《爱尔兰塔楼:社会、经济与环境》,约1300–1650年。维多利亚·L·麦卡利斯特。社会考古学与物质世界。曼彻斯特:曼彻斯特大学出版社,2019。x+278页,80英镑。

IF 1.2 1区 历史学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES
Jennifer Cochran Anderson
{"title":"《爱尔兰塔楼:社会、经济与环境》,约1300–1650年。维多利亚·L·麦卡利斯特。社会考古学与物质世界。曼彻斯特:曼彻斯特大学出版社,2019。x+278页,80英镑。","authors":"Jennifer Cochran Anderson","doi":"10.1017/rqx.2023.250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"whose distinguished pedigree he clearly hoped his sons would continue to uphold. What does this say about the role of factors such as gender, status, family, religious affiliations, and personal networks in shaping what and how people chose to remember? This is a well-written and thought-provoking study. A tension emerges, however, between a book whose core material is bounded by the existence of the republican regimes and a concluding chapter on “post-war states.” Although it succeeds in offering up a more “nuanced picture” of memories of a “catastrophic event” (7), the book provides no extended treatment of how these insights affect historiographies of republican England and its people. One implication is that the jarring of “official” narratives with “heterogenous reconstructions of the past” did little to help people come to terms with what had happened to them. The book’s conclusion instead takes us in a different direction. It seeks to align mid-seventeenth-century England with “post-conflict states” from across time and space, as a means of challenging histories of memorial culture that stress its essential modernity. The comparisons, for me, reinforced why the book was at its best when it focused on historicized social contexts. People in mid-seventeenth-century England did not remember conflict through the prisms of colonialism, as in Zimbabwe, or fascism, as in General Francisco Franco’s Spain, or ethno-religious difference, as in Croatia. Peck’s final sentence asserts that people in the past “did not do things so very differently there” (202), but I think she shows that they did, and there is much in this fine book that will help readers toward a better sense of why.","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 Irish Tower House: Society, Economy and Environment, c. 1300–1650. Victoria L. McAlister. Social Archaeology and Material Worlds. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2019. x + 278 pp. £80.\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer Cochran Anderson\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/rqx.2023.250\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"whose distinguished pedigree he clearly hoped his sons would continue to uphold. What does this say about the role of factors such as gender, status, family, religious affiliations, and personal networks in shaping what and how people chose to remember? This is a well-written and thought-provoking study. A tension emerges, however, between a book whose core material is bounded by the existence of the republican regimes and a concluding chapter on “post-war states.” Although it succeeds in offering up a more “nuanced picture” of memories of a “catastrophic event” (7), the book provides no extended treatment of how these insights affect historiographies of republican England and its people. One implication is that the jarring of “official” narratives with “heterogenous reconstructions of the past” did little to help people come to terms with what had happened to them. The book’s conclusion instead takes us in a different direction. It seeks to align mid-seventeenth-century England with “post-conflict states” from across time and space, as a means of challenging histories of memorial culture that stress its essential modernity. The comparisons, for me, reinforced why the book was at its best when it focused on historicized social contexts. People in mid-seventeenth-century England did not remember conflict through the prisms of colonialism, as in Zimbabwe, or fascism, as in General Francisco Franco’s Spain, or ethno-religious difference, as in Croatia. Peck’s final sentence asserts that people in the past “did not do things so very differently there” (202), but I think she shows that they did, and there is much in this fine book that will help readers toward a better sense of why.\",\"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.2023.250\",\"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.2023.250","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

他显然希望他的儿子们能继续维护他杰出的血统。这说明了性别、地位、家庭、宗教信仰和个人网络等因素在塑造人们选择记忆的内容和方式方面的作用?这是一项写得很好、发人深省的研究。然而,在一本以共和政体的存在为核心材料的书和关于“战后国家”的结束章之间,出现了紧张关系。尽管它成功地提供了一幅关于“灾难性事件”记忆的更“细致入微的画面”(7),这本书没有对这些见解如何影响共和国英格兰及其人民的历史进行深入的探讨。一个含义是,“官方”叙事与“对过去的异质重建”的不和谐并没有帮助人们接受发生在他们身上的事情。相反,这本书的结论将我们带向了一个不同的方向。它试图将17世纪中期的英格兰与跨越时间和空间的“冲突后国家”联系起来,以此挑战强调其本质现代性的纪念文化历史。对我来说,这些比较强化了为什么这本书在关注历史化的社会背景时处于最佳状态。17世纪中期的英国人不记得像津巴布韦那样的殖民主义,也不记得像弗朗西斯科·佛朗哥将军的西班牙那样的法西斯主义,或者像克罗地亚那样的种族-宗教差异。佩克的最后一句话断言,过去的人们“在那里做事情的方式没有太大的不同”(202),但我认为她表明了他们确实做了,这本优秀的书中有很多内容将帮助读者更好地理解原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Irish Tower House: Society, Economy and Environment, c. 1300–1650. Victoria L. McAlister. Social Archaeology and Material Worlds. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2019. x + 278 pp. £80.
whose distinguished pedigree he clearly hoped his sons would continue to uphold. What does this say about the role of factors such as gender, status, family, religious affiliations, and personal networks in shaping what and how people chose to remember? This is a well-written and thought-provoking study. A tension emerges, however, between a book whose core material is bounded by the existence of the republican regimes and a concluding chapter on “post-war states.” Although it succeeds in offering up a more “nuanced picture” of memories of a “catastrophic event” (7), the book provides no extended treatment of how these insights affect historiographies of republican England and its people. One implication is that the jarring of “official” narratives with “heterogenous reconstructions of the past” did little to help people come to terms with what had happened to them. The book’s conclusion instead takes us in a different direction. It seeks to align mid-seventeenth-century England with “post-conflict states” from across time and space, as a means of challenging histories of memorial culture that stress its essential modernity. The comparisons, for me, reinforced why the book was at its best when it focused on historicized social contexts. People in mid-seventeenth-century England did not remember conflict through the prisms of colonialism, as in Zimbabwe, or fascism, as in General Francisco Franco’s Spain, or ethno-religious difference, as in Croatia. Peck’s final sentence asserts that people in the past “did not do things so very differently there” (202), but I think she shows that they did, and there is much in this fine book that will help readers toward a better sense of why.
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