Lent Term 2017
12 - 1:15pm
The Early Modern Interdisciplinary Seminar is a fortnightly meeting of scholars whose work relates to any aspect of early modern History. The seminar exists to highlight and discuss innovative research that weaves together a diverse array of disciplines, including History, English Literature, Philosophy, Law, Linguistics, Economics, and Theology.
The seminar aims to bring academics, researchers and students from a wide variety of fields and academic backgrounds into ever-closer dialogue with one another, and to explore the many ways in which cross- disciplinary themes, ideas, arguments and evidence can illuminate the early modern period.
The meeting is divided into two sections. The first section invites a guest speaker to deliver a paper on their research for one hour. The second section provides 15-30 minutes for the speaker to answer questions on the topic and engage in a discussion on the cross-disciplinary implications of their work.
Attendees are invited to bring a packed lunch to the seminar. Tea and coffee is also provided.
1st February [Little Hall, Sidgwick Site]
Dr Hannah Murphy (University of Oxford)
"No day without a line": calligraphy, perspective and the craft of writing in early modern Nuremberg
15th February [History Faculty, Room 5]
Dr Alex Robinson (Sorbonne)
'Et le roi prit tant plaisir à la musique': Royal taste and music in the Renaissance - the case of Henri IV of France (1589-1610).
1st March [English Faculty, Room GR03]
Nailya Shamgunova (University of Cambridge)
Queering the Anglo-Ottoman Contact, c. 1550-1700
8th March (English Faculty, Board Room
In Collaboration with the Centre for Mediaeval and Early Modern Law and Literature (CMEMLL)
Dr Maria Mendes (Escola Superior de Teatro e Cinema, Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa) will present the following paper:
Praise with Purpose: Flattery in Early Modern England
Susceptibility to flattery has long been considered a character flaw, which is the reason those who believe it are usually described as being vain, proud, tyrannical or conceited. I will close-read Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, so as to question if Caesar’s failure to anticipate the conspirators’ plot is, as is usually thought, an illustration of his proneness to flattery or, as I hope to show, an example of the flatterer’s capacity to mirror one’s own mind. Flatterers might be very able in showing rhetorically what the flattered person’s ideal self would look like, and they might in turn tend to supplement rhetorical suggestion with their own desires and concerns. If this is the case, flattery is central to understanding that Julius Caesar describes a hermeneutic difficulty, and characterises the difficulties of knowing another’s mind.
15th March [English Faculty, Room GR03]