近代早期英国家庭中的性别关系

家庭是形成性别关系最小的基本单位,在近代早期,英国社会中的性别关系在家庭中得到明显的体现。结婚后,丈夫和妻子为了建立一个独立的新家而共同协作,劳动的性别分工基本遵循男主外、女主内的模式,各个阶层的妇女都要为家庭经济作贡献,但这并没有改变其地位卑微的状况,“男尊女卑”、“男主女从”仍然是这一时期家庭中的常态。     

‘Pleading for Help’: Gender Relations and Cross‐Cultural Logic in the Early Modern Mediterranean

Religious conversion cases involving women constitute an important aspect of early modern Mediterranean history. Various Muslim women left their homes in the Ottoman Empire, came to Venice and attempted to convert to Christianity. While some women found male protection and established themselves as Christians, others were pursued by male relatives and found themselves in contested cross‐cultural struggles. In this regard, gender relations surrounding female conversions also involved questions of private power, honour and legal jurisdiction. Framed by complex power relations and by complicated gender dynamics, males exercised control over female converts in a variety of ways.     

Aristotelian Ethics and Luke 15:11–32 in Early Modern England

The discourse surrounding Luke 15:11–32 — commonly titled “the parable of the prodigal son” — in early modern England is a major site of convergence for Aristotelian and Christian ethics. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the perceived role of “prodigality” (in the sense of excessive expenditure) in the parable of the prodigal son became deeply bound up with Aristotelian ethics; the parable's evolving title and its increasingly prominent role in casus summarii both contributed to and were affected by these changes. Despite the importance of both Aristotelian ethics and the parable of the prodigal son to early modern culture, scant research exists on the vital intersection between the two. By tracing the evolution of biblical paratexts, this article explicates how the parable gained its title. It then explores how the shared use of ?σωτ?α (prodigality) in Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics and Luke 15:13 affected the interpretation of Luke 15:11–32 in early modern England, and the repercussions this had for early modern philosophy and theology. It concludes that Aristotelian ethics were hugely influential in both the early modern interpretation of Luke 15:11–32 and the concept of “prodigality” that the parable was so often used to explore.