{"title":"《替提比略辩护:埃德蒙·博尔顿、泰西学者与早期斯图亚特政治》","authors":"P. Osmond","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2020.0019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"abstract:Edmund Bolton's commentary on Tacitus's Annals, books 1–6, in his Averrunci or The Skowrers (1634) represents the first scholarly challenge to Tacitus's authority as historian of the Roman Empire and the earliest revisionist portrait of the emperor Tiberius. While expanding on a number of themes in the introduction to the 2017 edition of Bolton's manuscript, this essay focuses on his reappraisal of Tiberius's reign and on the dual perspectives Bolton brings to his work, as a devoted (Catholic) monarchist examining a crucial stage in the consolidation of the principate, and as a historian of Rome reflecting upon \"the most ponderous worldlie controversie\" of his own day.","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In Defense of Tiberius: Edmund Bolton, Tacitean Scholarship, and Early Stuart Politics\",\"authors\":\"P. Osmond\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/hlq.2020.0019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"abstract:Edmund Bolton's commentary on Tacitus's Annals, books 1–6, in his Averrunci or The Skowrers (1634) represents the first scholarly challenge to Tacitus's authority as historian of the Roman Empire and the earliest revisionist portrait of the emperor Tiberius. While expanding on a number of themes in the introduction to the 2017 edition of Bolton's manuscript, this essay focuses on his reappraisal of Tiberius's reign and on the dual perspectives Bolton brings to his work, as a devoted (Catholic) monarchist examining a crucial stage in the consolidation of the principate, and as a historian of Rome reflecting upon \\\"the most ponderous worldlie controversie\\\" of his own day.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45445,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2020.0019\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, CHARACTERIZATION & TESTING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2020.0019","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, CHARACTERIZATION & TESTING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
埃德蒙·博尔顿(Edmund Bolton)在其著作《阿弗伦齐》(Averrunci or The Skowrers)(1634)中对塔西佗编年史1-6卷的评论，是对塔西佗作为罗马帝国历史学家权威的第一次学术挑战，也是对提比略皇帝最早的修正主义描述。本文在2017年版博尔顿手稿的前言中扩展了一些主题，重点关注他对提比略统治的重新评价，以及博尔顿在其作品中带来的双重视角，作为一个虔诚的(天主教)君主主义者，审视元首制巩固的关键阶段，作为一个罗马历史学家，反思他那个时代“最严重的世界争议”。
In Defense of Tiberius: Edmund Bolton, Tacitean Scholarship, and Early Stuart Politics
abstract:Edmund Bolton's commentary on Tacitus's Annals, books 1–6, in his Averrunci or The Skowrers (1634) represents the first scholarly challenge to Tacitus's authority as historian of the Roman Empire and the earliest revisionist portrait of the emperor Tiberius. While expanding on a number of themes in the introduction to the 2017 edition of Bolton's manuscript, this essay focuses on his reappraisal of Tiberius's reign and on the dual perspectives Bolton brings to his work, as a devoted (Catholic) monarchist examining a crucial stage in the consolidation of the principate, and as a historian of Rome reflecting upon "the most ponderous worldlie controversie" of his own day.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
