‘The Sport of Bishop-Hunting’: Marvell and the neo-Laudians

M. Dzelzainis
{"title":"‘The Sport of Bishop-Hunting’: Marvell and the neo-Laudians","authors":"M. Dzelzainis","doi":"10.7228/MANCHESTER/9780719089688.003.0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the narratives and counter-narratives about the Civil War that developed after the Restoration. The most contested figure in these narratives was Archbishop William Laud, regarded by Thomas Hobbes and others as personally responsible for the outbreak of the conflict in the 1630s. Laud’s legacy – embraced by the so-called neo-Laudians at Oxford – was debated in a pamphlet exchange between two of the period’s major satirists: Andrew Marvell and Samuel Butler. Their disagreement was at its sharpest concerning a pre-Civil War controversy over licensing a sermon in favour of the Forced Loan by an absolutist cleric, Robert Sibthorp. Marvell’s version of events in The Rehearsal Transpros’d (1672) proved influential in opposition Whig circles, eventually being taken up by the Earl of Shaftesbury and John Locke.","PeriodicalId":106168,"journal":{"name":"From Republic to Restoration","volume":"73 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"From Republic to Restoration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7228/MANCHESTER/9780719089688.003.0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter examines the narratives and counter-narratives about the Civil War that developed after the Restoration. The most contested figure in these narratives was Archbishop William Laud, regarded by Thomas Hobbes and others as personally responsible for the outbreak of the conflict in the 1630s. Laud’s legacy – embraced by the so-called neo-Laudians at Oxford – was debated in a pamphlet exchange between two of the period’s major satirists: Andrew Marvell and Samuel Butler. Their disagreement was at its sharpest concerning a pre-Civil War controversy over licensing a sermon in favour of the Forced Loan by an absolutist cleric, Robert Sibthorp. Marvell’s version of events in The Rehearsal Transpros’d (1672) proved influential in opposition Whig circles, eventually being taken up by the Earl of Shaftesbury and John Locke.
“狩猎主教的运动”:马维尔和新劳德派
本章考察了在复辟之后发展起来的关于内战的叙述和反叙述。这些叙述中最具争议的人物是大主教威廉·劳德,他被托马斯·霍布斯和其他人认为对1630年代冲突的爆发负有个人责任。劳德的遗产——被牛津大学所谓的新劳德主义者所接受——在当时的两位主要讽刺作家安德鲁·马维尔和塞缪尔·巴特勒交换小册子时进行了辩论。他们的分歧在内战前的争论中最为尖锐,争论的焦点是是否允许专制主义牧师罗伯特·西布索普(Robert Sibthorp)的一篇支持“强制贷款”的布道。马维尔在1672年出版的《排演传》一书中对事件的描述在辉格党中颇具影响力,最终被沙夫茨伯里伯爵和约翰·洛克采纳。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信