家的脚步，意图是什么，将是很重要的。最终，通过重新审视《编年史》的所有材料、文学和文化证据，该项目将使人们对早期现代史学实践、英国古物学教育、威廉·卡姆登和他的同事，以及当代对伊丽莎白一世及其统治本身的态度有更深入的了解

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