Lord Mansfield is typically remembered for his influence in common law and commercial law, and his decision in Somerset v. Stewart , which granted a slave, brought to England, habeas corpus to refuse his forced transportation out of that nation by his master. Both conditions allowed observers to praise him for what they viewed as very modern notions about economy and society (capitalism and anti-slavery, respectively). Mansfield's primary position as Chief Justice of King's Bench in England, which contributed most of the only published material from him, shielded him from any scrutiny about his wider influence in general British governance in the period of his public career, roughly 1740-1790. Throughout his career, Mansfield played a large role in the general government of the British Empire. Beginning with his role as Solicitor General in 1742 and continuing after he became Chief Justice in 1756, Mansfield interacted and advised the highest members of the British ruling elite, including the monarch. Because the nature of British governance in the 18th Century was very porous, Mansfield partook in the exercise of legislative (through his seats in the House and Commons and Lords), executive (through a formal seat on the Privy Council and later in the King's Closet), and judicial (through his roles as Solicitor and Attorney General, Chief Justice of King's Bench, and temporary positions as Lord Chancellor) power practically simultaneously throughout his career. In these capacities, Mansfield contributed to imperial policy at a critical moment. He was a champion for the British Empire as the beacon of the most perfect society at that time - a perspective he developed through his education and experiences during the crucial formative years of the British nation. He channeled his support for Britain into a seemingly rigid dogma that saw any threat or challenge to British authority or culture as inherently illegitimate. In this regard, Mansfield favored British domination over the other imperial powers, and he immediately rejected the earliest complaints of the Americans over British rule. Because of the nature of his position within British governance, Mansfield's view remained constant in a government that witnessed continual turnover. The potential of Mansfield's influence was not lost upon the public. Many factions from "true Whigs" such as John Wilkes, and American patriots viewed him as the epitome of the problem with the British government-its seemingly arbitrary, unconstitutional, and tyrannical posture toward everything. Mansfield posed a particular challenge for these groups because he was a Chief Justice, and they believed he was supposed to adhere to a strong notion of justice. Instead, they saw him continually leading their repression, and so they questioned the basis of the whole British system. Through pamphlets, newspapers, and visual prints, these groups identified Mansfield as a key conspirator, which they attributed to an anti-British disposition. In these ways, Mansfield and his opponents squared off over the definition of true Britishness internally and imperially. When these opponents gathered enough strength (Londoners during the Gordon Riots, and Americans with their War of Independence), they aimed to pull down Mansfield and his comrades for their violations. The former failed to overthrow society, but they arguably hastened a change in government. The latter succeeded in their movement to exit the Empire. The Revolution was not a total transformation for the Americans, however. They struggled to define their new nation and America had similar imperial aspirations. In this environment, Mansfield was the quintessential symbol of early national "leaders" bipolar attitudes towards Britain. Some leaders such as John Adams embraced their British heritage, and used Mansfield as a model to develop a strong, centralized, commercial nation. Other leaders such as Thomas Jefferson saw Mansfield as the chief villain to the idea of America. Jefferson coined the phrase "Mansfieldism" which he identified as a caustic relationship between law and government that favored the development of political and legal elitism that challenged the interests and participation of common citizens. Jefferson viewed Mansfield as the essential symbol of the American anti-revolution. These first-generation independent Americans both remembered Mansfield for his direct participation in the imperial crisis, but for Adams and his fellow Federalists, they had to initiate redemption for Mansfield to justify their program to create America. The redemption was successful. American institutions used Mansfield to fine-tune the balance between their British heritage and uniquely American outlook. As successive generations of Americans emerged into the political sphere, they remembered his seemingly progressive positions on law and society as presented through his court decisions over his actual participation against their independence. Especially through a selective reading of his decision in Somerset, Mansfield became the legal prophet for abolitionist nationalism. His decision arguably provided a legal precedent against the institution of slavery, but it more importantly transformed into the moral imperative of the movement. In this manner, Mansfield became fully redeemed among Americans. / History

On Monday 22 June 1772, the English jurist William Murray, 1st Earl of Mansfield, delivered his oral verdict as Chief Justice of the Court of King’s Bench in the famous case involving the enslaved Afro-British servant James Somerset to declare that only an Act of Parliament could legalize domestic bondage and that Somerset was a free man. For the estimated 15,000 captives living in the English metropole, Somerset v. Stewart effectively undercut the Anglo-Atlantic slavocracy that had hid behind legal technicalities and extrajudicial decrees defending domestic bondage since the last quarter of the seventeenth century. In order to offer a full treatment of Somerset, its Afro-British legal antecedents, and the Black experience in Early Modern Britain, this work traces the roots of British racial construction--deep seated physiognomic, socio-cultural, legal, and economic roots that date to 1553 when the English first explored equatorial West Africa or what cartographers generically branded “Negroland.” When investigating Somerset scholars have overlooked the semantics of race, its longue durée link to English legal systems, and the historical actors who socially and legally defiled the Black presence in the British Empire. In addition to reconnoitering the origins of British racial construction, this work examines the judicial minutia of Afro-British case law and Mansfield’s 1772 decision, while offering a comprehensive account of its immediate and long-term effects on emancipations in the Anglo-American diaspora. This provides an all-inclusive treatment neglected by Somerset scholars. Mansfield’s verdict was an exceptional threat to slavery in that it resonated powerfully within interracial trans-Atlantic abolitionist movements and the enslaved communities that waged various forms of “diasporic warfare” against captivity throughout the British Empire. My original quantitative data based on the Glasgow University “Runaway Slave in Eighteenth-Century Britain project” reveals the correlation between pro- and anti-slavery Afro-British legal cases and the 830 ‘runaway’ and eighty-two ‘for sale’ advertisements published in eighteenth-century British newspapers. The quantitative evidence illustrates that from 1758 the surge of Afro-British ‘runaways’ led to the high-profile trials of Joseph Harvey (1762), Jonathan Strong (1765), and Thomas John Hylas (1768) which provoked increased anti-slavery activity the following decade. Indeed, by the 1760s servants were absconding in record numbers and resisting--as what I coin metropolitan maroons--and domestic slavery was quickly dying out in Britain. The public reaction to Mansfield’s 1772 verdict, coupled with the precipitous fall of post-Somerset ‘runaway’ and ‘for sale’ advertisements, proved the end of de facto slavery in England. While its legal legacies were at times ambiguous, the Somerset case gained new meanings in the imaginations of emancipationists and pro-slavery apologists alike, as tellings and retellings of its verdict were passed by word of mouth among enslaved people and through popular publications among literate free people in the decades that followed. Some of the reverberations were resounding and others much more subtle, yet all attest to the special significance of Somerset in the long emancipationist struggle against slavery.

This thesis traces the figure of the idealized child through three of Frances Hodgson Burnett's children's books: Editha's Burglar (1888), Little Lord Fauntleroy (1886), and The Secret Garden (1911). In all three books Frances Hodgson Burnett introduces child characters who have a nuanced understanding of the world around them that allows them to cure the brokenness in the adult world. Burnett's use of the child figure and of illness as a representation of flaws in society reflected increased focus on these topics in the nineteenth century; they also rose from her belief in mind cure. This thesis examines the source of the curative power each protagonist wields, the impacts of their cure, and what the need for cure says about the larger society and the characters themselves. It also emphasizes how this cure was shaped by the children's gender and socioeconomic status. I argue that throughout all three works Burnett's protagonists take on traits of the idealized child to restore the world to her view of the natural world order. In doing this, Burnett reaffirms traditional family structure, separate spheres ideology, and class hierarchy. / Master of Arts / This thesis traces the figure of the idealized child through three of Frances Hodgson Burnett's children's books: Editha's Burglar (1888), Little Lord Fauntleroy (1886), and The Secret Garden (1911). In all three books Frances Hodgson Burnett introduces child characters who have a nuanced understanding of the world around them that allows them to cure the brokenness in the adult world. Burnett's use of the child figure and of illness as a representation of flaws in society reflected increased focus on these topics in the nineteenth century; they also rose from her belief in mind cure. This thesis examines the source of the curative power each protagonist wields, the impacts of their cure, and what the need for cure says about the larger society and the characters themselves. It also emphasizes how this cure was shaped by the children's gender and socioeconomic status. I argue that throughout all three works Burnett's protagonists take on traits of the idealized child to restore the world to her view of the natural world order. In doing this, Burnett reaffirms traditional family structure, separate spheres ideology, and class hierarchy.

The essay aims to analyze how the two female characters Éowyn and Galadriel in the novel The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R Tolkien exercise female authority through literary features. The essay was conducted through a close reading of the novel and an application of the term female authority, which mainly took place in accordance with its application in other literary analyses of The Lord of the Rings. The term “female authority” is defined here primarily as the ability to validate one’s own thoughts and actions, having a strong influence on others and possessing physical or magical powers. The analysis verifies and contrasts the conclusions of previous research by analyzing female authority through literary features. In conclusion, Éowyn and Galadriel show female authority by staying true to their convictions, sharing their thoughts and ideas, ordering and disciplining people around them and not caring about disagreements with others. The ways in which this takes place are illustrated through application of the literary features conflict, dialogue, metaphor, imagery and theme.

While the study of Charles Dickens’s religion has produced various results, few would contest that Dickens’s religious views are shaped by his peculiar emphasis on Jesus and the Gospels. As to the precise nature of his views and the degree to which his commitment to the Christian faith extends, however, a much lesser degree of consensus has been established. I attempt to demonstrate here that at the heart of his work is a conspicuous Christian worldview, which is grounded squarely in the imitation of Jesus and which pervades his life and his work in the most profound yet unobtrusive ways. I argue, then, that Dickens’s The Life of Our Lord is a definitive source in the Dickens corpus for our understanding of his Christian thought and worldview. Moreover, as a serious expression of Dickens’s understanding of Christianity, The Life of Our Lord also functions as an index to his Christian thought in the larger Dickens corpus. Of first importance then, I attempt to establish the authority of The Life of Our Lord as a composition that will bear the full weight of such assertions. Then, I analyze its content as to its implicit theology in order to establish not only its thoroughgoing Christian character but also to demonstrate that it reveals Dickens’s own genuine Christian conviction manifested in all his work. Drawing the work to a close, I attempt to demonstrate how The Life of Our Lord helps us to understand Dickens’s churchmanship and his relationship to the church. In the end, I comment on its intended purpose as moral instruction for his children exemplifying his understanding of Christianity. The study demonstrates throughout how the Christianity embodied and articulated in The Life of Our Lord is consistently and naturally reflected in all of Dickens’s work, whether fiction, journalism or correspondence.

承襲清末地方軍事主義與西方條約特權體系脈絡，加以民初軍閥亂政影響，民國時期的中國社會逐漸出現兩種類型的特權人物：一個是手握槍桿子的「丘八爺」，另一個則是同時操持著條約與砲艦的「洋大人」。 「丘八爺」是軍閥割據與頻繁內戰的產物。數以百萬計的「丘八爺」平素身著戎裝，打著軍人名義，動輒打打殺殺，作戰失敗或軍隊欠餉時，即譁變作亂，化為草莽土匪，到處打家劫舍。但遇軍閥招安，則又由匪轉兵，形成兵、匪間的惡性循環。雖然嚴格說來兵、匪之間不無差異，但是民國以來，尤其北京政府時期，「丘八爺」往往以兵、匪不分的兵匪面目，烙印在一般人的印象中。 另一方面，歐美國家自清末挾帶條約體系與船堅砲利來到中國之後，經由一連串戰爭，透過砲艦外交模式教導中國人：條約必須遵守、外人生命財產安全必須獲得保障。歐美國家常設性駐華外交、領事機構，則是扮演關鍵性的角色，手持上帝之鞭，多年來宣傳、馴化中國政府與中國人。如此，中國逐漸從抗拒、反彈，到接受西方權威，承認外國人在華的地位不容輕蔑與挑戰。「洋大人」的權威形象，由此在中國樹立起來。 理論上，「丘八爺」為禍雖大，百姓亦深以為苦，但畢竟是中國內政問題，與外交事務無涉。可是，清末以來，隨著大批洋人進入中國內陸通商、傳教與居住、外國資金流入中國市場、外國軍艦巡弋重要內河、外國領事機構與軍隊駐紮各通商要衢，條約特權體制進一步內化為中國權勢結構的一部份。當數量龐大、散佈全國的「丘八爺」，與深入中國內陸的「洋大人」頻繁接觸，「丘八爺」將魔爪伸向「洋大人」之後，也就變成嚴重的外交問題。 歐戰後的東亞秩序，歷經巴黎和會、華盛頓會議的凝聚共識，歐美列強（包括日本）逐漸形成一個觀念：將美國對華政策擴大為各國對華政策，也就是放棄原先帝國主義競爭、權力均勢的模式，改以「門戶開放政策」作為處理中國事務的中心指標。與此同時，經過馬列主義、無產階級革命洗禮的蘇聯，也重新回到中國：一方面利用放棄在華特權博取中國同情，另一方面以打倒歐美帝國主義為口號，大肆宣傳民族主義式理念。列強任何強硬的舉動，常被布爾什維克宣傳家渲染為帝國主義侵華鐵證，激發更強大的反帝浪潮。在這樣的國際場景之下，當「丘八爺」遇上了「洋大人」，會發生什麼問題？當「丘八爺」以打、殺、搶、綁等各種暴力形式，一再挑釁「洋大人」威嚴，甚至任意污衊指為「洋鬼子」時，「洋大人」該如何應付？蘇聯宣傳家環伺在側、伺機扯後腿的情況下，「洋大人」是否還能重施故技，以帝國主義的老路子—砲艦外交來施以懲罰？另謀他法？抑或默認中國現狀的發展？ 此外，1920年代前後，中國軍閥割據、南北對立逐漸發展到高峰，北京政府對外雖有中央之名、對內則無約束地方之實力。面對如此威信不足、欲振乏力的北京政府，以及地方分裂割據的現狀，「洋大人」顯然無法經由「代理人機制」，透過北京政府有效地制約地方問題。 因此，1920年代上半期，當意氣風發、趾高氣昂的「丘八爺」，遇上了受到外在與內部多重制約、看似有些跛腳的「洋大人」，勢必會產生許多值得深入討論、分析的有趣問題。 其次，當我們回顧以往被定位為帝國主義侵華—國賊賣國史的北洋外交史，面對民族主義史觀與俯拾皆是的情緒性指責字眼，是否應該嘗試以新的理解取代原先的敵意，重新建構不同視野的北洋外交史？處於中國軍閥主義高漲的1920年代上半期，體現中國內政不安因子、大肆肆虐中國社會各個角落的「丘八爺」現象，與「洋大人」之間的互動，及其衍生出的種種外交交涉，乃是當時最常見的外交與內政問題。但是囿於傳統民族主義史觀，外交史家往往只著重關係國家民族大義的重大外交事件，以及國際會議層次，屬於政府高層官方外交(high diplomacy)往來交涉模式。對於發生於社會下層，一些名不見經傳的「丘八爺」與「洋大人」衝突問題，外交史家若非視而不見，即是匆匆帶過，而忽略華洋衝突背後所隱藏的重要文化意涵。究其實際，當西方列強以帝國主義強權之姿在中國樹立起條約特權體制，「洋大人」頻頻以傳教士、商人角色深入中國內陸之際，中外之間國家主權界線因此變動不居，產生許多不明確的灰色地帶。而發生在中國內部，由「丘八爺」與「洋大人」構織出的華洋衝突事件，就是徘徊在邊境與邊界之間的重要問題。一方面華洋衝突涉及到兩國之間條約權利與義務的界定，屬於官方外交層次、明確的國家主權邊界設定。另一方面，華洋衝突在本質上，同時也涉及到不同文化邂逅下的族群衝突問題，以及彼此認知、設想的民族偏見問題，如中國人心中的「洋大人形象」，與洋人心中的中國的「兵匪問題」均屬於這個層次。而在文化邊際效應的作用下，華洋勢力之間的滲透、爭執與磨合，構成中外往來的真實文化底蘊，正是當時日常生活的寫實反映。透過發生在邊境地帶的華洋衝突研究，與中外官方外交進行對話、討論，或許可以思索出與傳統相當不一樣的中外關係史。 因此，本文試圖從複雜的華洋糾葛角度，以「丘八爺」與「洋大人」的互動切入點，經由複線式歷史論述與中外不同觀點的探討，由下往上地剖析外交問題，探究當時中外重疊地帶上的北洋外交史。

This dissertation examines Elizabeth Robinson Montagu's relationships with three men: her husband, Edward Montagu; George Lyttelton, first baron Lyttelton; and William Pulteney, earl of Bath to show how these relationships were structured and how Elizabeth Montagu negotiated them in order to forward her own intellectual interests. Montagu's relationship with her husband Edward and her friendships with Lord Lyttelton and Lord Bath supplied her with important outlets for intellectual and political expression. Scholarly work on Montagu's friendships with other intellectual women has demonstrated how Montagu drew on the support of female friends in her literary ambitions, but at the same time, it has obscured her equally important male relationships. Without discounting the importance of female friendship to Montagu's intellectual life, this study demonstrates that Montagu's relationships with Bath, Lyttleton, and her husband were at least as important to her as those with women, and that her male friendships and relationships offered her entry into the political sphere. Elizabeth Montagu was greatly interested in the political debates of her day and she contributed to the political process in the various ways open to her as an elite woman and female intellectual. Within the context of these male friendships, Montagu had an opportunity to discuss political philosophy as well as practical politics; as a result, she developed her own political positions. It is clear that contemporary gender conventions limited the boundaries of Montagu's intellectual and political concerns and that she felt the need to position her interests and activities in ways that did not appear transgressive in order to follow her own inclinations. Montagu represented her interest in the political realm as an extension of family duty and expression of female tenderness. In this manner, Montagu was able to forward her own opinions without appearing to cross conventional gender boundaries.

This study considers Härskarringen (1959–61), a Swedish translation of J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings (1954–55), within the framework of translation studies and the description of norms within different fields of translation. As the work’s position as a translation has been questioned by a number of critics, the aim of the study is to identify features of the text which can be associated with this critique. The methodology employed by the study aims to separate departures in the target text from the source text within fields such as semantics and style. The departures are then ordered on the basis of linguistic form. The study suggests that the translation contains a number of features, and proposes possible explanations for these, based on the result of the study in relation to these points of departure as well as the circumstances in the context of the creation of the translation. The method used is partly based on a model developed by Rune Ingo (1991), and the results are analyzed by means of key concepts from Yvonne Lindqvist (2002). The study concludes that Härskarringen should be considered a work done mainly in accordance with an acceptable translation strategy, and thereby has characteristics of a low prestige translation. The study further considers that the critics of the translation hold, seemingly, that The Lord of the Rings should be translated as high prestige literature, and that they have reacted against the translation consequently. The study suggests that the reason for the questioning of Härskarringen’s position as a translation seems to be that the work has not been translated in accordance with the norms of the literary field to where it is today attributed. The critique can partly be viewed as a result of a raised status of The Lord of the Rings and J. R. R. Tolkien, and thus of the mobility of a work within the literary system. / Den här uppsatsen undersöker Härskarringen (1959–61), en översättning av J. R. R. Tolkiens The Lord of the Rings (1954–55), med en översättningsvetenskaplig deskriptiv metodik. Uppsatsen försöker utröna vilka egenskaper hos den svenska tolkningen som gjort att dess ställning som översättning, till helheten eller enskilda delar, har ifrågasatts av en rad kritiker. Undersökningen utförs genom att tillämpa en metod för utverkande av avvikelser mellan översättningen och originaltexten inom för uppsatsen ändamålsenliga kategorier, såsom betydelsemässiga avvikelser mellan översättning och original. De framkomna avvikande textställena sorteras sedan efter deras språkform, och utifrån resultatet samt förhållanden i översättningens tillblivelse karakteriseras sedan den undersökta aspekten av översättningen genom ett antal egenskapsdrag samt möjliga anledningar till dessa. Slutsatsen efter genomförd undersökning är att Härskarringen, huvudsakligen genom att på olika sätt förhålla sig fritt till originalet, bär många gemensamma drag med översättningar inom lågprestigelitteraturen, och att kritikerna – då dessa förefaller anse att Tolkiens The Lord of the Rings tillhör högprestigelitteraturfältet och bör översättas enligt dess normer – därför har reagerat mot översättningens utformning. Härskarringens ställning som översättning har ifrågasatts på grund av att verket inte har översatts i enlighet med normerna på det litterära fält där det i dag anses befinna sig. Företeelsen får delvis ses som en följd av The Lord of the Rings och J. R. R. Tolkiens ökade anseende, och är därmed ett exempel på återverkningar av ett verks rörlighet inom det litterära systemet.

The present work is a new attempt to interpret on the episode in Genesis 18:1-15 by the method of narrative criticism. The general tendency on the narrative had focused on the exemplary act of Abraham’s hospitality interpreting it as his righteousness by the perspective of NT (Heb 13:2) or by the test motive of Greek Myth (the birth of Orion). The retributive theology was considered too much in interpreting the Fellowship narrative (Gn 18:1-15).These interpretations conflict with the narrator’s own theological views: (1) righteousness by faith (Gn 15:6), (2) God’s mercifulness to save Lot (Gn 19:29), and (3) God’s being gracious to make Sarah conceive (Gn 21:1). This study attempts to find out the author’s own interpretative view indicated in the whole Abraham narrative (Gn 11:27-25:11) as well as in the Fellowship Narrative itself (Gn 18:1-15).The present work is an attempt to interpret on the narrative by the method of narrative criticism. This study pays attention to the narrator’s various literary skills: “linking structure with preceding episode” (Gn 18:1a); “Sandwiched structure” of the larger context (Gn 18:1-21:7); Unique Plot Sequence; and Repeated Clue word and phrase (“laugh,” “Sarah,” ”this time next year”). These literary skills are understood to indicate the faithfulness of the Lord who tries to fulfill what he promised. The conclusion of this study overturns the traditional interpretations on the Fellowship Narrative. This work attests that Abraham showed his righteousness not by doing hospitality but by obeying God’s new command of circumcision out of willing heart as he used to obey the Lord’s commands having faith in the promise of the Lord (ch.5.3.2.2). The motive of God’s visit is to have the covenantal fellowship with obedient Abraham (ch. 2.1.6; 2.1.6.1). Abraham’s first moment recognition of deity is attested by interpreting of the technical pair verb, “And he lifted up his eyes and he saw and Lo!” (Gn 18:2a), which depicts prophetic experience of Abraham (ch.3.3). Abraham’s manner for the visitors is relevant to the higher ones (ch.3.3.2.1). The futile human endeavor without having faith is considered as the reason of being delayed of fulfillment of God’s promise (Gn 16). The fulfillment of the promised son was not attained by any human effort, but only by God’s merciful intervention in the Abraham narrative (ch. 4.4.4 and 4.4.5). / Thesis (PhD)--University of Pretoria, 2010. / Old Testament Studies / unrestricted

Bentinck's attitude towards his responsibilities as Govornor-general was conditioned to an important degree not only by the intellectual outlook he brought with him to India, but also by an emotional factor which originated with his dismissal by the Court of Directors from the Governorship of Madras in 1807. The son of a Whig politician, the third Duke of Portland, Bentinck had been in close touch with the political life of the late Eighteenth and early Nineteenth Centuries. His outlook was moulded, not by his father, but by the more imaginative of the Whigs - in particular by Burke and Charles James Fox, He was acquainted with the modes of thought inspired by Bentham and Adam Smith, both of whom could claim him as a disciple. His political sympathies, therefore, lay with the radicals. He was a doctrinnaire in the sense that he had a philosophical belief in progress, and considered the acceleration or initiation of change to be a primary duty of a statesman Bentinck was not in any way an originator of now ideas. His mind, while receptive to the impuluses of a new age, was not capable of originating or directing any of those impulses, It may be said of him, in fact, that his outlook was based more on scepticism towards conventional or traditional attitudes than on a perception of the spirit of liberalism.