The Subversion of Historiography in More’s Utopia
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20145735 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Charlotte Artese (corresponding author) |
| Year | 2011 |
| Volume | 48 (Number 183 |
| Issue | 1-2 |
| Pages | 204-223 |
| Publication date | 2011-06-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Moreana (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0047-8105 • E-ISSN: 2398-4961 |
| Publisher | Edinburgh University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.3366/more.2011.48.1-2.11 |
| OpenAlex | W2583041595 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 3 |
Thomas More’s Utopia (1516) systematically subverts historiography’s truth claims through its treatment of the eyewitness, the proper name, and the New World. It does so in order to assert its right to exist as neither history nor falsehood, the categories then available for narrative. By undermining the bases of historiography, Utopia can claim to be as much a history as any other text. Revealing the hollowness of history’s truth claims enables More to disallow any condemnation of his narrative based on a specious opposition of historiography and lies
Archaeology · Art · Art history · Historiography · Literature · Narrative · Narrative history · Opposition (politics) · Political science · Politics · Subversion · Utopia · Historical Economic and Social Studies · History · Law · Philosophy
| Highly cited | No |
|---|