Charles Ralph Boxer E João De Barros = 查爾斯‧博克塞與若昂‧德‧巴洛斯
This article establishes an interpretive dialogue between the historiography of João de Barros (sixteenth century) and the intellectual figure of Charles R. Boxer (twentieth century), arguing that, despite their chronological distance, both are connected by a long duration of common concerns: the wr...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Review of Culture |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Articles |
| Published: |
Instituto Cultural de Macau
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.icm.gov.mo/rc/viewer/pdfViewerParts/40047/2372 |
| Summary: | This article establishes an interpretive dialogue between the historiography of João de Barros (sixteenth century) and the intellectual figure of Charles R. Boxer (twentieth century), arguing that, despite their chronological distance, both are connected by a long duration of common concerns: the writing of History as an erudite and didactic practice, the mastery of chronicle sources from the Portuguese East, and the recognition of the human and documentary value of their "chroniclers" as privileged mediators of the empire. Through an analysis of Boxer's texts that thematize João de Barros—with particular emphasis on the use and appreciation of the Décadas da Ásia—the authors demonstrate how Boxer legitimizes Barros as a credible source and model of historiographical inspiration, underscoring the centrality of the historical context and geographical framework in reconstructing the imperial trajectory. Methodologically, the study proceeds through critical reading and bibliographical contextualization, confronting biographical works and historiographical assessments produced by Boxer and by subsequent historiography. As a result, the article concludes that the Boxerian exaltation of Barros is not merely literary recognition but a methodological gesture: in choosing Barros as a reference, Boxer reaffirms a conception of the history of the empire founded on the quality of coeval narratives, on the triangulation between information and setting, and on the historian's responsibility toward sources. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1682-1106 |