首页> 外文OA文献 >Could Isidore’s Chronicle Have Delighted Cicero? Using the Concept of Genre to Compare Ancient and Medieval Chronicles. Medieval Worlds|Volume 2016.3 medieval worlds Volume 2016.3|
【2h】

Could Isidore’s Chronicle Have Delighted Cicero? Using the Concept of Genre to Compare Ancient and Medieval Chronicles. Medieval Worlds|Volume 2016.3 medieval worlds Volume 2016.3|

机译:Isidore的编年史会为西塞罗高兴吗?使用流派概念比较古代和中世纪编年史。中世纪世界|第2016.3卷中世纪世界第2016.3 |卷

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Richard W. Burgess and Michael Kulikowski’s A Historical Introduction to the Chronicle Genre from its Origins to the High Middle Ages (Volume I in the authors’ planned series Mosaics of Time: The Latin Chronicle Traditions from the First Century BC to the Sixth Century AD) posits that medieval studies has neglected to engage in a systematic, historically-informed reflection on the genre of chronicles. The present article asserts that this challenge to the field presents a unique opportunity for an interdisciplinary discussion of wide scope and lasting duration. I thus argue that Burgess and Kulikowski’s larger points may be reconciled with current scholarship on medieval chronicles by updating the theoretical premises that underlie our identification of historical genres. I aim to contribute to the discussion by turning to a consensus in current theoretical work, that genre is best discussed as a description of the way texts and their readers communicated. The article concludes by applying this hypothesis to an experiment in comparison: if it is not the differences but the similarities that stand out when Cicero and Isidore of Seville’s respective meditations upon chronicles are set side by side, then what are the implications for our methods of reconstructing the significance of chronicles in their own milieus?
机译:理查德·伯吉斯(Richard W. Burgess)和迈克尔·库里科夫斯基(Michael Kulikowski)的编年史从其起源到中世纪的历史介绍(作者计划的系列《时间的马赛克:从公元前一世纪到公元六世纪的拉丁纪事传统》中的第一卷)假设中世纪的研究忽视了对编年史类型的系统化,历史性的反思。本文认为,这一领域的挑战为跨学科讨论的广泛范围和持续时间提供了独特的机会。因此,我认为,通过更新奠定我们对历史体裁的基础的理论前提,伯吉斯和库利科夫斯基的更大观点可能与当前有关中世纪编年史的学术研究相吻合。我的目的是通过在当前理论工作中达成共识来为讨论做出贡献,即最好地讨论这种体裁,作为对文本及其读者交流方式的描述。文章的结论是将这一假设应用于比较实验中:如果不是西塞罗和塞维利亚的编年史冥想被并排放置,那不是区别而是相似之处,那么这对我们的方法有何启示?在自己的环境中重建编年史的意义?

著录项

  • 作者

    Torgerson, Jesse W.;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2016
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号