{"title":"The Capuchins as Recipients and Mediators of Baroque Caritas","authors":"Marek Brčák","doi":"10.32725/oph.2019.025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2019.025","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36082,"journal":{"name":"Opera Historica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43959592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Three Missions of Niclas Warkotsch to Moscow in 1589-1594 in the Light of Russian Diplomatic Ritual","authors":"V. Panov","doi":"10.32725/oph.2019.001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2019.001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36082,"journal":{"name":"Opera Historica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47832290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Anniversary of the Reformation in Czech Historiography","authors":"Josef Hrdlička","doi":"10.32725/oph.2019.004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2019.004","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36082,"journal":{"name":"Opera Historica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42640564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction In Polish political thought of the seventeenth and first half of the eighteenth century, a conviction of the excellence of the old political system and laws was predominant. In political treatises, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was described uncritically as a country of ideal golden freedom. For this reason, new ideas and reforms were feared and the sentence was frequently repeated: „omnia mutatio nociva“ (every change is harmful).1 In the face of growing internal battles and increasing interference of other countries in Polish affairs, in the second half of the 18th century, voices calling for reforms were starting to appear.2 In these political writings there is a clear influence of the thoughts of the Enlightenment, a modern concept of the laws of nature formulated by philosophers such as John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau or French physiocrats – François Quesnay or Victor Riquetti de Mirabeau. One of the political currents that referred to the concept of law of nature was that defined in modern historiography as the doctrine of compromise between the nobility and bourgeoisie. Andrzej Sylwestrzak pointed out the specific situation of the Commonwealth, in which the ideologists of bourgeoisie did not intend to unite themselves within their social condition, or cooperate with peasantry, but descending from intelligentsia and petty nobility, they sought cooperation with nobility.3 This gave the Polish political thought of the 18th century a special dimension. The most prominent representatives of this trend are Józef Wybicki, Hugo Kołłątaj, Stanisław Staszic.4 These ideologists believed that to
引言在十七世纪和十八世纪上半叶的波兰政治思想中，对旧政治制度和法律的卓越性的信念占主导地位。在政治论文中，波兰立陶宛联邦被不加批判地描述为一个理想的黄金自由国家。由于这个原因，人们害怕新的想法和改革，这句话经常被重复：“omnia mutatio nociva”（每一个变化都是有害的）.1面对日益激烈的内部斗争和其他国家对波兰事务的日益干涉，在18世纪下半叶，要求改革的声音开始出现。2在这些政治著作中，明显受到启蒙运动思想的影响，启蒙运动是由约翰·洛克等哲学家提出的现代自然规律概念，让-雅克·卢梭或法国重农主义者——弗朗索瓦·魁奈或维克多·里奎蒂·德·米拉博。提到自然法概念的政治潮流之一是现代史学中定义的贵族和资产阶级之间的妥协学说。Andrzej Sylwestrzak指出了英联邦的具体情况，在这种情况下，资产阶级的思想家并不打算在自己的社会条件下团结起来，也不打算与农民合作，而是从知识阶层和小贵族阶层出身，寻求与贵族合作。这一趋势最突出的代表是Józef Wybicki、Hugo Koł322;ãtaj、Stanis 322; aw Staszic。4这些思想家认为
{"title":"Law of Nature as Justification for Reforms. Polish Political Thought in the Eighteenth Century","authors":"M. Baranowska, Paweł Fiktus","doi":"10.32725/oph.2019.003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2019.003","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction In Polish political thought of the seventeenth and first half of the eighteenth century, a conviction of the excellence of the old political system and laws was predominant. In political treatises, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was described uncritically as a country of ideal golden freedom. For this reason, new ideas and reforms were feared and the sentence was frequently repeated: „omnia mutatio nociva“ (every change is harmful).1 In the face of growing internal battles and increasing interference of other countries in Polish affairs, in the second half of the 18th century, voices calling for reforms were starting to appear.2 In these political writings there is a clear influence of the thoughts of the Enlightenment, a modern concept of the laws of nature formulated by philosophers such as John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau or French physiocrats – François Quesnay or Victor Riquetti de Mirabeau. One of the political currents that referred to the concept of law of nature was that defined in modern historiography as the doctrine of compromise between the nobility and bourgeoisie. Andrzej Sylwestrzak pointed out the specific situation of the Commonwealth, in which the ideologists of bourgeoisie did not intend to unite themselves within their social condition, or cooperate with peasantry, but descending from intelligentsia and petty nobility, they sought cooperation with nobility.3 This gave the Polish political thought of the 18th century a special dimension. The most prominent representatives of this trend are Józef Wybicki, Hugo Kołłątaj, Stanisław Staszic.4 These ideologists believed that to","PeriodicalId":36082,"journal":{"name":"Opera Historica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48659272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction Johann Heinrich Gottlob von Justi’s (1717–1771)1 work has proved difficult to contextualise and interpret. There is consensus that he was one of the most influential German political and economic writers from the 1750s to 1770s; however, evaluations of the value and originality of his work vary greatly. Traditionally, Justi has been seen as one of the leading German cameralists2 that is to say, as a specialist of the mercantilist policy of the state. Reinterpretations of cameralism and cameral sciences have changed and keep changing the ways the main proponent of cameral sciences has been seen during the past forty years.3 We have come to realise that cameralists wrote extensively on political
{"title":"Justi's Essay on Universal Monarchy (1747): A Misunderstood Satire","authors":"E. Nokkala","doi":"10.32725/oph.2019.002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2019.002","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Johann Heinrich Gottlob von Justi’s (1717–1771)1 work has proved difficult to contextualise and interpret. There is consensus that he was one of the most influential German political and economic writers from the 1750s to 1770s; however, evaluations of the value and originality of his work vary greatly. Traditionally, Justi has been seen as one of the leading German cameralists2 that is to say, as a specialist of the mercantilist policy of the state. Reinterpretations of cameralism and cameral sciences have changed and keep changing the ways the main proponent of cameral sciences has been seen during the past forty years.3 We have come to realise that cameralists wrote extensively on political","PeriodicalId":36082,"journal":{"name":"Opera Historica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45545157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Correspondence between Emperor Leopold I and Johann Adolf of Schwarzenberg (1662-1683). Outline of an Edition Project","authors":"Rostislav Smíšek","doi":"10.32725/oph.2019.007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2019.007","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36082,"journal":{"name":"Opera Historica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48407389","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Early Modern Age in the Russian Historiography: Yesterday and Today","authors":"A. Prokopiev","doi":"10.32725/oph.2019.005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2019.005","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36082,"journal":{"name":"Opera Historica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42745605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The opening of state frontiers after 1989 brought a considerable widening of horizons to the Czech historiography. Among the research trends which experienced the fastest upswing were also gender studies, although they were particularly oriented on women’s history. Monographs dedicated to the 19th century women, which were published at the turn of the millennia, were targeted at a wider spectrum of readers and they won a strong response from outside the narrow community of experts.1 The interest in cultural history of women and the development of women’s movement were supported by the first published Czech translations.2 The demand for these topics was reflected in the offer of public lectures,3 publishing of new professional and popularising books, and in the amount of student theses dedicated to various aspects of women’s history in the past. The period of feverish research into women’s history culminated at the end of the first decade of the 21st century with publication of a representative collective monograph about women in the Czech lands from the Middle Ages until the 20th century.4 The French concept of the cultural history of women,5 which was introduced into the Czech milieu by Milena Lenderová in the 1990s, already partly cleared the way for a more modern concept of gender history, and the chronological interpretation was replaced by thematic complexes. The incoming
{"title":"The Concept of Gender in the Czech Rural History and Historiography","authors":"Markéta Skořepová","doi":"10.32725/oph.2019.006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2019.006","url":null,"abstract":"The opening of state frontiers after 1989 brought a considerable widening of horizons to the Czech historiography. Among the research trends which experienced the fastest upswing were also gender studies, although they were particularly oriented on women’s history. Monographs dedicated to the 19th century women, which were published at the turn of the millennia, were targeted at a wider spectrum of readers and they won a strong response from outside the narrow community of experts.1 The interest in cultural history of women and the development of women’s movement were supported by the first published Czech translations.2 The demand for these topics was reflected in the offer of public lectures,3 publishing of new professional and popularising books, and in the amount of student theses dedicated to various aspects of women’s history in the past. The period of feverish research into women’s history culminated at the end of the first decade of the 21st century with publication of a representative collective monograph about women in the Czech lands from the Middle Ages until the 20th century.4 The French concept of the cultural history of women,5 which was introduced into the Czech milieu by Milena Lenderová in the 1990s, already partly cleared the way for a more modern concept of gender history, and the chronological interpretation was replaced by thematic complexes. The incoming","PeriodicalId":36082,"journal":{"name":"Opera Historica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44344888","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
1 This essay builds upon earlier reflections I have made on the same topic in my introduction, co-authored with Hervé Touboul . See Edward Castleton – Hervé Touboul, Retour sur 1848: peut-on en finir?, in: idem (edd .), Regards sur 1848, Besançon 2015, p . 7–31 . Ascribing National and International Meaning to 1848 Today There is something about the events of the European Revolutions of 1848 such that whenever those events are discussed, they can be endowed with a special immediacy capable of speaking to the present .1 2018 marked the 170th anniversary of those revolutions . In France, where I live, this commemoration was largely overshadowed by the 50th anniversary of the events of May-June 1968, deemed by the mainstream media and most major cultural institutions to be more relevant . Yet when I lectured to non-academic audiences in provincial France about 1848 for the 2018 commemoration, audiences invariably seemed to discover something in that year as equally important to understanding their own times as whatever happened in the summer of 1968 . In particular, I was repeatedly confronted by spontaneous comments and questions revolving around issues of political representation . These can be summarized more or less as follows . The problems France faces today are identical to those that arose when it first experimented with universal manhood suffrage subsequent to the declaration of the Second Republic . The elected elites care little for the people who elect them, whether they be authoritarian demagogic ,,outsiders“, members of a semi-professional political class of ,,insiders“, or ,,technocrats“ whose political actions focus singularly on reducing governmental balance sheets . In an era of resurgent anti-establishment populism on a global scale, stoked by widespread dissatisfaction with the democratic political process, this sort of interpretation is perhaps natural enough . Despite the fact that the electoral franchise is fully unrestricted in most countries, unlike in the France of 1848 when only men could participate in the political process, we live in an era wherein simply being able to vote does not seem like a panacea sufficient to solve increasingly polarizing social inequalities . In France currently, there is a general opinion that the public has had the wool pulled over its eyes for too long by its politicians . This feeling has been exacerbated by the fact that citizens recently elected a consummate ,,insider“ and previously unelected ,,technocrat“ to be president in 2017 who ran for chief executive as an ,,outsider“ representing change from the unpopular previous administration of which he was
这篇文章建立在我与hervevuretouboull合著的引言中对同一主题的早期思考之上。参见爱德华·卡斯尔顿(Edward Castleton)——hervevel touboull，《Retour sur 1848: peuton en finir?》， in: idem (edd .)， Regards sur 1848, besanon 2015, p。7-31。今天赋予1848年欧洲革命的国家和国际意义有一些关于1848年欧洲革命事件的东西，无论何时讨论这些事件，它们都可以被赋予一种特殊的即时性，能够与现在对话。2018年是这些革命170周年。在我居住的法国，1968年5月至6月事件50周年的纪念活动在很大程度上被掩盖了，主流媒体和大多数主要文化机构认为这更有意义。然而，当我在法国外省为2018年的纪念活动向非学术听众讲述1848年时，听众们似乎总是发现，在那一年里，对于理解他们自己的时代，一些事情与1968年夏天发生的事情同样重要。特别是，我一再遇到围绕政治代表问题的自发评论和问题。这些可以或多或少概括如下。法国今天面临的问题，与它在第二共和国宣告成立后首次试行男性普遍选举权时出现的问题相同。当选的精英们几乎不关心选举他们的人，无论他们是专制的煽动者、“局外人”、半专业政治阶层的“圈内人”成员，还是“政治行动只专注于减少政府资产负债表”的技术官僚。在一个反建制民粹主义在全球范围内死灰复燃、对民主政治进程普遍不满的时代，这种解读或许再自然不过了。尽管在大多数国家，选举权是完全不受限制的，但与1848年只有男性才能参与政治进程的法国不同，我们生活在一个仅仅能够投票似乎不足以解决日益分化的社会不平等的万灵药的时代。目前在法国，人们普遍认为公众被政客蒙蔽了太长时间。这种感觉因以下事实而加剧:公民最近选出了一位“以前未当选的技术官僚”——一位完美的“圈内人”——作为2017年的总统，他以“局外人”的身份竞选行政长官，“代表着与他所处的不受欢迎的上一届政府的不同”
{"title":"Untimely Meditations on the Revolution of 1848 in France","authors":"E. Castleton","doi":"10.32725/oph.2018.021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2018.021","url":null,"abstract":"1 This essay builds upon earlier reflections I have made on the same topic in my introduction, co-authored with Hervé Touboul . See Edward Castleton – Hervé Touboul, Retour sur 1848: peut-on en finir?, in: idem (edd .), Regards sur 1848, Besançon 2015, p . 7–31 . Ascribing National and International Meaning to 1848 Today There is something about the events of the European Revolutions of 1848 such that whenever those events are discussed, they can be endowed with a special immediacy capable of speaking to the present .1 2018 marked the 170th anniversary of those revolutions . In France, where I live, this commemoration was largely overshadowed by the 50th anniversary of the events of May-June 1968, deemed by the mainstream media and most major cultural institutions to be more relevant . Yet when I lectured to non-academic audiences in provincial France about 1848 for the 2018 commemoration, audiences invariably seemed to discover something in that year as equally important to understanding their own times as whatever happened in the summer of 1968 . In particular, I was repeatedly confronted by spontaneous comments and questions revolving around issues of political representation . These can be summarized more or less as follows . The problems France faces today are identical to those that arose when it first experimented with universal manhood suffrage subsequent to the declaration of the Second Republic . The elected elites care little for the people who elect them, whether they be authoritarian demagogic ,,outsiders“, members of a semi-professional political class of ,,insiders“, or ,,technocrats“ whose political actions focus singularly on reducing governmental balance sheets . In an era of resurgent anti-establishment populism on a global scale, stoked by widespread dissatisfaction with the democratic political process, this sort of interpretation is perhaps natural enough . Despite the fact that the electoral franchise is fully unrestricted in most countries, unlike in the France of 1848 when only men could participate in the political process, we live in an era wherein simply being able to vote does not seem like a panacea sufficient to solve increasingly polarizing social inequalities . In France currently, there is a general opinion that the public has had the wool pulled over its eyes for too long by its politicians . This feeling has been exacerbated by the fact that citizens recently elected a consummate ,,insider“ and previously unelected ,,technocrat“ to be president in 2017 who ran for chief executive as an ,,outsider“ representing change from the unpopular previous administration of which he was","PeriodicalId":36082,"journal":{"name":"Opera Historica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43425211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
1 The notion „Grozny studies“ (groznovyedenie) is not at all common in Russia . Quite the reverse, it is barely recognized and used . Still, we deem it promising (not only because the other possible names – The Terrible studies? Terriblistics? – sound like an academic joke) . Firstly, it enables to operate within an interdisciplinary field . Secondly, it describes a group of precisely stated problems connected with the key figure of the „Russian 16th century“ and is very convenient to use . Thirdly, the Russian historiography has already collected a huge body of literature about Ivan IV created by successive, intertwined and polemizing lines of study . Therefore, the Grozny studies have already become an important and notable field of the Russian historical thought and should be recognized as such . VLADIMIR PANOV
{"title":"Ivan the Terrible in the Russian Historiography of the 19th-21st Centuries. Problems, Methodology, Opinions","authors":"Vladimir Panov","doi":"10.32725/oph.2018.004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32725/oph.2018.004","url":null,"abstract":"1 The notion „Grozny studies“ (groznovyedenie) is not at all common in Russia . Quite the reverse, it is barely recognized and used . Still, we deem it promising (not only because the other possible names – The Terrible studies? Terriblistics? – sound like an academic joke) . Firstly, it enables to operate within an interdisciplinary field . Secondly, it describes a group of precisely stated problems connected with the key figure of the „Russian 16th century“ and is very convenient to use . Thirdly, the Russian historiography has already collected a huge body of literature about Ivan IV created by successive, intertwined and polemizing lines of study . Therefore, the Grozny studies have already become an important and notable field of the Russian historical thought and should be recognized as such . VLADIMIR PANOV","PeriodicalId":36082,"journal":{"name":"Opera Historica","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42617445","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：