{"title":"从档案中解读外交","authors":"D. Sokolov","doi":"10.1215/10829636-8626469","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay undertakes a cross-cultural interpretation of Giles Fletcher the Elder’s diplomatic mission to Muscovy (1588–89). It brings Fletcher’s official report on his embassy to the court of Emperor Fyodor in conversation with its Russian counterpart, in addition to placing these documents in the multifaceted context of early modern Anglo-Russian diplomatic ritual. Although Fletcher’s mission has always attracted the attention of scholars in different disciplines, it has not really been considered in light of diplomatic history. Meanwhile, both the English and Russian records of Fletcher’s embassy are preoccupied with diplomatic ritual, dedicating ample space to the choreography of official meetings, status symbols, gifts, acts of consumption, and corporeal semiotics. This essay examines two instances of breakdown in diplomatic protocol associated with Fletcher’s embassy: the alleged misuse of the emperor’s title by the English diplomat and the rejection of Elizabeth’s gifts by the Russian ruler. Focusing on the discrepancies between the English and Russian accounts of these frictions, the essay argues that the English embassy of 1588–89 was marked by a greater complexity and ambiguity regarding its strategies, tactics, objectives, successes, and failures than is often realized.","PeriodicalId":51901,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES","volume":"50 1","pages":"587-608"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reading Diplomacy across the Archives\",\"authors\":\"D. Sokolov\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/10829636-8626469\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This essay undertakes a cross-cultural interpretation of Giles Fletcher the Elder’s diplomatic mission to Muscovy (1588–89). It brings Fletcher’s official report on his embassy to the court of Emperor Fyodor in conversation with its Russian counterpart, in addition to placing these documents in the multifaceted context of early modern Anglo-Russian diplomatic ritual. Although Fletcher’s mission has always attracted the attention of scholars in different disciplines, it has not really been considered in light of diplomatic history. Meanwhile, both the English and Russian records of Fletcher’s embassy are preoccupied with diplomatic ritual, dedicating ample space to the choreography of official meetings, status symbols, gifts, acts of consumption, and corporeal semiotics. This essay examines two instances of breakdown in diplomatic protocol associated with Fletcher’s embassy: the alleged misuse of the emperor’s title by the English diplomat and the rejection of Elizabeth’s gifts by the Russian ruler. Focusing on the discrepancies between the English and Russian accounts of these frictions, the essay argues that the English embassy of 1588–89 was marked by a greater complexity and ambiguity regarding its strategies, tactics, objectives, successes, and failures than is often realized.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"587-608\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/10829636-8626469\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/10829636-8626469","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
This essay undertakes a cross-cultural interpretation of Giles Fletcher the Elder’s diplomatic mission to Muscovy (1588–89). It brings Fletcher’s official report on his embassy to the court of Emperor Fyodor in conversation with its Russian counterpart, in addition to placing these documents in the multifaceted context of early modern Anglo-Russian diplomatic ritual. Although Fletcher’s mission has always attracted the attention of scholars in different disciplines, it has not really been considered in light of diplomatic history. Meanwhile, both the English and Russian records of Fletcher’s embassy are preoccupied with diplomatic ritual, dedicating ample space to the choreography of official meetings, status symbols, gifts, acts of consumption, and corporeal semiotics. This essay examines two instances of breakdown in diplomatic protocol associated with Fletcher’s embassy: the alleged misuse of the emperor’s title by the English diplomat and the rejection of Elizabeth’s gifts by the Russian ruler. Focusing on the discrepancies between the English and Russian accounts of these frictions, the essay argues that the English embassy of 1588–89 was marked by a greater complexity and ambiguity regarding its strategies, tactics, objectives, successes, and failures than is often realized.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies publishes articles informed by historical inquiry and alert to issues raised by contemporary theoretical debate. The journal fosters rigorous investigation of historiographical representations of European and western Asian cultural forms from late antiquity to the seventeenth century. Its topics include art, literature, theater, music, philosophy, theology, and history, and it embraces material objects as well as texts; women as well as men; merchants, workers, and audiences as well as patrons; Jews and Muslims as well as Christians.