伪造者伍尔夫斯坦:“爱德华和古鲁姆定律”

Nicholas P. Schwartz
{"title":"伪造者伍尔夫斯坦:“爱德华和古鲁姆定律”","authors":"Nicholas P. Schwartz","doi":"10.1017/S026367511900005X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Despite the recent increase in attention given to Archbishop Wulfstan and his writings, the so-called ‘Laws of Edward and Guthrum’ – a lawcode forged by the archbishop in the opening years of the eleventh century – has received little analysis since Dorothy Whitelock’s 1941 study established the churchman as its true author. My article seeks to fill this gap firstly by expanding on Whitelock’s article. I show that many more of the text’s clauses function as antecedents to Wulfstan’s later legislation than those she identified in her important article. Second, I argue that §10 of the code, a clause not repeated in the archbishop’s later legislation, surely still held legal authority given Wulfstan’s prescriptions for non-lethal punishment in some cases. Finally, I posit that Wulfstan’s attribution of the code to Alfred, seen in its opening, reflects the archbishop’s value of him as a king worth emulating.","PeriodicalId":80459,"journal":{"name":"Anglo-Saxon England","volume":"47 1","pages":"219 - 246"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S026367511900005X","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wulfstan the Forger: the ‘Laws of Edward and Guthrum’\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas P. Schwartz\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S026367511900005X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Despite the recent increase in attention given to Archbishop Wulfstan and his writings, the so-called ‘Laws of Edward and Guthrum’ – a lawcode forged by the archbishop in the opening years of the eleventh century – has received little analysis since Dorothy Whitelock’s 1941 study established the churchman as its true author. My article seeks to fill this gap firstly by expanding on Whitelock’s article. I show that many more of the text’s clauses function as antecedents to Wulfstan’s later legislation than those she identified in her important article. Second, I argue that §10 of the code, a clause not repeated in the archbishop’s later legislation, surely still held legal authority given Wulfstan’s prescriptions for non-lethal punishment in some cases. Finally, I posit that Wulfstan’s attribution of the code to Alfred, seen in its opening, reflects the archbishop’s value of him as a king worth emulating.\",\"PeriodicalId\":80459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anglo-Saxon England\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"219 - 246\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S026367511900005X\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anglo-Saxon England\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S026367511900005X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anglo-Saxon England","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S026367511900005X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要尽管最近人们越来越关注伍尔夫斯坦大主教及其著作,但自从多萝西·怀特洛克1941年的研究确定这位牧师是其真正的作者以来,所谓的“爱德华和古瑟鲁姆定律”——一部由大主教在11世纪初伪造的法典——几乎没有得到任何分析。我的文章首先试图通过扩展怀特洛克的文章来填补这一空白。我发现,与她在重要文章中指出的条款相比,文本中更多的条款是伍尔夫斯坦后来立法的前提。其次,我认为,鉴于伍尔夫斯坦在某些情况下对非致命惩罚的规定,该法典第10条,这一条款在大主教后来的立法中没有重复,肯定仍然具有法律权威。最后,我认为,伍尔夫斯坦在开场白中将法典归于阿尔弗雷德,反映了大主教对他作为一个值得效仿的国王的价值。
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
Wulfstan the Forger: the ‘Laws of Edward and Guthrum’
Abstract Despite the recent increase in attention given to Archbishop Wulfstan and his writings, the so-called ‘Laws of Edward and Guthrum’ – a lawcode forged by the archbishop in the opening years of the eleventh century – has received little analysis since Dorothy Whitelock’s 1941 study established the churchman as its true author. My article seeks to fill this gap firstly by expanding on Whitelock’s article. I show that many more of the text’s clauses function as antecedents to Wulfstan’s later legislation than those she identified in her important article. Second, I argue that §10 of the code, a clause not repeated in the archbishop’s later legislation, surely still held legal authority given Wulfstan’s prescriptions for non-lethal punishment in some cases. Finally, I posit that Wulfstan’s attribution of the code to Alfred, seen in its opening, reflects the archbishop’s value of him as a king worth emulating.
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
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Radegund and Amalfrid in The Wife’s Lament Se ðe oðran naman wæs geciged: the Naming of Bishops and Clerics in Late Anglo-Saxon England Newly Discovered Pieces of an Old English Glossed Psalter: The Alkmaar Fragments of the N-Psalter Scholars Come for the Archbishop: the Afterlife of Archbishop Wulfstan of York, 1023–2023 Innovation and Experimentation in Late Seventh-Century Law: the Case of Theodore, Hlothhere, Wihtræd and Ine
×
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