• New Work on Early Modern Women
• Paul Salzman (bio)

In different ways, these three works are testimonials to the maturity of the field of study of early modern women’s writing. The scholarship and imaginative reach of the two monographs, in particular, illustrate just how far this once specialised, even marginalised, field has come, and they demonstrate how it can now make substantial contributions to early modern literary and historical studies in general. I will consider them individually, but as a group these books are representative of a growing body of scholarship that I think demonstrates how this field punches above its weight. At the same time, in their emphasis on the reach and agency of early modern women, the two monographs build on pioneering work that addressed the political valences of a range of early modern women’s writing. The books under review, like these earlier pioneering books, take for granted that when we discuss early modern women’s writing we break open the early modern canon through an emphasis on forms of writing once considered non-literary or beneath notice.

Christina Luckyj builds on some extraordinary, pioneering work on early modern women’s writing and political engagement, notably Susan Wiseman’s 2006 study Conspiracy and Virtue: Women, Writing, and Politics in Seventeenth-Century England, and Mihoko Suzuki’s earlier work, Subordinate Subjects: Gender, the Political Nation, and Literary Form in England, 1588–1688 (Routledge, 2003). Much of that work centred on writing from later in the century, in part as a reflection of the radical responses by women to the Civil War. Luckyj’s book also works well in parallel with Sarah C. E. Ross’s Women, Poetry, and Politics in Seventeenth-Century Britain (Oxford University Press, 2015) and with Gillian Wright’s Producing Women’s Poetry, 1600–1730: Text and Paratext, Manuscript and Print (Cambridge University Press, 2013). Luckyj concentrates on [End Page 231] what we might now consider to be a group of canonical women writers from the early seventeenth century: Elizabeth Cary, Aemilia Lanyer, Rachel Speght, Mary Wroth, and Anne Southwell (though perhaps Southwell is more in the category of becoming canonical). These are all literary writers, whereas Wiseman and Suzuki in particular emphasised the importance of looking beyond conventional genres when considering early modern women writers. The stress on political engagement is a useful corrective to earlier accounts of early modern women writers as inhabiting a separate and restricted social sphere. In the case of all five writers analysed in detail by Luckyj, this approach is combined with a careful attention to literary form, characterised by Luckyj as involving a female voice. In the case of Lanyer, Speght, and Southwell, this political engagement is inextricably bound up with a religious position that Luckyj describes in various terms, but is perhaps best seen as a Protestantism that can be harnessed to question political, social, and gendered authority. And in the case of Wroth, this same oppositional position stems from a more secular perspective, at least as far as her romance Urania is concerned. Luckyj’s clear and detailed readings of works by these five fascinating writers would provide an excellent introduction for those who have yet to take their contribution to early modern literature seriously. I would note in particular Luckyj’s original and detailed analysis of Southwell, who is, as I noted above, becoming a much more recognised writer of importance, especially in relation to the issues of political engagement and religious ideology that Luckyj outlines.

Suzuki’s study is considerably more expansive than the others’, and takes the field into an extremely fruitful...

• 关于早期现代女性的新作品
• 保罗·萨尔兹曼（个人简介）

这三部作品以不同的方式证明了早期现代女性写作研究领域的成熟。这两本专着的学识和想象力尤其说明了这个曾经专业化、甚至边缘化的领域已经取得了多大的进步，并且展示了它现在如何能够对早期现代文学和历史研究做出重大贡献。我会单独考虑它们，但作为一个整体，这些书代表了越来越多的学术成果，我认为这些书展示了这个领域如何超越其重量。与此同时，这两本专着强调早期现代女性的影响力和能动性，以探讨一系列早期现代女性写作的政治价值的开创性工作为基础。正在审查的书籍，就像这些早期的开创性书籍一样，

克里斯蒂娜·拉基（Christina Luckyj）以一些关于早期现代女性写作和政治参与的非凡、开创性的工作为基础，特别是苏珊·怀斯曼（Susan Wiseman）2006年的研究《阴谋与美德：十七世纪英国的女性、写作和政治》，以及铃木美穗子的早期著作《从属主题：性别》，英国的政治国家和文学形式，1588-1688（Routledge，2003）。这些作品大部分集中在本世纪后期的写作上，部分反映了女性对内战的激进反应。Luckyj 的书还可以与莎拉·CE·罗斯 (Sarah CE Ross) 的《十七世纪英国的女性、诗歌和政治》 (牛津大学出版社，2015 年) 以及吉莉安·赖特 (Gillian Wright) 的《创作女性诗歌，1600-1730：文本和副文本、手稿和印刷品》（剑桥大学出版社，2013 年）。Luckyj专注【完第231页】我们现在可以认为是十七世纪早期的一群经典女性作家：伊丽莎白·卡里（Elizabeth Cary）、艾米莉亚·兰耶（Aemilia Lanyer）、雷切尔·施佩特（Rachel Speght）、玛丽·沃思（Mary Wroth）和安妮·索思韦尔（Anne Southwell）（尽管也许索思韦尔更属于成为经典的范畴）。这些都是文学作家，而怀斯曼和铃木特别强调在考虑早期现代女性作家时超越传统流派的重要性。对政治参与的强调是对早期现代女性作家居住在一个独立且受限制的社会领域的描述的有效纠正。在 Luckyj 详细分析的所有五位作家的案例中，这种方法与对文学形式的仔细关注相结合，Luckyj 的特点是涉及女性声音。就兰耶、斯佩特和绍斯韦尔而言，这种政治参与与 Luckyj 用各种术语描述的宗教立场有着千丝万缕的联系，但也许最好将其视为一种新教，可以用来质疑政治、社会和性别权威。就沃斯而言，同样的对立立场源于更世俗的视角，至少就她的浪漫史而言乌拉尼娅很担心。Luckyj 对这五位迷人作家的作品进行了清晰而详细的阅读，将为那些尚未认真对待他们对早期现代文学的贡献的人提供极好的介绍。我要特别指出Luckyj对索斯韦尔的原创和详细的分析，正如我上面指出的，他正在成为一位更加被认可的重要作家，特别是在Luckyj概述的政治参与和宗教意识形态问题方面。

铃木的研究比其他人的研究范围要广泛得多，并且使该领域取得了极其丰硕的成果……