This text considers the early creative output of Ignác Cornova, in particular his lesserknown odes and his war poetry. It draws on contemporary research of the latter third of the 18th century focussing on the dynamic social change of the period, the transformation of the media, the emergence of a modern ‘public’, and changing perceptions of artistic as opposed to educational output. One of the difficulties of conceptualizing this period is the existence of two opposing trends – the older ‘Baroque’ tradition and the more ‘modern’ currents of the future national movement. Our text largely obviates this dichotomy by proposing a framework in which Cornova’s oeuvre is seen as evidence of an idiosyncratic cultural situation with its own features and markers. The aim of our study is to place Cornova’s early works within the literary context of his time – a context hard to appreciate today. We are not looking for the ‘future’ Cornova in those beginnings, nor the ‘embryos’ of his later development. Rather, we hope to rehabilitate the literary context in the Czech lands in the 1770s and 1780s as it veered between late Baroque odes, war reportage, and enlightenment patriotism. Alongside Cornova we consider now forgotten figures such as Vojtěch Koťara, Michael Denis, Johann Joseph Eberle and Václav Thám. The result is not a group biography, but rather a problem analysis of one segment of a period that defies unequivocal definition.
Tato studie je příspěvkem k prvním létům fungování České akademie věd a umění. Její vznik byl vnímán jako dosažení dlouholetého vytouženého cíle - národní akademie. Instituce ale vznikla již v době, kdy byla česká společnost politicky i umělecky diferencovaná, a tak reflexe jejího zrodu, na němž měl zásluhu především Josef Hlávka, nebyla jednoznačná. Výmluvným a veřejným projevem nesouhlasu bylo několik odmítnutí členství hned na samém počátku její existence. Motivace těch, kteří členství nepřijali, byly různé a zaslouží si obecnější pozornost. Jedním z nich byl Julius Zeyer. Jeho vztahu k České akademii a k Josefu Hlávkovi se věnovala tato studie podrobněji. Julius Zeyer a Josef Hlávka, dvě výjimečné a zároveň rozdílné osobnosti, se sblížily až v polovině devadesátých let. Julius Zeyer trávil na zámku v Lužanech, sídle Josefa Hlávky a jeho ženy Zdeňky letní měsíce. Ačkoli se Julius Zeyer nikdy nestal členem České akademie, odmítal ji a nepřijal od ní ani výroční cenu, přesto se stal jejím mecenášem, protože ve své závěti určil právě Českou akademii dědičkou jeho autorských práv v době, kdy o jeho díla začal výrazně stoupat zájem. Prostřednictvím své pramenné základy - korespondence - poukázala studie ale i na dobové konvence, hledání kompromisů, způsoby komunikace mezi jednotlivými osobnostmi spjatými s Josefem Hlávkou i šíři jejich sociálních kontaktů. and This study is a paper on the first years of operation at the Czech Academy of Sciences and Arts. Its creation was conceived as the achievement of a long yearned-for goal - a national academy. However, the institution was created at a time when Czech society was politically and artistically differentiated, so that reflections of its birth, which Josef Hlávka was primarily responsible for, were not straightforward. A very telling and public display of disagreement involved several membership rejections at the very start of its existence. The motivation for those who did not accept membership was various and deserves more general attention. One of these was Julius Zeyer. His relationship to the Czech Academy and to Josef Hlávka has been examined in detail by this study. Julius Zeyer and Josef Hlávka, two outstanding but very different personalities, did not have a rapprochement until the mid-1890s, when Julius Zeyer spent the summer months at the chateau in Lužany owned by Josef Hlávka and his wife Zdeňka. Although Julius Zeyer never became a member of the Czech Academy, rejected it and did not even accept its anniversary award, he nevertheless became its sponsor, as in his will he passed on his copyright rights to the Czech Academy at a time when interest in his works was beginning to grow significantly. By means of its source bases, i.e. correspondence, the study also referred to period conventions, quests for compromise, the methods of communication between the individuals associated with Josef Hlávka and the breadth of their social contacts.
Four strains of non-encysting amoebae were isolated from organs of freshwater fishes and characterized using light and electron microscope. Morphology of three clonal strains was consistent with amoebae which had already been described from water habitats. Two strains, one isolated from kidney tissue of common goldfish, Carassius auratus (Linnaeus, 1758), and the second one from brain of chub, Leuciscus cephalus Linnaeus, 1758, were identified with Vannella platypodia (Gläser, 1912) Page, 1976. Both strains were identical, except for the length of glycostyles. The strain isolated from the liver of perch, Perea fluviatilis (Linnaeus, 1758), was assigned to the genus Vexillifera Schaeffer, 1926 as Vexillifera expectata sp. n. The taxonomic position of the fourth non-encysting strain could not be safely established, although it shares some trophic cell structures with protostelids (Protostelia, Eumycetozoea). We present its detailed description here also to demonstrate that amoeba stages of this type of organisms are capable to infect fishes.