This essay aims to describe hitherto unknown notes of aesthetics lectures given by August Gottlieb Meißner (1753-1807) at Prague University. It compares these notes (made by a certain Wagner, and deposited in the Wienbibliothek im Rathaus) with notes deposited in Czech libraries, and seeks to determine their place chronologically amongst notes made by others attending Meißner’s lectures over the years. The most important difference in content between the earlier known notes and Wagner’s is Meißner’s negative attitude towards the Schlegel brothers. This attitude slightly alters our existing notion of his views on the relationship between literature and morality. Taken alone, the collections of notes in Czech libraries had led one to conclude that this Prague ordinarius was an ardent libertine, who dared, even at a conservative Austrian university, to push for the autonomy of art, including a thorough split between art and morality, regarding not only works of art, but also, to a certain extent, the artists themselves. By contrast, the Vienna MS as a matter of priority restricts this split to art, and limits it to the higher, moral aims of the artist as citizen. His approach to questions of morality and to the Schlegel brothers demonstrates that while Meißner considered himself part of the liberally enlightened current of contemporaneous literature, which made moving the emotions the central aim of art, he was no longer an adherent of upandcoming Romanticism with its extreme conviction about unlimited authorial liberty, which stemmed from the philosophical Idealism of the times. This attitude to the Schlegel brothers also suggests that Wagner attended Meißner’s lectures in aesthetics and rhetoric in the winter of 1800/1., Tomáš Hlobil., and Obsahuje bibliografické odkazy
Kniha Náměstí Krasnoarmějců 2 je monografickým završením badatelského projektu zaměřeného na dějiny takzvané normalizace na Filozofické fakultě Univerzity Karlovy v Praze, který ustavili studenti a doktorandi této instituce na sklonku předchozího desetiletí. Podle recenzenta zde autoři přicházejí se závěry, které překračují hranice vymezené výzkumným polem dějin vysokých po roce 1968, a využili je pro sepsání případové studie otevírající novou perspektivu ve výzkumu sociálních dějin státního socialismu v Československu. Jedná se o mikrohistorii „obnovování pořádku“ po porážce pražského jara, rozvinutou do obecnějších úvah o povaze vládnutí v Československu sedmdesátých osmdesátých let minulého století. Předložená analýza „normalizační“ ideologie, průběhu čistek a podoby postupně zaváděných mechanismů kontroly a dohledu tak představuje zásadní příspěvek k poznání mocenských vztahů v tehdejší společnosti. Svazek S minulostí zúčtujeme přináší edici dvou rozsáhlých klíčových dokumentů k dějinám „normalizace“ na fakultě – „Analýzy FF UK“ z roku 1970, jejímž účelem bylo shrnout „konsolidaci“ fakulty, a „Rehabilitační zprávy“, jež rekapitulovala činnost fakultní rehabilitační komise fungující v letech 1989 až 1992. and [autor recenze] Vítězslav Sommer.
By the end of spring 1468, within just a few months of one another, the anti-Ottoman crusade had suffered two grievous losses, both unavoidable or, at least, expected. In mid-January, Skanderbeg passed away. With the exception of a couple of fortresses and the Venetian possessions, Albania came under Ottoman rule. The difficult Hungarian-Ottoman negotiations of February-April 1468 led to the conclusion of a two-year truce between King Matthias Corvinus and Sultan Mehmed II (twice prolonged, in 1470 and in 1472). John Hunyadi’s soon left on his other crusade, against the heretic king of Bohemia, George Podiebrad, whom he accused, like his fellow crusader leaguer of 1463, Duke Philip the Good of Burgundy, of also conspiring with the Turk. The paper explores - based on archival material - the Hungarian and Wallachian background that led to this change in the policy of Matthias Corvinus, who had been prepared to attack the Turks, not the realm of Bohemia, in mid-1467. and Alexandru Simon.
The aim of this work is to introduce the basic findings from three Lusatian culture sites discovered in the Opava region between 2009 and 2011. These sites located in Kylešovice, Neplachovice and Kobeřice revealed new areas settled by people of the Lusatian culture in a previously unexplored region. A small salvage excavation was carried out in 2009 on the cadastre of Kylešovice (outer suburb of Opava). In the northeastern part of Kylešovice on the corner of Vaníčkova and Ruská streets, four settlement features and one posthole were found. In 2011, on the cadastre of village Neplachovice, one sunken object with Lusatian culture artifacts was discovered with four postholes located nearby. The most extensive excavation took place on the cadastre of Kobeřice in 2013 as a part of the construction of “Technical and traffic infrastructure for 19 family houses in Horní Olšina locality”. Twelve sunken objects were discovered at this site. It is located in the southwestern part of Kobeřice on the “Horní Olšina” field to the west of road No. 467 from Štěpánkovice to Kobeřice., Jiří Juchelka., and Obsahuje seznam literatury