黑死病:欧洲大死亡率的新历史,1347-1500年。约翰·阿伯思。牛津:牛津大学出版社,2021年。xxii+394页,24.94美元。

IF 1.2 1区 历史学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES
L. Jones
{"title":"黑死病:欧洲大死亡率的新历史,1347-1500年。约翰·阿伯思。牛津:牛津大学出版社,2021年。xxii+394页,24.94美元。","authors":"L. Jones","doi":"10.1017/rqx.2023.229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"(rather than an exploration of literal hermaphroditism and its destabilization of the gender binary, as Long somewhat anachronistically suggests). Some essays suffer from interpretive shortcomings. Andrea Frisch’s claim that Ronsard’s use of La Franciade (1572) to link orthodoxy and Frenchness was selfdefeating, since the Merovingians were Germanic and had been pagan; Frisch seems to view the problem from a post-Enlightenment perspective (I doubt that sixteenthcentury observers would have reasoned in these terms). Two of the essays that analyze literary works offer no discussion of authorship, the context of writing and publication, or reception. Éric Durot’s essay on John Knox’s transnational influence in France addresses an important issue but requires more evidence. Few would argue with Schachter’s claim that propaganda during the French religious wars was informed by “a longstanding tradition of using allegations of luxuriousness and excessive appetites to characterize bad rulers” (239). Somehow, the hackneyed argument that “from ancient times the state allied itself to religion as a means of enhancing its control of citizens and subjugated populations alike” (271) made its way into the volume. The conclusion informs us that many contemporaries saw factionalism as the root cause of sedition. While certainly true, this finding adds little to our understanding of political culture during the religious wars. Nevertheless, many of the contributions to this collection point toward helpful avenues of further investigation.","PeriodicalId":45863,"journal":{"name":"RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Black Death: A New History of the Great Mortality in Europe, 1347–1500. John Aberth. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. xxii + 394 pp. $24.94.\",\"authors\":\"L. Jones\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/rqx.2023.229\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"(rather than an exploration of literal hermaphroditism and its destabilization of the gender binary, as Long somewhat anachronistically suggests). Some essays suffer from interpretive shortcomings. Andrea Frisch’s claim that Ronsard’s use of La Franciade (1572) to link orthodoxy and Frenchness was selfdefeating, since the Merovingians were Germanic and had been pagan; Frisch seems to view the problem from a post-Enlightenment perspective (I doubt that sixteenthcentury observers would have reasoned in these terms). Two of the essays that analyze literary works offer no discussion of authorship, the context of writing and publication, or reception. Éric Durot’s essay on John Knox’s transnational influence in France addresses an important issue but requires more evidence. Few would argue with Schachter’s claim that propaganda during the French religious wars was informed by “a longstanding tradition of using allegations of luxuriousness and excessive appetites to characterize bad rulers” (239). Somehow, the hackneyed argument that “from ancient times the state allied itself to religion as a means of enhancing its control of citizens and subjugated populations alike” (271) made its way into the volume. The conclusion informs us that many contemporaries saw factionalism as the root cause of sedition. While certainly true, this finding adds little to our understanding of political culture during the religious wars. Nevertheless, many of the contributions to this collection point toward helpful avenues of further investigation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45863,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/rqx.2023.229\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rqx.2023.229","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

(而不是探索字面上的雌雄同体及其对二元性别的破坏,正如朗所暗示的那样,这有点不合时宜)。有些文章在解释上存在缺陷。安德里亚·弗里施(Andrea Frisch)声称,朗萨尔用《法兰西》(La Franciade, 1572)把正统和法国性联系起来是弄虚成拙的,因为墨洛温王朝是日耳曼人,曾经是异教徒;弗里施似乎是从后启蒙运动的角度来看待这个问题的(我怀疑16世纪的观察者是否会用这些术语来推理)。有两篇分析文学作品的文章没有讨论作者身份、写作和出版的背景或接受情况。Éric杜罗关于约翰·诺克斯在法国的跨国影响的文章解决了一个重要问题,但需要更多的证据。很少有人会反驳沙克特的说法,即法国宗教战争期间的宣传是通过“一个长期的传统,用奢华和过度的欲望来描述坏统治者的特征”(239)。不知何故,“从古代开始,国家就与宗教结盟,作为加强其对公民和被征服人口控制的一种手段”(271)这一陈词滥调的论点进入了这本书。结论告诉我们,许多同时代的人认为派系斗争是煽动叛乱的根本原因。虽然这一发现无疑是正确的,但它对我们理解宗教战争期间的政治文化并没有什么帮助。尽管如此,对这个集合的许多贡献指向了进一步调查的有益途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Black Death: A New History of the Great Mortality in Europe, 1347–1500. John Aberth. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. xxii + 394 pp. $24.94.
(rather than an exploration of literal hermaphroditism and its destabilization of the gender binary, as Long somewhat anachronistically suggests). Some essays suffer from interpretive shortcomings. Andrea Frisch’s claim that Ronsard’s use of La Franciade (1572) to link orthodoxy and Frenchness was selfdefeating, since the Merovingians were Germanic and had been pagan; Frisch seems to view the problem from a post-Enlightenment perspective (I doubt that sixteenthcentury observers would have reasoned in these terms). Two of the essays that analyze literary works offer no discussion of authorship, the context of writing and publication, or reception. Éric Durot’s essay on John Knox’s transnational influence in France addresses an important issue but requires more evidence. Few would argue with Schachter’s claim that propaganda during the French religious wars was informed by “a longstanding tradition of using allegations of luxuriousness and excessive appetites to characterize bad rulers” (239). Somehow, the hackneyed argument that “from ancient times the state allied itself to religion as a means of enhancing its control of citizens and subjugated populations alike” (271) made its way into the volume. The conclusion informs us that many contemporaries saw factionalism as the root cause of sedition. While certainly true, this finding adds little to our understanding of political culture during the religious wars. Nevertheless, many of the contributions to this collection point toward helpful avenues of further investigation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY
RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
16.70%
发文量
108
期刊介绍: Starting with volume 62 (2009), the University of Chicago Press will publish Renaissance Quarterly on behalf of the Renaissance Society of America. Renaissance Quarterly is the leading American journal of Renaissance studies, encouraging connections between different scholarly approaches to bring together material spanning the period from 1300 to 1650 in Western history. The official journal of the Renaissance Society of America, RQ presents twelve to sixteen articles and over four hundred reviews per year.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信