英国旅行作家中的冯-明希豪森男爵:埃德蒙-斯宾塞和他的切尔克斯游记

IF 0.5 Q3 AREA STUDIES Caucasus Survey Pub Date : 2024-04-16 DOI:10.30965/23761202-20240001
Azamat Kumykov
{"title":"英国旅行作家中的冯-明希豪森男爵:埃德蒙-斯宾塞和他的切尔克斯游记","authors":"Azamat Kumykov","doi":"10.30965/23761202-20240001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe article is devoted to a critical analysis of the legacy of Edmund Spencer – a nineteenth century British travel writer and author of numerous books and articles on Circassia and the Caucasus. The widespread use of Spencer’s work by historians notwithstanding, until now there has been no published biography of the author, which led to a proliferation of claims about his background and the timing and circumstances of his visit to Circassia. This article contributes to the correction of this omission by presenting the results of the latest biographical research on Edmund Spencer, based on manuscript and printed primary sources. Despite doubts expressed by some historians about the existence of such a person, the article conclusively proves that Edmund Spencer was indeed a real historical personage. Furthermore, since until now no attempt has been made to evaluate the reliability of Spencer’s works on Circassia as historical sources, the article examines references to Spencer in contemporaneous manuscript sources, such as the British, French and Russian diplomatic, military and intelligence correspondence and reports, finding that available documentary evidence refutes the author’s claim of a visit to the interior of Circassia. The attitudes of Western scholars of the period and of foreign visitors to Circassia raise further serious doubts about the authenticity of Spencer’s travelogues. The article calls into question Spencer’s account of his travels in Circassia as a source of geographic, ethnographic and sociological knowledge, concluding that it was a nothing more than a fabrication.","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Baron von Münchhausen of British Travel Writers: Edmund Spencer and his Travels in Circassia\",\"authors\":\"Azamat Kumykov\",\"doi\":\"10.30965/23761202-20240001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe article is devoted to a critical analysis of the legacy of Edmund Spencer – a nineteenth century British travel writer and author of numerous books and articles on Circassia and the Caucasus. The widespread use of Spencer’s work by historians notwithstanding, until now there has been no published biography of the author, which led to a proliferation of claims about his background and the timing and circumstances of his visit to Circassia. This article contributes to the correction of this omission by presenting the results of the latest biographical research on Edmund Spencer, based on manuscript and printed primary sources. Despite doubts expressed by some historians about the existence of such a person, the article conclusively proves that Edmund Spencer was indeed a real historical personage. Furthermore, since until now no attempt has been made to evaluate the reliability of Spencer’s works on Circassia as historical sources, the article examines references to Spencer in contemporaneous manuscript sources, such as the British, French and Russian diplomatic, military and intelligence correspondence and reports, finding that available documentary evidence refutes the author’s claim of a visit to the interior of Circassia. The attitudes of Western scholars of the period and of foreign visitors to Circassia raise further serious doubts about the authenticity of Spencer’s travelogues. The article calls into question Spencer’s account of his travels in Circassia as a source of geographic, ethnographic and sociological knowledge, concluding that it was a nothing more than a fabrication.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37506,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Caucasus Survey\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Caucasus Survey\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30965/23761202-20240001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Caucasus Survey","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30965/23761202-20240001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

埃德蒙-斯宾塞是十九世纪英国旅行作家,著有大量关于切尔克斯和高加索的书籍和文章。尽管史学家们广泛使用斯宾塞的作品,但直到现在还没有出版过关于这位作家的传记,这导致关于他的背景、访问切尔克斯的时间和情况的说法层出不穷。本文以手稿和印刷原始资料为基础,介绍了有关埃德蒙-斯宾塞的最新传记研究成果,有助于纠正这一遗漏。尽管一些历史学家对埃德蒙-斯宾塞这个人的存在表示怀疑,但这篇文章最终证明埃德蒙-斯宾塞确实是一个真实的历史人物。此外,由于迄今为止还没有人试图评估斯宾塞关于切尔克斯的著作作为历史资料的可靠性,文章研究了同时代的手稿资料,如英国、法国和俄罗斯的外交、军事和情报信函和报告中对斯宾塞的提及,发现现有的文献证据驳斥了作者关于访问切尔克斯内陆的说法。当时的西方学者和访问切尔克斯的外国游客的态度进一步对斯宾塞游记的真实性提出了严重质疑。文章对斯宾塞在切尔克斯的游记作为地理学、人种学和社会学知识的来源提出质疑,并得出结论:这不过是编造出来的。
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
The Baron von Münchhausen of British Travel Writers: Edmund Spencer and his Travels in Circassia
The article is devoted to a critical analysis of the legacy of Edmund Spencer – a nineteenth century British travel writer and author of numerous books and articles on Circassia and the Caucasus. The widespread use of Spencer’s work by historians notwithstanding, until now there has been no published biography of the author, which led to a proliferation of claims about his background and the timing and circumstances of his visit to Circassia. This article contributes to the correction of this omission by presenting the results of the latest biographical research on Edmund Spencer, based on manuscript and printed primary sources. Despite doubts expressed by some historians about the existence of such a person, the article conclusively proves that Edmund Spencer was indeed a real historical personage. Furthermore, since until now no attempt has been made to evaluate the reliability of Spencer’s works on Circassia as historical sources, the article examines references to Spencer in contemporaneous manuscript sources, such as the British, French and Russian diplomatic, military and intelligence correspondence and reports, finding that available documentary evidence refutes the author’s claim of a visit to the interior of Circassia. The attitudes of Western scholars of the period and of foreign visitors to Circassia raise further serious doubts about the authenticity of Spencer’s travelogues. The article calls into question Spencer’s account of his travels in Circassia as a source of geographic, ethnographic and sociological knowledge, concluding that it was a nothing more than a fabrication.
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
Caucasus Survey
Caucasus Survey Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
4
期刊介绍: Caucasus Survey is a new peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary and independent journal, concerned with the study of the Caucasus – the independent republics of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, de facto entities in the area and the North Caucasian republics and regions of the Russian Federation. Also covered are issues relating to the Republic of Kalmykia, Crimea, the Cossacks, Nogays, and Caucasian diasporas. Caucasus Survey aims to advance an area studies tradition in the humanities and social sciences about and from the Caucasus, connecting this tradition with core disciplinary concerns in the fields of history, political science, sociology, anthropology, cultural and religious studies, economics, political geography and demography, security, war and peace studies, and social psychology. Research enhancing understanding of the region’s conflicts and relations between the Russian Federation and the Caucasus, internationally and domestically with regard to the North Caucasus, features high in our concerns.
期刊最新文献
Revolution, Covid-19, and War in Armenia: Impacts on Various Forms of Trust Unamuso of Tiflis: Urban Women in Pre-Revolutionary Georgia Capricious States and Betwixt Citizens across the Caucasus Parliamentary Opposition Parties in Georgia’s Foreign Policy under a Hybrid Regime in 2012–2020 Challenges to Building a Viable Alternative to Ethnonationalism in the Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict Setting
×
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