殖民主义对大都市革命的干预:重新考虑《一个可悔改段落的悔改书

IF 0.3 1区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES Pub Date : 2024-02-09 DOI:10.1017/ihs.2023.42
Sean Kelsey
{"title":"殖民主义对大都市革命的干预:重新考虑《一个可悔改段落的悔改书","authors":"Sean Kelsey","doi":"10.1017/ihs.2023.42","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article presents findings from a fresh examination of a familiar source, shedding new light on the creation of one of the best-known contemporary accounts of the 1641 Irish uprising. It is argued that a text usually regarded as the work of Henry Jones, dean of Kilmore, ought to be understood as the intellectual property of both a team of authors and their sponsors, a New English faction at Dublin Castle with long-standing ambitions to crush popery and entrench planter hegemony in Ireland. It is argued that this group's objective was to strengthen the hand of the populist ‘junto’ at Westminster, led by John Pym, that was wrestling with Charles I for political and constitutional supremacy in English affairs in the winter and spring of 1641–2. The colonialists contributed to this metropolitan revolution by rendering safe to handle the Irish rebels’ politically-explosive seditious slander that their uprising had been raised by royal command. The notorious falsehood of the rebels’ claims has obscured the demonstrably underhand and fundamentally deceitful calculation with which the colonialists helped introduce it into mainstream English political culture, in order to isolate the king further and weaken his personal authority on both sides of the Irish Sea.","PeriodicalId":44187,"journal":{"name":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Colonialist intervention in a metropolitan revolution: reconsidering A remonstrance of divers remarkeable passages\",\"authors\":\"Sean Kelsey\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ihs.2023.42\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article presents findings from a fresh examination of a familiar source, shedding new light on the creation of one of the best-known contemporary accounts of the 1641 Irish uprising. It is argued that a text usually regarded as the work of Henry Jones, dean of Kilmore, ought to be understood as the intellectual property of both a team of authors and their sponsors, a New English faction at Dublin Castle with long-standing ambitions to crush popery and entrench planter hegemony in Ireland. It is argued that this group's objective was to strengthen the hand of the populist ‘junto’ at Westminster, led by John Pym, that was wrestling with Charles I for political and constitutional supremacy in English affairs in the winter and spring of 1641–2. The colonialists contributed to this metropolitan revolution by rendering safe to handle the Irish rebels’ politically-explosive seditious slander that their uprising had been raised by royal command. The notorious falsehood of the rebels’ claims has obscured the demonstrably underhand and fundamentally deceitful calculation with which the colonialists helped introduce it into mainstream English political culture, in order to isolate the king further and weaken his personal authority on both sides of the Irish Sea.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44187,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2023.42\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2023.42","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文介绍了对一个熟悉的资料来源进行全新研究的结果,对 1641 年爱尔兰起义最著名的当代描述之一的创作过程进行了新的阐释。文章认为,通常被认为是基尔莫尔院长亨利-琼斯(Henry Jones)的作品的文本,应该被理解为作者团队及其赞助人(都柏林城堡的一个新英国派系,长期以来一直有野心在爱尔兰粉碎教皇制度并巩固种植园主的霸权)的知识财产。该派别在 1641-2 年的冬季和春季与查理一世争夺英国事务中的政治和宪法至高无上的地位。殖民主义者为这场都会革命做出了贡献,他们安全地处理了爱尔兰起义者在政治上具有爆炸性的煽动性诽谤,即他们的起义是由王室命令发起的。叛乱者的谬论臭名昭著,但却掩盖了殖民主义者帮助将其引入英国主流政治文化的明显暗箱操作和根本欺骗的算计,目的是进一步孤立国王,削弱他在爱尔兰海两岸的个人权威。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Colonialist intervention in a metropolitan revolution: reconsidering A remonstrance of divers remarkeable passages
This article presents findings from a fresh examination of a familiar source, shedding new light on the creation of one of the best-known contemporary accounts of the 1641 Irish uprising. It is argued that a text usually regarded as the work of Henry Jones, dean of Kilmore, ought to be understood as the intellectual property of both a team of authors and their sponsors, a New English faction at Dublin Castle with long-standing ambitions to crush popery and entrench planter hegemony in Ireland. It is argued that this group's objective was to strengthen the hand of the populist ‘junto’ at Westminster, led by John Pym, that was wrestling with Charles I for political and constitutional supremacy in English affairs in the winter and spring of 1641–2. The colonialists contributed to this metropolitan revolution by rendering safe to handle the Irish rebels’ politically-explosive seditious slander that their uprising had been raised by royal command. The notorious falsehood of the rebels’ claims has obscured the demonstrably underhand and fundamentally deceitful calculation with which the colonialists helped introduce it into mainstream English political culture, in order to isolate the king further and weaken his personal authority on both sides of the Irish Sea.
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
7.10%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: This journal is published jointly by the Irish Historical Society and the Ulster Society for Irish Historical Studies. Published twice a year, Irish Historical Studies covers all areas of Irish history, including the medieval period. We thank William E. Vaughn of the management committee of Irish Historical Studies for his permission to republish the following two articles.
期刊最新文献
The impact of military demobilisation on rising Irish migration to London, c.1750–1850 The pope, a knight and a bishop on the edge of Christendom: the politics of exclusion in thirteenth-century Ireland Colonialist intervention in a metropolitan revolution: reconsidering A remonstrance of divers remarkeable passages Ethnographic collections in Northern Ireland and the Solomon Islands tomako (canoe) at the Ulster Museum, 1898–2023 The Weaver Street bombing in Belfast 1922: violence, politics and memory
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1