V přednáškách z estetiky a poetiky Augusta Gottlieba Meißnera, jak je na pražské univerzitě zaznamenali jeho posluchači Josef Jungmann a Josef Liboslav Ziegler, se vyskytují mimořádně často výrazy Rührung, rühren, rührend a gerührt. Studie si klade za cíl postihnout, jak pražský ordinarius estetiky a klasické literatury s těmito výrazy v přednáškách pracoval, a zjistit, jak způsob jejich uplatnění souvisel s osvícenskou estetikou 18. století, zvláště německou. Vrcholná nobilitace tohoto pojmového komplexu v pražské univerzitní estetice přelomu osmnáctého a devatenáctého století se pravděpodobně neopírala o žádné konkrétní dílo, nýbrž souvisela s obecnými dobovými estetickými tendencemi, zvláště vlivným afektivním proudem německé estetiky účinku (Wirkungsästhetik) druhé poloviny 18. století. Tento proud, tvořící alternativu k projektu kontemplativně pojaté transcendentální estetiky Immanuela Kanta, učinil z emocí a vášní základ vkusu a umění, vštípil estetickým úvahám psychologicko-antropologický ráz, aniž ztratil ze zřetele přesvědčení o důležitosti, ba prvořadosti mravního přínosu umění. Meißnerovy přednášky představují dosud neznámý, stěží opominutelný článek tohoto proudu německé estetiky rozvinutý na univerzitě v rakouské monarchii, tedy za hranicemi tradičních středoněmeckých a severoněmeckých středisek estetického myšlení. Soustředěný zájem o Rührung Meißnerovy přednášky do tohoto proudu na jedné straně včleňuje, jeho absolutizace ústící v cílené oslabení mravního aspektu je na druhé straně posunuje na samý jeho okraj. Dvojaká role Rührung, nejpříznačnější a nejosobitější rys přednášek, nasvědčuje tomu, že Meißner byl obeznámen nejen s německými, ale i s výrazně vyhrocenějšími francouzskými a anglickými stanovisky, vstřebanými zřejmě za lipských studií. and The terms Rührung, rühren, rührend, and gerührt occur with extraordinary frequency in the lectures on aesthetics and poetics which were given at Prague University by August Gottlieb Meißner (1753–1807), as recorded by his students Josef Jungmann and Josef Liboslav Ziegler. The article aims to explain how Meißner, the ordinarius of aesthetics and classical literature at Prague, worked with these terms in his lectures and it seeks to demonstrate how their use was connected with the Enlightenment aesthetics of the eighteenth century, particularly in the German- speaking lands. The ennoblement of this set of terms in aesthetics at Prague University in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was probably not based on any specific work. Instead, it was connected with the general aesthetic trends of the times, particularly the influential German ‘aesthetics of effect’ (Wirkungsästhetik) of the second half of the eighteenth century. This current, which constituted an alternative to the contemplatively conceived transcendental aesthetics of Immanuel Kant, made the emotions the basis of taste and art, adding a psychological-anthropological aspect to aesthetic thinking, without losing sight of the importance, even paramouncy, of the moral contribution of art. Meißner’s lectures constitute a hitherto unknown, hard to overlook part of this current of German aesthetics, which was developed at a university in the Austrian Monarchy, that is to say, beyond the frontiers of the traditional central German and north German centres of aesthetic thought. Though the concentrated interest in Rührung places Meißner’s lectures into this current, the absolutization of the term, resulting in a deliberate weakening of the moral aspect, shifts the lectures to the margins. The double role of Rührung, the most typical, most distinctive feature of the lectures, shows that Meißner was familiar not only with contemporaneous German views but also with the strikingly more pointed French and English viewpoints, which he had absorbed probably during his years at Leipzig.
Food security has been one of the most pressing issues since time immemorial. Food production and provisioning have always been demanding task, especially in times of war. An armed conflict often leads to disruption of the prevailing social order and it transforms social and economic patterns of everyday life. Moreover, wars also generally result in shortages of food, water and medical supplies, which further generates undernourishment as well as chronic hunger and famine. This article discusses the role of food in armed
conflicts with an increased focus on situations when starvation is intentionally imposed on targeted populations. As Collinson and Macbeth (2014) emphasise, such intentional restriction of food by either of the sides of a conflict is a "weapon of war". These complex
processes are going to be illustrated primarily on the example of the 1990s war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Nevertheless, selected events and circumstances are going to be additionally compared with historical use and social significance of salt with an emphasis on warfare. The main research focus is aimed at the former UN "Safe" Area Srebrenica and theoverall scarcity of salt in the besieged enclave during the 1990s war. Not only that during the Bosnian War, salt was purchased for precious metal items but also for those on the verge of life and death, the small amount of salt sometimes became worth more than gold.
The declared aim of enlightened administrative reforms was to provide security and aid the whole population, i.e., all social classes. Executive powers of the newly introduced police institutions covered - and defined - the whole public sphere and measures such as census or obligation to have a passport applied, at least in theory, to persons from all walks of life. This article examines how and to what extent were these ambitions applied in practice and whether these measures had an equalising effect on the society. The author concludes that unequal, in this case preferential, administrative treatment of especially the aristocracy was still widespread at the beginning of the nineteenth century. On the one hand, persons of a higher social status - who often held public offices - were supposed to embody the new civil virtues and set an example. On the other hand, however, it was feared that any public punishment or police treatment of such persons would undermine public authority and social order in general., Pavel Himl., and Obsahuje bibliografické odkazy
The year 1948 brought an essential transformation to the countryside, its traditional values and principals of its functioning. The collectivization did not only mean consolidation of private land into collective farms; for the entire period, it was connected with repressive methods used against so-called kulaks. The contribution is a micro-probe into the life story of miller Jaroslav Paukner from the village of Hrejkovice in Southern Bohemia. Together with his parents, he was classified as “kulak” and he had to face permanent economic and social pressure crowned by
handing over of his farm to the local collective farm, deportation of the family from the village and following court proceedings as a consequence of miller´s self-willed removing into his native village. The article is based on comparison of archive materials, private chronicle of a Hrejkovice inhabitant, and survivors ́ memories. Its main aim was to offer an alternative view of the 1950s than that offered by history books, namely through a very particular story.