This article explores the ways the political upheavals of the mid seventeenth century were represented in English almanacs, and argues that study of this much overlooked printed product illuminates several facets of the mental afterlife of Britain’s domestic conflicts. It contends that the prominence of political and military events from the sixteen-forties and -fifties within almanacs shows a popular demand for material that helped people remember the events of the bloody recent past and that these recollections served a range of purposes, from prognostic input to aide memoire. In addition, it suggests that the language in which the recent past was presented – primarily by almanac compilers but also by their readers – is revealing of the ways these events were interpreted and memorialized, and of some of the contests over recent memory that operated in mid seventeenth-century England. If, in the winter of 1658, an individual preparing for the year ahead chose to purchase a copy of John Swan’s annual almanac the first thing they would have encountered on opening the cover was a list of ‘Memorable Accidents’: a chronology of significant events and a specification of the number of years since they had occurred. The list began with the creation of the world 5,657 years ago and was followed by a selection of biblical and historical incidents, including Noah’s f lood, the construction of Rome and the invention of printing. The record of the more recent past, however, was dominated by the political and military turbulence of the previous decade, and included the Irish rebellion, the battle of Edgehill and the execution of Charles I. It was, as Swan acknowledged, a highly selective enumeration of historical events, and he concluded his account with the lamentation that ‘more things memorable might have been added, but I want room’, as constraints of space required him not to ‘exceed the short scantling of three sheets’.1 This need for selectivity raises some intriguing questions, not least the significance of those ‘Memorable Accidents’ that were considered worthy of inclusion. While earlier incidents, such as the construction of London’s Royal Exchange, were not politically divisive and had featured in almanac chronologies relatively consistently throughout the sixteenth century, the same clearly could not be said of events like the battle of Edgehill. Yet Swan’s almanac was far from unusual in the space it devoted to the revolutionary events of the sixteen-forties and -fifties, and, in some cases, these representations could be both more extensive and more partisan. William Eland’s chronology from 1656 also 1 John Swan, An ephemeris, or, Almanack for the year of our Lord 1659 (Cambridge, 1659), sig. A2. Note, original italics used throughout article. *This article is based on a paper given to the History Lab seminar at the Institute of Historical Research. It was runner up in the 2017 Pollard Prize. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 98 Representation of the recent past in English almanacs, 1648–60 © 2018 The Authors Historical Research, vol. 92, no. 255 (February 2019) began with the creation of the world and of its twenty-four events, ten related to the upheavals of 1640–51.2 This article contends that the study of the representation of the recent past in the chronologies and calendars of printed almanacs illuminates several facets of the mental afterlife of the domestic conflicts in England that, to date, have been little explored. In particular, it argues that the prominence of political and military events from the sixteen-forties and -fifties within almanacs suggests there was popular demand for material that would assist people in remembering these dramatic incidents and that these recollections served a range of purposes, from prognostic input to aide memoire. In addition, it suggests that the language in which the recent past was presented – primarily by almanac compilers but also by their readers – is revealing of the ways these events were interpreted and memorialized, and also of some of the contests over recent memory that operated in mid seventeenth-century England. Almanacs were astronomical guides to the planetary movements of the coming year. They were published annually, usually as part of a series, with each edition updated to reflect the specific details of the next twelve months. By tracing heavenly motions, almanacs enabled astrological interpretations, though they also provided useful information on a range of more general subjects, from the dates of fairs to medical notes. John Taylor, the so-called water poet, acknowledged the importance of almanacs in everyday life when he wrote that: For times and seasons we might grope and seek, Not knowing yeers, or quarters, month, or week, Or houres, or minutes, nor the Sabbath day, Nor when to eat, or sleep, or debts to pay. Millions of people would this knowledge lack Except directed from the Almanack.3 Though almanacs appeared under one individual’s name – Edward Pond, William Lilly, John Woodhouse, Andrew Waterman, to name but a few – this did not necessarily mean they were the product of a sole author. In 1603, the monopoly for printing almanacs was granted to the Stationers’ Company, and for the remainder of the seventeenth century writers were required to apply to this body if they wished to have their product printed and sold legally.4 The Company and its printers, concerned with the commercial value of their almanacs, could amend or add material to titles as they saw fit. As a result, almanacs, and especially those produced under the mark of the Stationers, are best understood as compiled rather than straightforwardly authored. On some occasions, the 2 William Eland, Hemerologium astronomicum in annum aerae Christianae MDCLVI. Or An almanack for the year of Christ 1656 (1656), sig. C1v. 3 John Taylor, The certain travailes of an uncertain journey begun on Tuesday the 9. of August, and ended on Saturday the 3. of September following, 1653 (n.p., 1654), p. 7. 4 L. Hill Curth, English Almanacs, Astrology, and Popular Medicine, 1550–1700 (Manchester, 2007), p. 37. Though this system broke down in practice during the years of the civil war, the only legal exceptions made were for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge. In 1623 the privy council granted printers at Cambridge University the right to share in printing certain privileged books, including any almanacs which might be offered first to the university, not the Stationers’ Company. In 1631 these privileges were reduced, and in 1639 the Cambridge authorities signed an agreement by which the university press undertook to print almanacs only with the written consent of the Company, in return for an annual payment of £200 and a guarantee that an adequate supply of work would be provided (see B. Capp, Astrology and the Popular Press: English Almanacs 1500–1800 (1979), p. 37). Representation of the recent past in English almanacs, 1648–60 99 Historical Research, vol. 92, no. 255 (February 2019) © 2018 The Authors name under which an almanac appeared deliberately misrepresented its actual source: for example, the well-known astrologer Edward Pond authored almanacs until 1700, apparently unimpeded by the small matter of his death in 1629.5 Whatever their origins, almanacs certainly sold well. Bernard Capp estimated that in the sixteen-sixties (the earliest period for which detailed evidence survives) sales averaged around 400,000 copies annually, a figure which suggests that around one in three families bought an almanac each year.6 Humphrey Blunden, who published William Lilly’s Merlini Anglici Ephemeris, recorded a schedule of production which hints at the expansion of the genre over the course of the sixteen-forties: 13,500 copies in 1646, 17,000 copies in 1647 and 18,500 copies in 1648.7 Of course, the kinds of people who actually purchased these products is harder to identify. Cheap ephemera rarely featured in inventories or wills and, in any case, the time sensitive nature of almanacs meant they were synonymous with transience. As a character in the verse Englands Changeling (1659) put it, ‘What’s that? a last years Almanack / I thought so by his look / A foolish, useless, worthless thing’.8 Nevertheless, research into ownership conducted by Louise Hill Curth has suggested that almanacs were consumed by individuals from across the social spectrum and, as a result, she has concluded that they should be understood as ‘the first form of English mass media’.9 Yet in spite of their contemporary popularity, printed almanacs have been relatively overlooked as a source by early modern historians. As Hill Curth noted, the genre contains ‘a veritable wealth of material for social and cultural historians’, but to date they have primarily been probed for what they suggest about astrological beliefs and practices, or, more recently, the related topic of early modern medicine.10 The most notable exception to this general neglect is Bernard Capp’s seminal study Astrology and the Popular Press, though the sheer scope of this work meant it could not tackle every feature of the almanacs in depth. Their chronologies and calendars, in particular, receive a comparatively brief overview, while Hill Curth’s research on almanacs and popular medicine attended to chronologies in a single sentence, along with tide tables and schedules of university terms.11 However, as Philip Benedict’s work on confessional 5 Edward Pond, An almanack for the year of our Lord God 1700 (Cambridge, 1700); J. Raymond, ‘Pond, Edward (d. 1629), Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004) [accessed 5 Oct. 2016]. 6 Capp, p. 23. For further work on the distribution of almanacs, see C. Blagden, ‘The distribution of almanacs in the second half of the 17th-century’, Studies in

中文翻译：

---

“一些令人难忘的事故的年表”：1648-60 年英国年鉴中最近的过去

本文探讨了 17 世纪中叶政治动荡在英国年鉴中的表现方式，并认为对这种备受忽视的印刷品的研究揭示了英国国内冲突的精神来世的几个方面。它争辩说，年鉴中 16 世纪 40 年代和 50 年代的政治和军事事件的突出显示了对帮助人们记住最近发生的血腥事件的材料的普遍需求，并且这些回忆有多种用途，从预测输入协助备忘录。此外，它表明最近的过去所用的语言——主要是由年历编纂者，也由他们的读者——揭示了这些事件被解释和纪念的方式，以及在 17 世纪中叶的英格兰进行的一些关于近期记忆的竞赛。如果在 1658 年冬天，一个为来年做准备的人选择购买一本约翰·斯旺的年度年鉴，打开封面时他们会看到的第一件事就是“难忘的事故”清单：重大事件的年表以及自它们发生以来的年数的说明。这份名单从 5,657 年前世界的创造开始，然后是一系列圣经和历史事件，包括诺亚洪水、罗马的建造和印刷术的发明。然而，最近十年的记录主要是过去十年的政治和军事动荡，包括爱尔兰叛乱、埃奇希尔战役和查理一世的处决。正如斯旺承认的那样，这是对历史事件的高度选择性列举，他在总结他的叙述时感叹“可能会添加更多令人难忘的东西，但我想要空间”，因为空间的限制要求他不要“超过”三张纸的短尺寸。1 这种对选择性的需求提出了一些有趣的问题，尤其是那些被认为值得列入的“难忘事故”的重要性。虽然较早的事件，例如伦敦皇家交易所的建设，在政治上并没有引起分歧，并且在整个 16 世纪的年历中都相对一致，但对于像 Edgehill 之战这样的事件，显然不能说同样的事情。然而，斯旺的年鉴在其专门用于 16 世纪 40 年代和 50 年代革命事件的空间中远非不同寻常，而且在某些情况下，这些表述可能更广泛，更具有党派色彩。威廉·埃兰 (William Eland) 1656 年的年表也有约翰·斯旺 (John Swan) 一书，一份星历，或者，我们主 1659 年的年鉴（剑桥，1659 年），签名。A2。请注意，文章中使用了原始斜体。*本文基于历史研究所历史实验室研讨会上的一篇论文。它在 2017 年波拉德奖中获得亚军。这是一篇基于知识共享署名许可条款的开放获取文章，允许在任何媒体中使用、分发和复制，前提是原始作品被正确引用。98 在英国年鉴中代表最近的过去，1648–60 © 2018 作者历史研究，卷。92，没有。255（2019 年 2 月）始于世界的创造及其二十四件事，其中十件事与 1640-51.2 的剧变有关。阐明了英格兰国内冲突的精神来世的几个方面，迄今为止，这些方面还鲜有探讨。特别是，它认为年鉴中 16 世纪 40 年代和 50 年代的政治和军事事件的突出表明，人们普遍需要能够帮助人们记住这些戏剧性事件的材料，并且这些回忆有多种用途，从备忘录的预后输入。此外，它表明，最近的过去被呈现的语言——主要是历书的编纂者，也包括他们的读者——揭示了这些事件被解释和纪念的方式，也揭示了在十七世纪中期进行的一些关于最近记忆的竞赛-世纪英格兰。年历是来年行星运动的天文指南。它们每年出版一次，通常作为系列的一部分，每个版本都会更新以反映未来十二个月的具体细节。通过追踪天体运动，年历实现了占星学的解释，尽管它们也提供了关于一系列更一般主题的有用信息，从展会日期到医疗笔记。所谓的水诗人约翰泰勒承认了年鉴在日常生活中的重要性，他写道：对于时间和季节，我们可能会摸索和寻找， 不知道年，或季度，月，或周， 或小时，或分钟，或安息日， 也不知道何时吃饭，何时睡觉，或偿还债务。数以百万计的人会缺乏这种知识，除非来自年鉴。3 虽然年鉴出现在一个人的名字下——爱德华·庞德、威廉·莉莉、约翰·伍德豪斯、安德鲁·沃特曼，仅举几例——但这并不一定意味着它们是唯一作者。1603 年，文具公司获得了印刷年鉴的垄断权，在 17 世纪余下的时间里，如果作家希望合法印刷和销售其产品，则必须向该机构提出申请。 4 公司及其印刷商，考虑到他们年鉴的商业价值，可以在他们认为合适的时候修改或添加标题的材料。因此，年鉴，尤其是那些以文具商为标志制作的年鉴，最好被理解为经过编译而不是直接编写。在某些情况下，2 William Eland, Hemerologium astronomicum in annum aerae Christianae MDCLVI。或 1656 年基督年鉴 (1656)，签名。C1v。3 约翰泰勒，不确定旅程的某些苦难始于 8 月 9 日星期二，并于 9 月 3 日星期六结束，1653 年 (np, 1654)，p。7. 4 L. Hill Curth，英国年鉴、占星术和流行医学，1550-1700（曼彻斯特，2007 年），p。37. 尽管在内战期间这一制度在实践中崩溃了，但唯一的法律例外是牛津大学和剑桥大学。1623 年，枢密院授予剑桥大学的印刷商分享印刷某些特权书籍的权利，包括可能首先提供给大学而非文具公司的任何年鉴。1631 年，这些特权被削弱，1639 年剑桥当局签署了一项协议，根据该协议，大学出版社只有在公司书面同意的情况下才能印刷年历，作为回报，每年支付 200 英镑，并保证充足的供应将提供工作（见 B. Capp, Astrology and the Popular Press: English Almanacs 1500–1800 (1979), p. 37）。英国年鉴中最近的过去的表示，1648-60 99 历史研究，卷。92，没有。255（2019 年 2 月）© 2018 年鉴出现的作者姓名故意歪曲其实际来源：例如，著名的占星家爱德华·庞德 (Edward Pond) 在 1700 年之前撰写了历书，显然不受他于 1629.5 年去世的小事所影响。无论其起源如何，历书肯定卖得很好。伯纳德·卡普估计，在 16 世纪 60 年代（有详细证据存在的最早时期），年平均销量约为 400,000 份，这一数字表明每年约有三分之一的家庭购买一本年历。 6 出版威廉·莉莉 (William Lilly) 著作的汉弗莱·布伦登 (Humphrey Blunden) Merlini Anglici Ephemeris 记录的制作时间表暗示了这一流派在 1640 年代的扩张：1646 年 13,500 份，1647 年 17,000 份，1648 年 18,500 份。这些产品更难识别。廉价的蜉蝣很少出现在库存或遗嘱中，无论如何，年历的时间敏感性意味着它们是短暂的同义词。正如Englands Changeling (1659) 诗句中的一个角色所说，“那是什么？去年的年鉴 / 我从他的外表就这么认为 / 一个愚蠢的、无用的、毫无价值的东西。8 然而，路易丝·希尔·柯斯 (Louise Hill Curth) 对所有权的研究表明，年鉴被社会各阶层的人所消费，因此，她得出的结论是，它们应该被理解为“英语大众媒体的第一种形式”。9 然而，尽管它们在当代很受欢迎，但作为早期现代历史学家的来源，印刷年鉴却相对被忽视了。正如希尔·柯斯 (Hill Curth) 所指出的，该体裁包含“对社会和文化历史学家来说名副其实的丰富材料”，但迄今为止，他们主要是针对他们对占星术信仰和实践的建议，或者最近的早期现代医学相关主题进行了探讨。 10 这种普遍忽视的最显着的例外是伯纳德·卡普 (Bernard Capp) 的开创性研究占星术和大众出版社，尽管这项工作的绝对范围意味着它无法深入处理年鉴的每一个特征。尤其是他们的年表和日历，得到了相对简短的概述，而希尔·柯斯 (Hill Curth) 对年历和流行医学的研究只用一句话来处理年表，以及潮汐表和大学学期时间表。 11 然而，正如菲利普·本尼迪克特 (Philip Benedict) 对忏悔的工作5 Edward Pond，我们主神 1700 年的历书（剑桥，1700）；J. Raymond, 'Pond, Edward (d. 1629), 牛津国家传记词典 (2004) [2016 年 10 月 5 日访问]。6 卡普，第。23. 有关年历分布的进一步工作，请参阅 C. Blagden，“17 世纪下半叶的年历分布”，研究