{"title":"现代早期欧洲的美好死亡","authors":"Cynthia Klestinec, Gideon Manning","doi":"10.1111/hic3.12819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The inevitability of death does not change its variability. In <i>The Hour of Our Death</i> (1981), Philippe Ariès positioned the sudden, unexpected, mass death of epidemics (especially from the Black Death) against the personalized, domesticated death for which one had time to prepare. The domesticated death, so he argued, appeared during a specific epoche of European history and was an historical inflection point, coinciding with the 18th century Enlightenment. Ariès looked unfavorably at this climax for what he saw as a process of de-spiritualization, waning of faith, and the beginnings of commercialization and medicalization of death. Since his publications, scholars from a range of fields—history, anthropology, literature, religion, and art—have sought to address the omissions, exaggerations, and misleading claims in Ariès' account and, in doing so, have developed a rich field studying the cultural history and significance of death. Now situated in a transdisciplinary space, studying the good death and the tradition of <i>ars moriendi</i> (the art of the dying well) offers new perspectives and answers new questions about death. Although there is much that could be discussed, the focus here will be on recent trends in scholarship on the tradition of <i>ars moriendi</i> and its relationship to the interrelated histories of burial, the role of clerical and lay comforters, and the role of physicians as well as the historical and religious-philosophical problems of the prolongation of life and sudden death.</p>","PeriodicalId":46376,"journal":{"name":"History Compass","volume":"22 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hic3.12819","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Good Death in Early Modern Europe\",\"authors\":\"Cynthia Klestinec, Gideon Manning\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/hic3.12819\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The inevitability of death does not change its variability. In <i>The Hour of Our Death</i> (1981), Philippe Ariès positioned the sudden, unexpected, mass death of epidemics (especially from the Black Death) against the personalized, domesticated death for which one had time to prepare. The domesticated death, so he argued, appeared during a specific epoche of European history and was an historical inflection point, coinciding with the 18th century Enlightenment. Ariès looked unfavorably at this climax for what he saw as a process of de-spiritualization, waning of faith, and the beginnings of commercialization and medicalization of death. Since his publications, scholars from a range of fields—history, anthropology, literature, religion, and art—have sought to address the omissions, exaggerations, and misleading claims in Ariès' account and, in doing so, have developed a rich field studying the cultural history and significance of death. Now situated in a transdisciplinary space, studying the good death and the tradition of <i>ars moriendi</i> (the art of the dying well) offers new perspectives and answers new questions about death. Although there is much that could be discussed, the focus here will be on recent trends in scholarship on the tradition of <i>ars moriendi</i> and its relationship to the interrelated histories of burial, the role of clerical and lay comforters, and the role of physicians as well as the historical and religious-philosophical problems of the prolongation of life and sudden death.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"History Compass\",\"volume\":\"22 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hic3.12819\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"History Compass\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hic3.12819\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History Compass","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hic3.12819","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
死亡的不可避免性并不会改变它的多变性。在《我们的死亡时刻》(1981 年)一书中,菲利普-阿里斯将流行病(尤其是黑死病)造成的突然、意外、大规模死亡与人们有时间准备的个性化、驯化的死亡相提并论。他认为,驯化的死亡出现在欧洲历史的特定时期,是一个历史拐点,与 18 世纪的启蒙运动相吻合。阿利埃斯对这一高潮持否定态度,他认为这是一个去精神化、信仰消退的过程,也是死亡商业化和医学化的开端。自从他的著作发表以来,来自历史学、人类学、文学、宗教和艺术等不同领域的学者一直在努力解决阿里斯的论述中存在的遗漏、夸大和误导性说法,并在此过程中发展出了一个研究死亡的文化历史和意义的丰富领域。现在,在一个跨学科的空间里,研究美好的死亡和 ars moriendi(临终的艺术)传统提供了新的视角,回答了关于死亡的新问题。虽然可以讨论的内容很多,但本文的重点将是关于 "安乐死 "传统的最新学术趋势及其与相互关联的丧葬史、教士和非专业安抚者的作用、医生的作用以及延长生命和猝死的历史和宗教哲学问题之间的关系。
The inevitability of death does not change its variability. In The Hour of Our Death (1981), Philippe Ariès positioned the sudden, unexpected, mass death of epidemics (especially from the Black Death) against the personalized, domesticated death for which one had time to prepare. The domesticated death, so he argued, appeared during a specific epoche of European history and was an historical inflection point, coinciding with the 18th century Enlightenment. Ariès looked unfavorably at this climax for what he saw as a process of de-spiritualization, waning of faith, and the beginnings of commercialization and medicalization of death. Since his publications, scholars from a range of fields—history, anthropology, literature, religion, and art—have sought to address the omissions, exaggerations, and misleading claims in Ariès' account and, in doing so, have developed a rich field studying the cultural history and significance of death. Now situated in a transdisciplinary space, studying the good death and the tradition of ars moriendi (the art of the dying well) offers new perspectives and answers new questions about death. Although there is much that could be discussed, the focus here will be on recent trends in scholarship on the tradition of ars moriendi and its relationship to the interrelated histories of burial, the role of clerical and lay comforters, and the role of physicians as well as the historical and religious-philosophical problems of the prolongation of life and sudden death.