inflated sense of ceremony and importance; this strategic nostalgia applied to the overall exhibition as well. The songs were a “musical manifestation of imperial expansion” (p. 251) that was anachronistic almost from themoment they debuted and now offer an instructive lesson about the perception of empire by the 1920s. The chronological organization of the chapters leaves no doubt that exhibition, in myriad ways, was central to the operation of empire. This could include the questioning of empire and expansion, as emphasized in Douglas Fordham’s analysis of satirical cartoons that lampooned the diplomacy of peace and in the discussion of Nabobs in McAleer and Mackenzie’s introduction. Mackenzie and Auerbach also both discuss a link between the waning of empire in the early twentieth century and the increase in the size and grandeur of imperial events like the Festival of Empire and the Delhi Durbar of 1911. These insights suggest there is a larger argument contained in these chapters about how adding a focus on exhibition and display can change prevailing narratives of the history of the British Empire, but it is not made explicit. The reader is left instead with a better understanding of the multiplicity of objects and practices used to represent empire over time. The stated goal of the collection is to show that the “history of empire also needs to be, to a large degree, a history of display and of reception” (p. 2). The contributors are certainly successful with regard to display, and they make strides with respect to tracing reception. Most of the chapters do engage with audience and how certain works were received, particularly in the periodical press. Precisely how everyday Britons received empire remains a hard topic to elucidate, however. This is not a critique specific to this collection, but rather a wider observation for those studying history. Is a book’s purchase a reasonable indication that it was read? How can we gauge how viewers interpreted a painting, or a panorama, when we are often limited to a critic’s comments? Of course, these are questions central to the study of history and have long been debated; reading these essays in another opportunity to participate fruitfully with the topic. Exhibiting the Empire is an engaging read for scholars of empire of all levels. Specialists will enjoy the detail of each chapter on a separate culture of display, while graduate students will gain a firm understanding of the utterly entwined relationship between empire and exhibition. With some exceptions, the essays stay focused on the British, and specifically the London, public, leaving room for further studies of rural and colonial exhibition and reception.

中文翻译：

---

阿隆索·德莱昂将军远征德克萨斯，1686–1690 年

夸大的仪式感和重要性；这种策略性的怀旧也适用于整个展览。这些歌曲是“帝国扩张的音乐表现”（第 251 页），几乎从它们首次亮相的那一刻起就已经不合时宜，现在提供了关于 1920 年代对帝国看法的有益教训。章节的时间顺序组织毫无疑问，展览在无数方面都是帝国运作的核心。这可能包括对帝国和扩张的质疑，正如道格拉斯·福特汉姆 (Douglas Fordham) 对讽刺和平外交的讽刺漫画的分析以及麦卡莱尔和麦肯齐的介绍中对纳博布斯的讨论所强调的那样。Mackenzie 和 Auerbach 还讨论了 20 世纪早期帝国的衰落与帝国盛会和 1911 年德里杜巴节等帝国事件的规模和盛况增加之间的联系。这些见解表明存在更大的论点在这些章节中，关于增加对展览和展示的关注如何改变大英帝国历史的流行叙述，但没有明确说明。相反，读者可以更好地理解用于代表帝国的对象和实践的多样性。该系列的既定目标是表明“帝国的历史在很大程度上也需要成为展示和接受的历史”（第 2 页）。贡献者在展示方面肯定是成功的，他们在追踪接收方面取得了长足的进步。大多数章节确实与观众互动以及某些作品是如何被接受的，特别是在期刊出版社中。然而，究竟英国人每天如何获得帝国仍然是一个难以阐明的话题。这不是针对该系列的批评，而是对那些研究历史的人的更广泛的观察。一本书的购买是否合理表明它已被阅读？当我们经常受限于评论家的评论时，我们如何判断观众如何解读一幅画或一幅全景图？当然，这些是历史研究的核心问题，并且长期以来一直争论不休。在另一个机会中阅读这些文章，以富有成效地参与该主题。展览帝国是各级帝国学者的引人入胜的读物。专家们将享受每一章关于不同展示文化的细节，而研究生将深入了解帝国与展览之间完全交织的关系。除了一些例外，这些文章都集中在英国，特别是伦敦的公众，为进一步研究农村和殖民地的展览和接待留下了空间。