Jve [22] Tacitus: The Germania; With Introduction and notes by Duane Reed Stuart, Professor of classics in Princeton University; New York, The MacMillan Company 1916. [23] Der römische Limes - Grenzwall gegen die Germanenflut; http://programm.ard.de/TV/phoenix/der-roemische-limes/eid_287259734114953 BR, SWR, SR, Hessen, ARD, ZDF [24] Die Germania des Cornelius Tacitus; Mit einer Karte. Übersetzung von Paul Stefan; Im Insel-Verlag zu Leipzig 1930. [25] D. M. Robbins & E. C. Polome (1997): Varia on the Indo-European Past: Papers in Memory of Gimbutas Marija. Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph #19. Washington DC: The Institute for the Study of Man. [26] John V. Day: Indo-European Origins: The Anthropological Evidence; The Institute for the Study of Man, Washington D.C., 2001. [27] Enea Silvio Piccolomini: Europa; Herausgegeben von Günther Frank und Paul Metzger; Melanchton-Akademie Bretten, Uebersetzung von Albrecht Hartmann; Verlag Regionalkultur, 2005. (Melanchton, pravo ime Philipp Schwarzerdt, nemshki reformator najblizhji Luthru — op. B.J.H.) [28] The Life of Poggio Bracciolini. By The Rev. W. M. Shepherd, LL. D., Liverpool. Printed by Harris Brothers, For Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green & Longman. London. 1837. [29] Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte des Mittelalters und der Renaissance; herausgegeben von Walter Goetz, Heft 14: Poggius Florentinus, Leben und Werke, von Dr. Ernst Walser, Privatdozent an der Universität Zürich; Druck und Verlag von B. G. Teubner; Leipzig Berlin 1914. [30] Ann Proulx Lang: Poggio Bracciolini's De Avaritia; A Study in Fifteenth Century Florentine Attitudes Toward Avarice and Usury Thesis, Sir Georg Williams University, Montreal, 1973. [31] Material for a History of Pope Alexander VI - His relatives and His Time; by Right Reverend Msgr. Peter De Roo; Bruges, Desclee. De Brouwer and Co. 1924. [32] Tertullian page: http://www.tertullian.org/feedback.php?page=t_rpearse_tacitus_index.htm Damir Globochnik MIROSLAV VILHAR NA ZHABJEKU Premozhen grashchak, eden prvih piscev in prevajalcev burk za chitalnishke odre, pesnik, skladatelj in politik Miroslav Vilhar (1818—1871) je na zachetku leta 1863 zachel izdajati politichni chasnik Naprej. Urednik in glavni pisec je bil Fran Levstik (1831—1887). Naprej je zagovarjal slovenske narodne pravice, enakopravnost slovenskega jezika v uradih, cerkvi in sholi, Zedinjeno Slovenijo, nastopal je proti nemshki stranki in nemshkutarjem. Konec septembra 1863 je Naprej prenehal izhajati. Zaradi dveh chlankov, ki sta bila objavljena v Napreju, sta si izdajatelj in urednik nakopala tiskovni pravdi. V chlanku »Kaj se nekaterim zdi ravnopravnost?« (sht. 42, maj 1863), v katerem je Levstik pisal o proshnji zhupanov ljubljanske okolice za slovensko dopisovanje, se je namrech prepoznal predstojnik ljubljanske gosposke Johann Pajk. Levstika in Vilharja je tozhil zaradi razzhaljenja chasti. Levstik je bil obsojen na tri mesece zapora, Vilhar pa na shtiri tedne in plachilo kavcije v vishini 60 goldinarjev. Kasneje je oba oprostilo sodishche na Dunaju v soglasju z dezhelnim nadsodishchem v Gradcu oprostilo.1 Chlanek »Misli o sedanjih mednarodnih mejah« (sht. 15—17, februar 1863), ki ga je spisal M. P., je bil objavljen kot dopis s Koroshke (najbrzh je pri chlanku sodeloval tudi urednik Levstik). Vilhar in vodja Egrove tiskarne Anton Klein sta bila obtozhena hudodelstva kaljenja javnega miru. Vilhar, ki ni izdal identitete pisca spisa o narodnih mejah, je bil januarja 1864 obsojen na shest tednov zapora, poostrenega enkrat tedensko s postom, postom, in s plachilom 300 goldinarjev kavcije, ki so jo namenili ljubljanskim ubozhcem. Vodja Egrove tiskarne Anton Klein je bil oproshchen.2 Sodishchi na Dunaju in v Gradcu sta potrdili razsodbo. Vilhar je kazen moral odsedeti. Izgubil je tudi dezhelnozborski mandat. Ker je list Tagespost zapisal, da je Vilhar prosil cesarja za izredni pregled njegove proshnje, je Vilhar v prav tam v 125. sht. objavil preklic: »Jez nisem vlozhil nikakorshne proshnje za izredno revizijo pravde moje in tudi za pomilostenje ne. Odlocheno mi kazen od 6 tednov nastopim z mirno vestjo 4. dne t. m.. — Zhivila draga mi domovina!«3 Vilhar naj bi vseeno prosil za odlozhitev kazni, a proshnji ni bilo ugodeno. V zapor na Zhabjaku je odshel 4. junija in ga zapustil 23. julija 1864.4 Damir Globochnik MIROSLAV VILHAR IN ZHABJEK Miroslav Vilhar (1818—1871) was a wealthy lord. He was one of the first to write and translate farces for reading club stages, and was also a poet, composer and politician. In 1863, he began publishing the political journal Naprej. The journal's editor-in-chief and head writer was Fran Levstik (1831—1887). Naprej advocated Slovene national rights and equal status for the Slovene language in administration, churches and schools; it also backed the Zedinjena Slovenija or »United Slovenia« programme and opposed the pro-German party and »Germanisers«. Naprej ceased publication at the end of September 1863. Two articles published in Naprej led to legal problems for the publisher and editor-in-chief. In the article »Kaj se nekaterim zdi ravnopravnost?« (»What do some people consider equal rights?«, no. 42, May 1863), in which Levstik wrote about a request from the mayors of Ljubljana and the surrounding towns for Slovene-language correspondence, Johann Pajk, an official of the municipality of Ljubljana, could be easily identified. He sued Levstik and Vilhar for slander. Levstik was sentenced to three months in prison; Vilhar received four weeks and was forced to pay a fine in the amount of 60 florins. The two were later acquitted by the court in Vienna and the provincial court in Graz.1 The article entitled »Misli o sedanjih mednarodnih mejah« (»Some Thoughts on the Current International Borders«, no. 15—17, February 1863), written by one M.P., was published as a correspondence from Koroshka (Carinthia) (Levstik, as editor-in-chief, probably also had a hand in the article). Vilhar and Anton Klein, the head of Eger's print shop, were charged with a criminal act for disturbing the peace. Vilhar did not divulge the identity of the writer of the piece on national borders; in January 1864, he was sentenced to a six-week prison sentence with a weekly fast and was fined 300 florins, which were given to the poor of Ljubljana. Anton Klein, the head of Eger's print shop, was acquitted.2 The courts in Vienna and Graz upheld the conviction. Vilhar had to serve his sentence. He also lost his seat in the provincial assembly. The newspaper Tagespost reported that Vilhar had asked the Emperor for an exceptional review of his appeal. Vilhar issued a correction in issue 125 of Tagespost: »I did not file any kind of request for an exceptional review of my case or for a pardon. It is with a clear conscience that I will commence serving the 6 week sentence handed down unto me on the 4th day of this month... — Long live my dear homeland!«3 Vilhar was said to have nonetheless requested a deferral of the sentence, but his request was not granted. He departed for the prison in Zhabjek on 4 June and was released on 23 July 1864.4 Vilhar se je dal med prestajanjem kazni fotografirati. V zaporu je bil tedaj tudi Ferdinand Bognar, ki si je uredil pravcato fotografsko delavnico.5 Fotograf je v zapor prishel, ker je ponarejal bankovce. Vilharja je fotografiral brez uradnega dovoljenja, ker je po prestani kazni nameraval fotografije prodajati.6 Morda je bil Bognar popotni fotograf, ki je smel v zapor odnesti vso svojo imovino, tudi fotografsko opremo. Fotografija prikazuje Vilharja za zheleznimi reshetkami. Zhena zaprtega oficirja Marija Bachmannova, ki je hodila na Zhabjak obiskovat mozha, je fotografije prinashala iz zapora. Fotografije »narodnega muchenika« je prodajal chitalnishki gostilnichar France Kadilnik. Izkupichek je shel v narodne namene.7 Naprodaj so bile istochasno z Vilharjevo izpustitvijo iz zapora. Policija je fotografije zaplenila, ker na zadnji strani fotografij ni bilo navedeno imena fotografa.8 Na tiskovni pravdi decembra 1864 so bili Vilhar, Bachmannova in Kadilnik obsojeni na manjshe denarne kazni, ki jih je Vilhar takoj plachal.9 Miroslav Vilhar je leta 1865 v Zagrebu v spomin na bivanje v ljubljanskem preiskovalnem zaporu Zhabjek izdal knjizhico humoristichnih in zbadljivih verzov Zhabjanke (Zhabe, Raki, Ribice). While serving his sentence, Vilhar had himself photographed. Ferdinand Bognar was also being held in the prison at the time and had actually set up a photography studio there.5 He was sentenced and imprisoned for forging banknotes. He photographed Vilhar without receiving official permission, because he intended to sell the photographs once he was done serving his sentence.6 Perhaps Bognar was a travelling photographer and as such was allowed to bring all of his possessions with him to prison, including his photography supplies. The photograph shows Vilhar behind iron bars. Officer Marij Bachmann was also being held at Zhabjek; his wife would visit him, and it was she who brought the photographs from the prison. France Kadilnik, the proprietor of the reading club's tavern, sold photographs of the »national martyr«. The proceeds went towards the national cause.7 The photographs went on sale when Vilhar was released from prison. The police confiscated the photographs because the photographer's name was not listed on the back.8 At the trial in December 1864, Vilhar, Bachmann and Kadilnik were given small fines, which Vilhar immediately paid.9 Miroslav Vihar wrote a short book of humorous, satirical verses as a memento of his incarceration at the remand prison in Zhabjek; the book, entitled Zhabjanke (Zhabe, Raki, Ribice) (»Verses from Zhabjek (Frogs, Crabs, Fishes))* was published in Zagreb in 1865. *The title is a play on words, as the place name »Zhabjek« contains the root of the word »zhaba« or »frog«. Viri /Sources 1 »Iz Ljubljane«, Novice, 1864, sht./no. 23. 2 »Iz Ljubljane«, Novice, 1864, sht./no. 4. 3 »Iz Ljubljane«, Novice, 1864, sht./no. 23. 4 »Gospod Miroslav Vilhar«, Novice, 1864, sht./no. 30. 5 Anton Slodnjak, opombe k: Fran Levstik, Zbrano delo / Politichni spisi I, Dodatek, Osma knjiga, Ljubljana 1959, str./p. 343. 6 Motimir, »O Miroslavu Vilharju«, Slovanski svet, 1893, sht./no. 8, str./p. 151. 7 Anton Slodnjak, opombe k: Fran Levstik, Zbrano delo / Politichni spisi I, Dodatek, Osma knjiga, Ljubljana 1959, str./p. 344. 8 Biographisches Lexikon von dr. Constant Wurzbach, Dunaj / Vienna 1884, 50, str./p. 295—297 (Motimir, »O Miroslavu Vilharju«, Slovanski svet, 1893, sht./no. 8, str./p. 151). 9 Anton Slodnjak, opombe k: Fran Levstik, Zbrano delo / Politichni spisi I, Dodatek, Osma knjiga, Ljubljana 1959, str./p. 344. Damir Globochnik POTRES V LJUBLJANI Na velikonochno nedeljo 14. aprila 1895 je Ljubljano prizadel potres 8. oziroma 9. stopnje po Mercallijevi lestvici. Poshkodovana je bila desetina vseh stavb v mestu. Ljubljanski obchinski svet je 8. julija sprejel predlog obchinskega svetovalca Ivana Hribarja o fotografiranju vseh za rushenje dolochenih stavb. Stavbe sta avgusta in septembra fotografirala ljubljanska fotografa Wilhelm (Viljem) Helfer in Julij Müller.1 Wilhelm Helfer, ki je na zachetku leta 1895 prishel iz Voloskega (pri Opatiji),2 je posnel fotografije na ploshche srednjih in velikih formatov. Za svoje delo je prejel 601 goldinar. Magistratu je leta 1896, tedaj je odshel v Gradec, ponudil v odkup sto steklenih ploshch.3 Tudi Julij Müller je uporabljal ploshche velikih formatov. Pripravil je album fotografij, ki ga je magistrat poslal drzhavnemu zboru in ministrstvu na Dunaj.4 Knjigarnar Maks Fischer je na zachetku maja izdal knjizhico Ivana Robide Grozni dnevi potresa v Ljubljani s petimi ilustracijami, ki so nastale po fotografijah Wilhelma Helferja. Perorisbe, »ki v bolj jasni podobi nego fotografije kazhejo popolnoma po naravi posnete najzanimivjshe momente izpotresne katastrofe«, je izdelal Anton Gvajc. Slovenski narod je predlagal, naj Gvajcheve skice poshljejo dunajskemu chasopisnemu sindikatu. Tuji chasopisi bi na ta nachin dobili primerne ilustracije, hkrati pa bi podprli tudi delo domachega umetnika.5 Pomozhni odbor za Ljubljano in okolico je dal po fotografijah izdelati podobe poshkodovanih poslopij; te podobe je razposlal skupaj s proshnjami za podporo.6 Marsikdo se je hotel okoristiti z nesrecho Ljubljanchanov. Fotografi niso bili izjema. Mnogi so fotografirali posledice potresa z namenom, da bodo fotografije kasneje prodajali. Fotograf Anton Jerkich iz Gorice je sedem fotografij velikega formata s prizori posledic potresa prodajal za goldinar in pol. Cena vseh sedmih fotografij je bila devet goldinarjev. Tretjino dobichka je namenil popotresni Ljubljani. Imena kupcev je nameraval javno objavljati v chasopisju.7 Damir Globochnik THE EARTHQUAKE IN LJUBLJANA On Easter Sunday, 14 April 1895, Ljubljana was hit by an earthquake measuring 8 or 9 on the Mercalli scale. One tenth of all the buildings in the city were damaged. On 8 July of that year, the Ljubljana municipal council approved the proposal of counsellor Ivan Hribar that all of the buildings that had been slated for demolition be photographed. In August and September, the buildings were photographed by Wilhelm (Viljem) Helfer and Julij Müller, both photographers from Ljubljana.1 Wilhelm Helfer had arrived from Volosca (in what is now Croatia) at the beginning of 1895;2 he used medium- and large-format plates to take the photographs. He received 601 florins for his work. In 1896, when he left Ljubljana for Graz, he offered to sell 100 glass plates to the town hall.3 Julij Müller also used large-format plates. He prepared an album of photographs which the town hall then sent to the National Assembly and Ministry in Vienna.4 At the beginning of May, the bookseller Maks Fischer published a small book by Ivan Robida entitled Gro%ni dnevi potresa v Ljubljani (The Terrible Days of the Earthquake in Ljubljana); it contained five illustrations based on the photographs of Wilhelm Helfer. The pencil drawings, which »show more clearly than photographs a wholly naturalistic depiction of the most interesting moments of the seismic catastrophe,« were done by Anton Gvajc. The journal Slovenski narod suggested that Gvajc's drawings be sent to the Viennese Press Syndicate. The foreign press would thus obtain suitable illustrations and support the work of a local artist.5 The aid committee for Ljubljana and its environs had pictures of the damaged buildings made on the basis of the photographs; it then sent out the images together with requests for help.6 Some also sought personal gain in the catastrophe that had befallen the residents of Ljubljana. Photographers were no exception. Many photographed the aftermath of the earthquake with the intent of later selling the photographs. Anton Jerkich, a photographer from Gorica, sold seven large-format photographs of the aftermath of the earthquake for one and a half florins apiece. The total price for all seven photographs was nine florins. He donated a third of the money made from the sale to relief efforts in Ljubljana. He intended to publish the buyers' names in newspapers.7 Vilhelm Helfer je pomozhnemu odboru odstopil svoje fotografije v brezplachno uporabo na pismih in plakatih. Josip Paulin je objavil Helferjeve fotografije na slovensko-nemshkem tiskanem porochilu o potresu in v posebnem albumu oziroma v knjizhici Velikonedeljski potres v Ljubljani dne 14. aprila 1895. l. in cesarjev obisk (56 strani, 13 fotografij). Helfer je Paulinu zagrozil, da bo moral za svoje neposhteno pochetje odgovarjati pred oblastmi, ta pa ga je ovadil odboru in navedel, da zheli Helfer odbor ovirati pri razmnozhevanju fotografij.8 »Cesarska panorama« iz Berlina9 je poslala v Ljubljano fotografa. Maja je zachela prikazovati 34 stereo fotografij posledic ljubljanskega potresa.10 List za zabavo, znanost in umetnost Prosvjeta, ki je izhajal v Zagrebu, je objavil 11 po fotografijah izdelanih podob posledic potresa.11 Tudi fotograf Josip Armich je fotografiral posledice potresa. V chasnikih lahko preberemo, da je svoj atelje brezplachno odstopil za prenochevanje okrog dvajsetih delozhirancev.12 Revija Dom in svet je objavila vrsto fotografij razlichnih avtorjev: urednika Franchishka Lampeta, ki je o vzrokih potresa tudi pisal, Aloisa Beera, Hinka Dolenca in Antona Jerkicha. Fotografi so skrbno dokumentirali najbolj poshkodovane hishe, ki so jih podprli s tramovi, cerkve in druge zgradbe, zasilna bivalishcha v shotorih, v lesenih barakah in v kadeh za zelje, razdeljevanje hrane v zasilnih kuhinjah, mashe na prostem, rushenje stavb. Dokumentarne fotografije bi lahko povezali v fotoreportazho. Najbolj poshkodovana ljubljanska ulica je bila v Shpitalska, danashnja Stritarjeva ulica, v kateri so podrli vse hishe razen ene. Wilhelm Helfer je na fotografiji Shpitalske ulice (26,8 x 39 cm) zajel tudi nekaj nakljuchnih mimoidochih, ki so se radovedno obrnili proti fotografu. Vsi med fotografiranjem niso mirovali, zato so njihovi obrisi zabrisani. Moshki v chrni obleki je celo zamenjal svoje stojishche, zato se zaradi dolgega chasa osvetlitve na fotografiji pojavlja dvakrat. Viri /Sources 1 »Fotografiranje za porushenje odlochenih hish«, Slovenski narod, 1895, sht./no. 299. 2 Wilhelm Helfer, rojen 1864 v Olmützu, je bil dunajski fotograf. Delal je tudi Karlsbadu, Pragi in Opatiji. Leta 1897 je odprl fotoatelje v Gradcu, v dvajsetih letih 20. stoletja je imel atelje tudi na Dunaju. 3 Mirko Kambich, »Potres v Ljubljani«, 150 let fotografije na Slovenskem 1839—1919, I. del, 1989, str./p. 23. 4 Mirko Kambich, prav tam, str./p. 24. 5 »Slike in skice o potresu«, Slovenski narod, 1895, sht./no. 100. 6 »Katastrofa«, Slovenski narod, 1895, sht./no. 112. Wilhelm Helfer gave the photographs he took to the aid committee to use freely in correspondence and posters. Josip Paulin published Helfer's photographs in a bilingual (Slovene and German) printed report on the earthquake and in a special album or book entitled Velikonedejski potres v Ljubljani dne 14. aprila 1895. L in cesarjev obisk (The Easter Earthquake in Ljubljana, 14 April 1895, and a Visit from the Emperor) (56 pages, 13 photographs). Helfer threateningly told Paulin that he would have to answer to the authorities for his dishonest act; Paulin then reported Helfer to the committee on the grounds that he was trying to prevent the committee from reproducing his photographs.8 Kaiser-Panorama of Berlin9 sent a photographer to Ljubljana. In May, it began displaying 34 stereogram photographs of the aftermath of the Ljubljana earthquake.10 Prosvjeta, a journal covering entertainment, science and art published in Zagreb, published 11 images of the aftermath of the earthquake based on the photographs.11 Josip Armich also photographed the aftermath of the earthquake. Newspapers reported that he provided free accommodation in his studio to around 20 people who had been put out of their homes by the quake.12 The journal Dom in svet published a series of photographs from different authors: Franchishek Lampe, editor-in-chief of the journal who also wrote about the aftermath, Alois Beer, Hinko Dolenc and Anton Jerkich. The photographers carefully documented heavily damaged houses propped up with beams, churches and other buildings, makeshift accommodation in tents, wooden shanties and sauerkraut tubs, food being served in makeshift soup kitchens, open-air masses and the demolition of buildings. The documentary photographs they took could be used to prepare a photo report. Shpitalska ulica, now Stritarjeva ulica, bore the brunt of the damage: all the houses on the street save one were demolished. In a photograph of Shpitalska ulica (26.8 x 39 cm), Wilhelm Helfer also captured several curious passersby who turned to face the photographer. Not all of them were still while the photograph was being taken, which is why they appear blurry in the photo. The man in the black suit even changed positions; due to the long exposure time, he appears twice in the photograph. 7 »Fotograf Anton Jerkich v Gorici«, Slovenski narod, 1895, sht./no. 112, Slovenec, 1895, sht./no. 112. 8 Viljem Josip Helfer, »Izjava«, Slovenec, 1895, sht./no. 106. 9 »Kaiser-Panorama« iz Berlina: prva med panoramami za prikazovanje stereoposnetkov. Vech ljudi je sedelo okrog velikega valja in skozi kukala opazovalo fotografije, ki so se na bobnu pomikale od enega k drugemu kukalu. 10 »Panorama Ljubljane po potresu«, Slovenski narod, 1895, sht./no. 118. 11 »Prosvjeta«, Slovenski narod, 1895, sht./no. 118. 12 »Hvalevredna pozhrtvovalnost«, Slovenski narod, 1895, sht./no. 109. Wilhem Helfer, Shpitalska ulica Gosposka ulica (objavljeno v: Dom in svet, 1895, sht. /no. 14) Milosh Crnjanski KOMENTAR K PESMI O PRINCIPU (K pesmi »V spomin Principu«) (...) Vest, da je v Sarajevu ubit avstrijski prestolonaslednik, je prishla do nas, tega sonchnega dne na Dunaju — ki se je zbudil brez enega samega oblachka — po kosilu. Prispela je v nasho kavarno (Caffe »Meinl«), v blizhini stolpa Sv. Shtefana, v chasu partije biljarda. Zanimivo je, da nam je bila vest sporochena, sprva, tako, kakor da so v Sarajevu ubili srbskega prestolonaslednika. Natakarji so jo takshno dobili. Tako jim je rekel nash prota, po telefonu. Nasprotno mnenju, ki velja danes, ta vest ni izzvala nikakrshne konsternacije, ne med nami ne med Dunajchani, in glasba je na Dunaju igrala do vechera. Shele pozno se je nekdo spomnil, da jo je ustavil. Doba valchkov se je konchala. Konsternacijo sta, med Dunajchani, izzvali shele krsti prestolonaslednika in njegove zhene, grofice Kotek (ki jo je Princip ubil nehote, streljaje na guvernerja Bosne, generala Potioreka). Vsa postaja je bila zavita v chrnino. Lokomotiva pa je prispela z rdechimi ochmi. Krsta Nadvojvode je bila mnogo vechja in z mnogo vech venci kot krsta njegove zhene, ki je bila samo navadna grofica. V Avstriji ni bilo enakosti ne na dvorih ne med mrtvimi, vse pa je bilo, tudi krste, umerjeno po shpanskem ceremonialu Habsburga. V ushesih, vchasih, v snu, she zdaj slishim shum korakov avstrijskih generalov, na tem pogrebu. Stopali so s korakom lutk, zibajoch se po ritmu Chopinovega pogrebnega marsha, s svojimi dvorogimi klobuki na glavah, klobuki pa so bili okrasheni z zelenim perjem iz petelinjih repov. Slishal se je topot konj. Taka tishina je bila nastala. Krsta Franca Ferdinanda je bila pokrita z zastavo Habsburga, rumeno, z dvoglavim chrnim orlom, starim okoli tisoch let. Sin nekega revezha, proletarca, poljedelca, Hercegovca, she nepolnoleten, ga je bil snel z neba, z revolverskimi streli. Atentator je imel chudno ime. Sestavljeno iz imena princa in nadangela. Milosh Crnjanski COMMENTARY ON THE POEM ABOUT PRINCIP (To the poem »In Memoriam of Gavrilo Princip«) (...) The news that in Sarajevo was killed the Austrian heir to the throne has come to us on that sunny day in Vienna — the day had woke up without a single cloud — after lunch. It arrived in our cafeteria (Caffe »Meinl«), near the tower of St. Stephen, during the game of billiards. It is interesting that the message was communicated to us, at first, as if in Sarajevo had been killed the Serbian heir to the throne. The waiters got such news. In such sense said it to them our prota (Orthodox priest) by phone. In contrast to the opinion valid today, this message has not provoked any consternation neither among us nor among the Viennese, and the music was played in Vienna until the evening. Until late someone remembered to stop it. Waltz era has ended. Consternation among Viennese was provoked only by the coffins of heir to the throne and his wife, the Countess Kotek (Princip has killed her unintentionally, shooting into the governor of Bosnia — General Potiorek). All station was shrouded in blackness. The locomotive has arrived with red eyes. The coffin of Archduke was much larger and with much more wreaths than the coffin of his wife, who was just a regular Countess. In Austria, there was no equality in the courts and not among the dead persons, and there was all, even coffins, calibrated according to the Spanish Habsburg ceremony. In my ears, sometimes in a dream, even now I hear the noise of steps of Austrian generals in that funeral. They walked with the steps of dolls, rocking to the rhythm of Chopin's funeral march, with double-horned hats on their heads, the hats were trimmed with green feathers of cocks' tails. It was heard the tramp of horses. Such silence has been created. Franz Ferdinand's coffin was covered with the flag of Habsburg, yellow one, with a black two-headed eagle, about a thousand years old. Son of a poor man, proletarian, farmer, from Herzegovina, yet not full age, took off him down of the sky, with the revolver shots. Assassin had a weird name. Compound of the name of a Prince and Archangel. Evropa she danes slavi dva ubijalca atenskega tirana Pizistrata, Harmodija in Aristogejtona, v svojih sholskih udzhbenikih (ad usum delphini). Slavi tudi senatorje Rima, ki so ubili Julija Cezarja. Toda za atentatorje iz Sarajeva ni imela lepe besede, nikoli. Pa tudi Kraljevina Srbov, Hrvatov in Slovencev ni bila ocharana s temi svojimi podaniki. Dolgo ni hotela dovoliti niti prenosa kosti teh atentatorjev. Poleg tega so, celo pri nas, nekateri iz Principa naredili Srba — provincialca, fanatika, shovinista, ki je bil, menda, zgolj igrachka v rokah shefa Obveshchevalnega oddelka srbskega generalshtaba, polkovnika Dragutina Dimitrijevicha Apisa. Toda, atentator nam je govoril, razlochno, tudi z druge strani groba. Kot je znano, je bil atentator zaprt v temnici v Theresienstatdu in tam mu je bila, menda zaradi kostne tuberkuloze, amputirana desna roka. Vmes, med temi groznimi trenutki, so ga zaslishevali o motivih njegovega atentata. O tem obstaja dnevnik nekega zdravnika. Princip je, seveda, priznaval, da je zhelel zdruzhitev Bosne in Srbije, odkrito pa je priznaval tudi to, da je to bil le korak do naslednjega cilja atentatorja in njegovih tovarishev. Ta cilj je bila revolucija. »Mi vsi smo bili bakuninovci,« so bile besede Principa. Niti po vojni Princip, pri nas, ni bil priljubljena tema. Njegovo dejanje so odobravali le nashi revezhi in mladina. Burzhoazija ni odobravala dejanja Principa. Ob koncu vojne so pri nas vsi govorili le o potrebi, da se postavi prekrasen Kosovski hram po nachrtu Meshtrovicha. Nash veliki pesnik Duchich je, tedaj, v Srbiji videl imperatorja. Vzklikal ji je: »Ave Serbia!« (Morituri te salutant). Jaz sem napisal to pesem v slavo uboja in Principa. (1959) Iz srbshchine prevedel Ivo Antich Europe today celebrates in its school textbooks (ad usum Delphini) two killer of Athenian tyrant Peisistratid: Harmodios and Aristogeiton. It glorifies the Roman senators who killed Julius Caesar. But for the assassins from Sarajevo it hadn' nice word, never. As well as the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was not impressed with these citizens of its own. It also long refused to allow a transfer of the bones of these assassins. In addition, even here among us, some of the Serbs modified Princip into provincial, fanatic, chauvinist, who was, apparently, mere a toy in the hands of the chief of Intelligence Department of the Serbian General Staff — Colonel Dragutin Dimitrijevich Apis. But the assassin has spoken to us, clearly, also from the other side of the grave. As it is known, the assassin was closed in the prison in Theresienstatd, and there, supposedly due to bone tuberculosis, was amputated his right arm. In the meantime, during these terrible moments, he was interrogated about the motives of his assassination. About this exists a diary of a physician. Princip has, of course, admitted that he wanted unification of Bosnia and Serbia, but openly recognized also that this was only a step to the next target of the assassin and his companions. This goal was revolution. »We all were Bakuninians,« were the words of Princip. Even after the war, Princip, between us, hasn't been a popular theme. His action has been only approved by our the poor and youth. The bourgeoisie did not approve the action of Princip. At the end of the war, among us all have been talking only about the need to raise the magnificent temple of Kosovo according to plan by Mestrovich. Our great poet Duchich, at that time, in Serbia saw the emperor. She cried out: »Ave Serbia!« (Morituri te salutant). I've written this poem to the glory of killing and Princip. (1959) Translated from Serbian by Ivo Antich Branko J. Hribovshek »TACIT IN NJEGOVI ROKOPISI« ? (Pripombe k pripombam) To ni avtoriziran izvlechek iz zadevne spletne strani. Prichujochi zapis ne vsebuje nichesar, kar bi lahko avtor izvirne spletne strani razlagal kot »konstruktivne povratne informacije«, vendar pa so pripombe zelo razdiralne po svojih namerah in s svojim mnenjem. Komentator ne namerava imeti nikakrshne polemike s komerkoli. (op. B.J.H.) Je Tacit ponaredek? Sodobne izdaje Tacita, ki sem jih videl, ne omenjajo trditev o ponarejanju, ki so se pojavljale v prejshnjih chasih. Spodaj podani pregled je povzet po Mendellu, ki daje iste podatke v vechjem obsegu. Che ima kdo vech podatkov ali novejshe bibliografske reference na to temo, da bi se z njimi ta zgodba lahko she bolj uredila, bom hvalezhen, che jih bom prejel. Po Mendellu je bilo od leta 1775 vsaj shest poskusov diskreditacije Tacitovih del kot ponarejenih ali pa izmishljenih: • Dvom izvira od Voltaira, njegove trditve je izoblikoval odvetnik Linguet. Vendar pa je zadevo resno vzel shele Napoleon. Francoski revolucionarji so nashli »velikansko spodbudo v Tacitovem republikanizmu. Sodobni naslednik Cezarja«, namrech Napoleon, je zato imel mochan politichni motiv za diskreditacijo Tacita. Toda ta prizadevanja prenehajo s propadom prvega francoskega cesarstva. • John Wilson Ross je (anonimno!) objavil knjigo z naslovom Tacit in Bracciolini: letopisi ponarejeni v XV. stoletju (London, 1878) z namenom dokazati, da je Poggio ponaredil Tacitova dela. (Bilo bi zanimivo vedeti, kako je bil Ross lahko preprichan, da bi Poggio mogel ponarediti rokopise iz 9. stoletja.) Rossovo delo je zdaj uvrshcheno v Projekt Gutenberg in je dostopno na spletu. Pripomba glede anonimnosti: Ross je knjigo posvetil svojemu bratu, ki je s polnim imenom naveden na naslovni strani knjige! Pripomba glede Poggiove mozhnosti ponaredka: Kot pishe Ross, je to mozhno s pergamentom in ustreznim chrnilom, kot so tudi nasploh nemshki ponarejevalci v XI. stoletju in pozneje vech kot dvajset tisoch kronik prikazovali kot kronike iz IX. stoletja in prej. Branko J. Hribovshek »TACITUS AND HIS MANUSCRIPTS« ? (Comments to Comments) This is not an authorised excerpt of the given web page. This excerpt contains nothing what could be interpreted as »constructive feedback« by the author of the original web page, but is in comments very destructive for his intentions and opinion. The commentator does not intend to have any polemic with whomsoever. (op. B.J.H.) Is Tacitus a forgery? The modern editions of Tacitus that I have seen do not refer to the allegations of forgery that have been made at various times. The following account is summarized from Mendell, who gives the same data at more length. If anyone has more data or more recent bibliographic references on this, so that this story can be put to bed, I would be grateful to receive it. According to Mendell, since 1775 there have been at least 6 attempts to discredit the works of Tacitus as either forgeries or fiction: • The allegation originated with Voltaire, and his claims were elaborated by a lawyer named Linguet. However the position was only taken seriously with Napoleon. The French Revolutionaries had found »tremendous comfort in Tacitus' republicanism. The modern successor to the Caesars« had therefore a strong political motive to discredit him. But these efforts ceased with the collapse of the First Empire. • John Wilson ROSS published (anonymously!) a book entitled Tacitus and Bracciolini:: the Annals forged in the XVth century, London (1878) intended to prove that Poggio had forged the works of Tacitus. (It would be interesting to know how Ross believed Poggio could forge 9th century MSS.) This work has now been added to Project Gutenberg and is online. Comment: anonymously — Ross dedicated the book to his brother, which is cited with the full name on the title page of the book! how Ross believed Poggio could forge 9th century MSS - read Ross's work, with the parchment and corresponding ink, as also the German forgers forging more than twenty thousand chronicles in 11th century and later to be held as the chronicles from 9th century and earlier. • Leta 1890 je P. Hochart v delu De l' Authenticite des Annales et des Histoires de Tacite ohranil isto mnenje »z veliko vechjo uchenostjo in podprto she z dodatnim zvezkom«. Ochitno pa niti Ross niti Hochart v svojem chasu nista mogla preprichati mnenja znanstvenikov. • Leta 1920 je Leo Wiener v delu Tacitova Germanija in drugi ponaredki »zaman skushal dokazati z zmedenim prikazom lingvistichnih ognjemetov, da so Germanija in s tem implicitno tudi druga Tacitova dela ponaredki, izdelani potem, ko se je arabski vpliv razshiril v Evropo«. Pripomba: »zaman skushal dokazati« — s katerim svojim mnenjem zaman, kaj je narobe z dokazi? Kje so nasprotni argumenti? Tudi »zmedenih prikazov lingvistichnih ognjemetov« ni mogoche pogasiti z ironijo, che to ni utemeljeno z nasprotnimi argumenti. • »Po izidu briljantne knjige Gastona Boissiera (Tacite, 1903) se je zbudilo novo zanimanje za tega zgodovinarja; Eugene Bacha (Le Genie de Tacite, 1906) je poskushal dokazati, da je bil Tacit mojster romantichne izmishljije ... Bachova knjiga ima dolocheno vrednost po svojih pripombah o slogovnih zadevah.« • T. S. Jerome v delu Vidiki preuchevanje zgodovine (1923) predstavlja Tacita kot »doslednega lazhnivca po naravi in premishljeni izbiri. Knjiga nima nobene vrednosti zaradi svoje vsestranske nenatanchnosti, zmede glede vidikov stvarne in zgodovinske naracije ter zaradi svoje v celoti nepreprichljive metode«. Pripomba: Tacit kot »dosledni lazhnivec« — zakaj ne citirati Tertulijana o tej temi, kot je tukaj navedeno na Tertulijanovi strani? Kot meni Mendell, nobeden od teh piscev ni dosegel sploshne sprejetosti svojih pogledov o Tacitu; ekstremna stalishcha so bila zanemarjena in vsestranska neoporechnost Tacita potrjena. Vseeno pa tako kot pri vsej zgodovini osebni element v izbiri in razlagi pomeni, da znanstveniki niso obvezno sprejeli Tacitovega pogleda kot dokonchno in pravichno razlago prvega stoletja rimske zgodovine. Zdi se, da argumenti o ponaredku niso zadostovali, da bi bili sprejeti. Pripomba: nezadostni argumenti o ponaredku (?) — ugotovitev je brez navedbe nasprotnih argumentov. Mendell daje tudi obsezhen seznam ljudi, ki od I. stoletja n. sht. dalje omenjajo Tacita ali katero od njegovih del. Iz tega lahko vidimo, da je Tacit omenjan ali citiran v vsakem stoletju vse do vkljuchno shestega. Sedmo in osmo stoletje sta edini, ki nista zapustili nobene sledi o poznavanju tega avtorja. Njegov Dialogus sploh ni kakorkoli omenjen. Brez citiranja vsake reference je tukaj nekaj primerov, ki so se mi zdeli zanimivi. • In 1890 P. HOCHART, De l'Authenticite des Annales et des Histoires de Tacite, maintained the same idea »with a much greater show of learning, and followed up with a supplementary volume«. Apparently neither Ross or Hochart was able to convince scholarly opinion at the time. • In 1920 Leo WIENER, Tacitus' Germania and other forgeries, »attempted in vain to prove by a bewildering display of linguistic fireworks that the Germania and, by implication, other works of Tacitus were forgeries made after Arabic influence had extended into Europe«. Comment: attempted in vain to prove - by which opinion in vain, what is wrong with the proofs? Where are the counterarguments? bewildering display of linguistic fireworks - which can not be extinguished by an ironic pee, if you do not have founded counterarguments! • »After Gaston Boissier's brilliant book (Tacite, 1903) had roused new enthusiasm for the historian, Eugene Bacha (Le Genie de Tacite, 1906) attempted to prove Tacitus was a master of Romantic fiction ... Bacha's book does have some value for his comments on stylistic matters.« • T.S.Jerome, Aspects of the Study of History, 1923, presented Tacitus as »a consistent liar by nature and deliberate choice. The book has no value because of its overall inaccuracy, the confusion of narratio in a legal speech with narratio in history, and its wholly unconvincing method«. Comment: Tacitus as »a consistent liar« - why do you not cite Tertullian on this subject, here on Tertullian's page? According to Mendell, none of these writers have won general acceptance of their estimates of Tacitus, the extreme positions have been abandoned, and the general integrity of Tacitus vindicated. However as with all history, the personal element of selection and interpretation means that scholars do not necessarily accept Tacitus' view as the final and just interpretation of first-century Roman history. It would seem that the arguments for forgery have failed to find acceptance. Comment: the arguments for forgery have failed to find acceptance - without giving any counterarguments Mendell also gives an extensive list of people who mention Tacitus or any of his works from the 1st century onwards. From this we can see that Tacitus is mentioned or quoted in every century down to and including the Sixth. The Seventh and Eighth centuries are the only ones that have left no trace of knowledge of our author. The Dialogus is not mentioned at all, however. Without quoting every reference, here are some which I found of interest. Okoli leta 400: • Ammianus Marcellinus objavi svojo zgodovino, ki jo zachenja tam, kjer Tacit koncha.01 Pripomba: Marcellinusa je »odkril« tudi G. F. Poggio Bracciolini. • Sulpicius Severus iz Akvitanije v Chronicorum Libri (II, 29) uporablja Tacitova Letopisa 15.37 in 15.44 kot svoja vira o poroki Nerona s Pitagorasom in o kaznovanju kristjanov. (Naj dodam, da ne vem tochno, kaj se vezhe na kaj.) Angleshchina v ANF; avtor latinskega teksta je Sulpicius Severus: Sulpicii Severi Libri qui supersunt; ed. C. Halm. CSEL 1, Dunaj (1866). Glej tudi E. Laupot: Tacitov Fragment 2: Antirimjansko gibanje kristjanov in na%arejcev; Vigiliae Christianae 54 (2000), p. 233-47.o2 Pripomba: »Tacit«, avtor Letopisov, bi lahko uporabil Chronicorum Lbri, che bi to delo obstajalo, kot vir podatkov in tudi kot naslov Letopisi. Ross:»... kajti ta naslovjim ni bil dodeljen vse do shestnajstega stoletja.« • Jerome v svojem Komentarju k Zahariju (14.1, 2) navaja Tacita kot avtorja rimske zgodovine od smrti Avgusta do smrti Domicijana v 30 zvezkih: • »Haec omnia plenissime Josephus, qui Judaicam scripsit historiam, et multo majora quam legimus v prophetis, eos sustinuisse commemorat. Cornelius quoque Tacitus, qui post Augustum usque ad mortem Domitiani Vitas Caesarum triginta voluminibus exaravit.« (citat iz Patrologia Latina) Prevod iz lat.: »Vse te stvari Josephus, ki je napisal zgodovino Judov, navaja zelo popolno in jih podpira z mnogimi podatki v vechjem obsegu, kakor pa jih je mogoche brati iz /biblijskih/ prerokov. Enako Cornelius Tacitus, ki je opisal zhivljenja cesarjev v 30 zvezkih od Avgusta do smrti Domicijana.« Pripomba: Pristnost zapisov Josephusa Flaviusa, zlasti glede kristjanov, je na sploshno sporna; ta spor je kot verska zadeva zelo emocionalen (gl. na spletu).°3 Okoli leta 500: • Servius citira izgubljeni del besedila v svojem komentarju k Eneidi (3.399). • Orosius uporablja Tacita in citira iz zdaj izgubljenih delov besedila. Cassiodorus citira iz Germanije (45). Jordanes citira iz Agricola (10) in je zadnji antichni avtor, ki tako ravna.°4 Pripomba: Ali pa je morda »Tacit« uporabil te pisce za sestavljanje Germanije in Agricola, Piccolomini pa je odkril Jordanesovo delo Getica, »uporabljeno« kot prvotna Germanija. Around 400: • Ammianus Marcellinus publishes his history, starting where Tacitus left of£o1 Comment: ... A. Marcellinus was also »discovered« by G.F. Poggio Bracciolini • Sulpicius Severus of Aquitaine, Chronicorum Libri II, 29, uses Annals 15.37 and 15.44 as his source, for the marriage of Nero to Pythagoras and the punishment of the Christians. (I should add I don't know exactly what ties to what). English in ANF; Latin text is Sulpicius Severus. Sulpicii Severi libri qui supersunt. Ed. C. Halm. CSEL 1, Wien (1866). See also E.Laupot, Tacitus' Fragment 2: The Anti-Roman Movement of the Christiani and the Nazoreans, Vigiliae Christianae 54 (2000) 233-47°2 Comment: The »Tacitus« of Annals may have use Chronicorum Libri, if it existed, as a source as the name Annals, Ross:... when that title was not given to them until the sixteenth century? • Jerome in his Commentary on Zacchariah 14.1, 2 cites Tacitus as the author of a history from the death of Augustus to the death of Domitian, in 30 volumes: • »Haec omnia plenissime Josephus, qui Judaicam scripsit historiam, et multo majora quam legimus in prophetis, eos sustinuisse commemorat. Cornelius quoque Tacitus, qui post Augustum usque ad mortem Domitiani Vitas Caesarum triginta voluminibus exaravit.« (from the Patrologia Latina text here) »All these things [about the destruction of Jerusalem] Josephus records very fully, who wrote a Jewish History, and supports them with many things at greater length than we read in the prophets [i.e. in the bible]. Also Cornelius Tacitus, who wrote the lives of the Caesars in 30 volumes from Augustus down to the death of Domitian.« (Tr. RP) Comment: The authenticity of records of Josephus Flavius, especially on Christians, are in general disputed, the dispute is highly emotional as a religious matter, see the web.°3 Around 500: • Servius quotes a lost portion of the text in his commentary on the Aeneid 3.399. • Orosius used Tacitus, and quotes from now lost portions of the text. Cassiodorus quotes from the Germania 45. Jordanes quotes from the Agricola 10, and is the last author of antiquity to do so^4 Comment: Or »Tacitus« used them to compose Germania and Agricola, Piccolomini discovered Getica of Jordanes, »used« as the first Germania. Poggio Bracciolini in Tacitova dela Ker so berljivo dostopna v angleshki razlichici Poggiova pisma Niccoloju Niccoliju o tej zadevi, mislim, da bo morda zanimivo navesti nekaj odlomkov iz njih.oS Pripomba: Renesanchni pisatelji so imeli navado prepisovati svoja pisma in so prepise razposhiljali zainteresiranim bralcem, zato njihovih pisem sploh ne kazhe jemati kot zelo osebna sporochila ali dopise, temvech kot informacije, razshirjene v sploshno javnost; zlasti to velja za »invectiva« (invekcije, besedni napadi, sramotenje) v smislu predhodnika danashnjega rumenega tiska. Poggio je bil znan med svojimi sodobniki tudi zaradi svojega objavljenega dopisovanja. Zato je vprashljivo, kaj je resnica in kaj je mogoche jemati kot resnichno. Poudarki v citatih iz pisem so komentatorjevi. Izpisma X ... Kar zadeva samostan Corvey, ki je v Nemchiji, nimash razlogov za upanje. Tam naj bi bilo domnevno veliko knjig; ne verjamem v pripovedi bedakov, ampak tudi che bi bilo res, kar govorijo, je vendar vsa dezhela brlog tatov. Celo tisti domachini, ki ostanejo v Kuriji, ne gredo varno nazaj v svojo dezhelo. Torej zavrzi to idejo. (...) Devetindvajseti dan oktobra [1420]. (Poggio je bil preprichan, da gre v Anglijo v chasu, ko je bila papeshka kurija she posebej ogrozhena, vendar je bil zapeljan od svojega novega pokrovitelja, kardinala Beauforta, ki mu je pustil zelo malo denarja. Vsa Poggiova pisma iz tega obdobja so zelo potrta, nenehno je pritiskal, da bi shel domov. Naposled mu je uspelo dobiti dovolj denarja za pobeg in takoj se je pochutil veliko srechnejshega.) Izpisma XLII ... Imash skoraj vse novice, toda jaz hranim denar za konec. Moj prijatelj, ki je menih iz samostana v Nemchiji in ki nas je pozneje zapustil, mi je poslal pismo, ki sem ga prejel pred tremi dnevi. Pishe, da je nashel vech zvezkov take vrste, kot so vshech tebi in meni, zheli pa jih zamenjati za Novella Joannesa Andreaeja ali za Speculum z dodatki, ter v prilogi k pismu poshilja naslove knjig. Speculum z dodatki so zvezki velike vrednosti; zato poglej, ali se ti zdi, da bi bila zamenjava mozhna. Med temi zvezki so Julius Frontinus in vech del Kornelija Tacita, doslej nama she neznana. Videl bosh seznam in ugotovi, ali je mozhno te pravne knjige kupiti za spodobno ceno. Knjige bodo deponirane v Nürnbergu, kamor bi moral tudi Speculum z dodatki; prav zlahka je prenesti knjige od tam, kot bosh videl iz seznama. To je izbor; je pa tam she veliko drugih knjig. On namrech pishe takole: 'Ker ste me prosili, da za vas oznachim pesnike, ki naj bi jih vi izbrali iz seznama, sem nashel mnoge, in od teh boste nekatere nashli na prilozhenem popisu.' — Dragi Nicolaus, pishi mi, kakor hitro moresh, kaj mu odgovoriti, tako da bo vse opravljeno v skladu s tvojo presojo; skrbi me le nekaj stvari, ki jih bosh videl sam. Poggio Bracciolini and the works of Tacitus Since an English version of his letters to Niccolo Niccoli on this subject is readily available, I thought perhaps it might be of interest to reproduce portions of them.°5 Comment: The renaissance writers used to copy their correspondence and to distribute the copies to the interested readers, so their letters are not at all to be treated as the very personal information or communication, but as the information to be disseminated to the general public, especially »invectiva« as a predecessor of a nowadays yellow press. Poggio was famous among his contemporaries also due to his published correspondence. So it is questionable what was true and what should be believed to be true. The emphasis in letters are by commentator. From Letter X ... As for the monastery of Corvey, which is in Germany, you have no grounds for hope. There are supposed to be a lot of books there; I do not believe the tales of fools but even if what they say were true, the whole country is a den of thieves. Even those natives who stay in the Curia do not go back safely to their own country. So give up that idea. ... The twenty-ninth day of October [1420]. Poggio had been persuaded to come to England when the Papal curia was in particular danger, but had been deceived by his new patron, Cardinal Beaufort, who kept him very short of money. All his letters from this period are very depressed, and he was pining to go home. In the end he managed to get enough money to escape and promptly felt much happier. From Letter XLII ... You have almost all the news, but I am keeping the honey for the last. A friend of mine, who is a monk from a monastery in Germany and who left us lately, sent me a letter which I received three days ago. He writes that he has found several volumes of the kind you and I like which he wants to exchange for the Novella of Joannes Andreae or for both the Speculum and its supplements, and he sends the names of the books enclosed in the letter. The Speculum and the supplements are volumes of great value; so see if you think the exchange should be made. Among these volumes are Julius Frontinus and several works of Cornelius Tacitus still unknown to us. You will see the inventory and find out whether these law books can be bought for a decent price. The books will be deposited in Nuremberg where the Speculum and supplements ought also to be taken; it is easy to bring books from there as you will see in the inventory. This is a selection; there are many other books. For he writes in this vein. 'As you asked me to mark the poets for you to choose those you would like from the list I have found many from which I chose some which you will find on the enclosed inventory'. Dear Nicolaus, write to me as soon as you can what to answer him so that everything may be done according to your judgement; I care for only a few things, which you will see for yourself. Pozdrav, tole sem napisal v veliki naglici. Rim, tretji dan novembra [1425]. — Povej Nicolausu, kar se da kmalu, naj ne poshilja svojega prepisa De finibus, ker sem jaz nashel enega, in ta, ki ga zdaj pripravljam, bo dokonchan, preden pride njegov. Torej tvoje zadeve gredo po ovinkih naprej. [konec pisma] (To se nanasha na meniha iz Hersfelda. Pravne knjige, ki so omenjene, so zelo obsezhni in dragi zvezki.)°6 Pripomba: Bracciolini je dejal, da »che je shel na Madzharsko, naj bi se pretvarjal, da je prishel iz Anglije«; stvar je morala biti v tem, da naj ne bi nihche vedel za dezhelo, kjer je bil rokopis znova odkrit ... Izpisma XLVII ... Nichesar vech ne bom rekel o knjigah iz Nemchije, le she to, da drugache kakor ti jaz ne spim, ampak sem buden. Vendar upam, da bo mozh drzhal besedo in da knjiga pride do naju prisilno ali prostovoljno. Tudi zato sem se potrudil, da dobim popis enega zelo starih samostanov v Nemchiji, v katerem je velika zbirka knjig, vendar ti ne povem she vech, tako da me ne bosh drazhil s tvojim sarkazmom. Che zhelish imeti Spartianusa, vedi, da imam Aulusa Gelliusa ... Pozdrav, v Rimu v naglici, dvanajsti september [1426].o7 Iz pisma XLVIII ... Vedi, da imam knjige, za katere sem te prosil, in papirje tudi ter predvsem Aulusa Gelliusa. Resnichno bom vesel, che bosh poslal Kornelija Tacita; che bosh to storil, bom vrnil tvojega Spartianusa; zelo vztrajno te prosim za to. (...) Pozdrav, in odgovori mi, chetudi si jezen, kajti tedaj mi tvoja pisma prinesejo najvechje zadovoljstvo. Rim, enaindvajsetega oktobra [1426]. (To je sklicevanje na M. II. Niccolo je bil chlovek nenehno slabega zdravja in zelo zhivchen; to ga je delalo razdrazhljivega in je znatno prispevalo k njegovi zmozhnosti izzivanja nasprotnikov.) Pripomba: Le kako je to mogoche vedeti? Izpisma XLJX XLIV. Najinemu prijatelju Cosmusu sem rekel, prav kot si napisal, da je ta menih iz Hersfelda povedal nekomu, da je prinesel popis vech knjig po mojem seznamu. Kasneje, ko sem temeljito izprashal tega mozha, je prishel k meni in prinesel spisek, poln besed in brez vsebine. Je dober chlovek, toda nevednezh glede najinih shtudij, in je mislil, da bo vse, kar je nashel in mu ni bilo znano, neznano tudi nama, in tako je spisek oblozhil s knjigami, ki jih imava, s takimi, ki jih poznash zhe od drugod. Vseeno ti poshiljam del njegovega seznama, ki opisuje zvezek Kornelija Tacita in dela drugih avtorjev, ki nama manjkajo: to so namrech kratka, drobna besedila, ki jim ne kazhe prisojati velikega pomena. Goodbye, I have written this in great haste. Rome, the third day of November [1425]. — Tell Nicolaus as soon as possible not to send his copy of the De finibus because I have found one, and the one which I am getting ready will be finished before his comes. So your affairs go stumbling on. [End] This refers to a monk from Hersfeld. The law-books in question were very large and expensive volumes.136 Comment: Bracciolini said that, »if he did go to Hungary he would pretend that he had come from England,« the object must have been that no one should know the country where the MS. had been recovered;.. From Letter XLVII ... I shall say no more about the books from Germany except that unlike you I am not asleep but awake. But hopefully if the man I count on keeps his promise, the book will come to us either by force or willingly. Even so I have made an effort to have an inventory of one of the very old monasteries in Germany where there is a large collection of books, but I shall not tell you any more so that you will not annoy me with your sarcasm. If you want to have the Spartianus, see that I have the Aulus Gellius ... Goodbye, at Rome in haste, September the twelfth [1426].o7 From Letter XLVIII ... See that I have the books which I asked you for and the paper too and especially the Aulus Gellius. I shall be truly pleased if you send the Cornelius Tacitus; if you do so, I shall return your Spartianus; I ask you for this very insistently. ... Goodby and answer me even if you are angry, for then your letters bring me the greatest pleasure. Rome, the twenty-first of October [1426]. This is a reference to M. II. Niccolo was a man in constant poor health and very nervous, which made him irritable, and gave him a considerable ability to make enemies. Comment: How do you know it? From Letter XLIX XLIX. I had told our friend Cosmus, just as you write, that that monk from Hersfeld had told someone that he had brought an inventory of more books according to my list. Afterward when I questioned the man thoroughly he came to me bringing the inventory, full of words and empty of matter. He is a good man, but ignorant of our studies, and he thought that whatever he found that was unknown to him would be unknown to us too and so he crammed it with books which we have, the same books that you have known elsewhere. However I am sending you the part of his inventory which describes the volume of Cornelius Tacitus and of other authors whom we lack; since these are short little texts, they must not be considered of great importance. Opustil sem veliko upanje, ki sem ga zasnoval na njegovih obljubah; to je razlog, zakaj si nisem posebno prizadeval, da ti pishem o tem, kajti che bi bilo karkoli nenavadnega ali vrednega najine pozornosti, ti ne bi le pisal, ampak bi poletel k tebi, da ti povem o tem osebno. Ta menih potrebuje denar; razpravljal sem z njim o pomochi le pod pogojem, da mi za ta denar da Ammianusa Marcellinusa, prvo Livijevo Dekado in en zvezek Ciceronovih Govorov, che omenim le dela, ki jih imava obadva, in she nekaj drugih, ki jih kljub temu, da jih imava, ne kazhe prezreti. Nadalje sem zahteval, da se jih na njegovo odgovornost prenese v Nürnberg. Toliko sem opravil. Ne vem, kako se bo to izkazalo; vendar bosh o vsem izvedel od mene v doglednem chasu. (...) Rim, petnajstega maja [1427] ... Izpisma LI ... Zdaj pa k bolj pomembnim zadevam. Ko prispe Kornelij Tacit, ga bom obdrzhal skritega pri sebi, kajti poznam tisti napev »Od kod je to prishlo in kdo je to prinesel semkaj? Kdo to razglasha kot svojo last?« — Ampak ne skrbi, niti ena beseda mi ne bo ushla. (...) Nichesar nisem slishal o Korneliju Tacitu, ki je v Nemchiji. Chakam na odgovor tega meniha. (...) Rim, petindvajseti september 1427. (To kazhe, da je bilo nekaj dvoma o lastnishtvu zvezka. Nakazano je bilo, da je to zato, ker ga je Niccolo 'pridobil' iz Boccacciove posesti.) Pripomba: Pismo le potrjuje, da sta bila Poggio in Niccolo sokrivca glede zhe »najdenega« Tacita, ter sta zhelela, da bi verjeli, da kakrshnikoli dvomi niso bili utemeljeni in da so nekatera Tacitova dela res bila v Nemchiji. Phyllis Gordan ob tem daje nekaj referenc v zvezi s temo ponovnega odkrivanja Tacita, ter o Poggiu in Niccoliju.°8 • P. Hochart: De l' authenticité des Annales et des Histoires de Tacite; Bordeaux: imprimerie G. Gounouilhou, 1889. (Glej tudi zgoraj) • R. Sabbadini: Le Scoperte dei codici Latini et GRECI ne " secoli XIV e XV; 2 zvezka, v revidirani razlichici E. Garin 1967; II, p. 254. • L. Pralle: Die Wiederentdeckung des Tacit: Ein beitrag zur Geistesgeschichte Fuldas und zur Biographie des Jungen Cusanus.; Quellen und Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der Abtei und der Diözese Fulda XVII, Fulda: Parzeller & Co. (1952), vkljuchuje znanstveno razpravo o tej zadevi z zaporedjem in datumi Poggiovih pisem na to temo. Izpisma LVII ... Pozdrav, petega junija 1428. Dal sem Bartolomewu de Bardisu Livijevo Dekado in Kornelija Tacita, da ti to poshilje. V tvojem Korneliju vech strani manjka na razlichnih mestih in v Dekadi cel stolpec, kot bosh lahko videl. 1428. [konec pisma] (Nanasha se na izvod M. II., ki ga je imel Niccolo.) Pripomba: Kako je to mogoche vedeti? I have given up the great hope which I built on his promises; that is the reason why I did not make a particular effort to write you this, for if there had been anything unusual or worthy of our wisdom, I should not only have written to you but flown to you to tell you about it in person. This monk is in need of money; I have discussed helping him, provided only that he gives me for this money the Ammianus Marcellinus, the first Decade of Livy, and one volume of the Orations of Cicero, to mention works we both have, and quite a few others, which although we have them are not to be disdained. I asked furthermore that they be carried at his risk to Nuremberg. This I am handling. I do not known how it will turn out; however you will find it all out from me in due course. ... Rome, the fifteenth of May [1427] ... From Litter LI ... Now to more important matters. When the Cornelius Tacitus comes I shall keep it hidden with me for I know that whole song, »Where did it come from and who brought it here? Who claims it for his own?« But do not worry, not a word shall escape me. ... I have heard nothing about the Cornelius Tacitus which is in Germany. I am waiting for an answer from that monk. ... Rome, the twenty-fifth of September 1427. This indicates that there was something doubtful about the ownership of the volume. It has been suggested that this is because Niccolo had 'acquired' it from the estate of Boccaccio. Comment: The letter proves just that Poggio and Niccolo were accomplices concerning the already »found« Tacitus, that they wanted to be believed that the whatsoever suspicions were not founded and that some works of Tacitus were really in Germany. Gordan gives here a couple of references on the subject of the rediscovery of Tacitus, and Poggio and Niccoli.°8 • P. HOCHART, De l'authenticité des annales et des histoires de Tacite, Bordeaux: imprimerie G. Gounouilhou, 1889. (But see above) • R. SABBADINI, Li Scoperte dei codici latini etgreci ne' secoli XIV e XV, 2 vols, in the revised version of E. Garin 1967. II, p.254. • L. PRALLE, Die Wiederentdeckung des Tacitus: Ein beitrag zur Geistesgeschichte Fuldas und zur Biographie des jungen Cusanus, Quellen und Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der Abtei und der Diözese Fulda XVII, Fulda: Parzeller & Co, (1952). includes a scholarly discussion of the matter with the order and dating of Poggio's letters on the subject. From Letter LVII ... Goodbye, the fifth day of June, 1428. I gave Bartholemew de Bardis the Decade of Livy and the Cornelius Tacitus to send you. In your Cornelius there are several pages missing in various places and in the Decade a whole column, as you will be able to see. 1428. [End] The reference is to a copy of M. II which Niccolo had. Comment: How do you know? I%pisma LIX ... Kornelij Tacit je v Nemchiji nem in od tam nisem slishal nich novega o njegovi dejavnosti. (...) Pozdrav, v naglici, enajstega septembra 1428. Pripomba: Pravzaprav Tacit ni znan v Nemchiji in menih ni naredil nich — nereshena uganka ima veliko reshitev! Konstruktivne povratne informacije so dobrodoshle. Roger Pearse Pripomba: Glej moto (op. B.J.H.) Iz angl. prevedel in dodal opombe Ivo Antich 01 (Op. prev.: Ammianus Marcellinus, rimski vojak in zgodovinar iz 4. stol. n. sht.) 02 (Op. prev.: Sulpicius Severus, 4. stol. n. sht., rimski pravnik, krshchanski duhovnik, zgodovinar, avtor znamenitih Kronik in biografije sv. Martina. Neron je bil »uradno« porochen s tremi zhenskami in z dvema moshkima; slednja sta Pitagoras /Pythagoras in Sporus.) 03 (Op. prev.: Josephus Flavius, Jozhef Flavij, rimski zgodovinar iz prvega stol. n. sht., rimski drzhavljan, izvorno Jud z imenom Yosef ben Matityahu, rojen v Jeruzalemu; pisal o rimski in judovski preteklosti ter o zachetkih krshchanstva; v judovski tradiciji oznachen kot konvertit. Domicijan — ekscentrichen rimski cesar, sposoben, a tiranski, preganjal Jude in kristjane, umorili so ga dvorni uradniki leta 96 n. sht.) 04 (Op. prev.: Servius, Orosius, Cassiodorus, Jordanes - rimski pisci, zgodovinarji med 4. in 6. stol. n. sht.) 05 (Op. prev.: Gian Francesco Poggio Bracciolini, 1380-1459, pisec, zgodnji ital. renesanchni humanist, odrashchal v Florenci, v sluzhbi pri sedmih papezhih, v samostanskih knjizhnicah v Nemchiji, Shvici in Franciji odkril shtevilne klasichne rimske rokopise, med njimi Lukrecijevo pesnitev O naravi; prepise teh del je poshiljal prijateljem uchenjakom; med raziskovalci obstaja mnenje, da je avtentichnost nekaterih rokopisov vprashljiva. Niccolo Niccoli, 1364-1437, Florentinec, humanist, izumitelj kurzivne pisave.) 06 (Op. prev.: Giovanni d'Andrea ali Johannes Andres, ok. 1275-1348, italijanski ekspert za cerkveno pravo, njegovo delo Novella ali komentarji, 1234. Speculum iudicale, iz 1271, pregled civilnega in cerkvenega prava, avtor je francoski pisec in shkof Guillaume Durand, tudi Durandus, 13. stol. Julius Frontinus, rimski aristokrat, pisec, 1.-2. stol. n. sht.) 07 (Op. prev.: Spartianus in Aulus Gellius, rimska pisca med 2. in 4. stol. n. sht.) 08 (Op. prev.: Phyllis Walter Goodhart Gordan, 1913-1994, amerishka znanstvenica iz New Yorka, prevedla iz lat. v angl. korespondenco Bracciolini-Niccoli, izd. 1991.) From Letter LIX ... Cornelius Tacitus is silent in Germany and I have heard nothing new from there about his activities. ... Goodbye, in haste, the eleventh day of September 1428. Comment: Actually - Tacitus is not known in Germany and the monk has nothing done --- unclear enigma has a lot of solutions! Constructive feedback is welcomed to . Roger Pearse Comment: See moto (com. B.J.H.) From English translated and added notes Ivo Antich 01 (Note by trans.: Ammianus Marcellinus, a Roman soldier and historian from the 4th century CE.) 02 (Note by trans.: Sulpicius Severus, the 4th century CE, a Roman lawyer, christian priest, historian, author of the famous Chronicles and biography of St. Martin. Nero was »officially« married with the three women and two men; the latter are Pitagoras / Pythagoras and Sporus.) 03 (Note by trans.: Josephus Flavius, the Roman historian of the first century CE, Roman citizen, originally a Jew named Yosef Ben Matityahu, born in Jerusalem, wrote about the Roman and Jewish history and about the beginnings of Christianity; in the Jewish tradition, marked as a convert. Domitian - eccentric Roman Emperor, capable but tyrannical, persecuting the Jews and Christians; he was assassinated by court officials in the year 96 CE.) 04 (Note by trans.: Servius, Orosius, Cassiodorus, Jordanes - Roman writers, historians, between the 4th and 6th century CE.) 05 (Note by trans.: Gian Francesco Poggio Bracciolini, 1380-1459, writer, humanist of early Italian renaissance, grown up in Florence, in service at seven popes, in the monastery libraries in Germany, Switzerland and France he discovered numerous of the classical Roman manuscripts, inter alia Lucretius's poem On the Nature; copies of these works he has been sanding to his scholar friends; there is a meaning among researchers that authenticity of some manuscripts is being questionable. Niccolo Niccoli, 1364-1437, a Florentine, scholar, inventor of italic fonts.) 06 (Note by trans.: Giovanni d' Andrea or Johannes Andreae, about 1275 to 1348, the Italian expert in canon law, his work is Novella or comments, 1234. Speculum iudicale, from 1271, a review of civil and canon law, by the French writer and bishop Guillaume Durand, also Durandus, 13 th century. Julius Frontinus, the Roman aristocrat, writer, 1st - 2nd century CE.) 07 (Note by trans.: Spartianus and Aulus Gellius, Roman writers from between 2nd and 4th century CE.) 08 (Note by trans.: Phyllis Walter Goodhart Gordan, 1913-1994, american scientist from New York; she translated from Latin into English the correspondence Bracciolini - Niccoli, ed. 1991.) Svojskost LiVeS Journala — Revije SRP Vodilo LiVeS Journala — Revije SRP so tri vrednotne orientacije individua, tega ne nepomembnega drobca v sistemu institucij. Te vrednote so: Svoboda, Resnica, Pogum. Pomembne so, vsaka od njih posebej, pomembno je prezhemanje teh vrednot. Tak namen ima tudi urednishtvo Revije SRP, ki izhaja v posodobljenem prvotnem slovenskem chrkopisu bohorichici, katere utemeljitev predstavlja Zbornik 2001 Bohorichica. Individuality of the LiVeS Journal Guidelines of the LiVeS Journal are the three values of the orientation of the individuum, that irrelevant shred in the system of institutions. These values are: Liberty (freedom), Verity (truth), and Spirit (courage) Each of them is important in its separate way, the infusion of these values is important. This is also the intention of the LiVeS Journal editorial board, which is published in an updated version of Bohorichica - the primary Slovenian alphabet, the argumentation behind which is presented in Zbornik 2001 Bohorichica. Sama ustvarjalnost in avtonomija, njuna utemeljenost v raziskovanju, nachelno in sploshno nista vprashljivi, nihche, skoraj nihche ne bo nasprotoval takim usmeritvam. Problem se pojavlja shele na konkretnem nivoju, kot tak je nerazviden in skrit ali zhe prikrit in s tem tezhko reshljiv. Problem ukinjanja ustvarjalnosti (in avtonomije) se kazhe v shtevilnih, a na videz nepomembnih malenkostih. Lahko jih ne vidimo ali pa se moramo spustiti na nivo konkretnosti, to je na nivo ukvarjanja z malenkostmi in postati malenkostni. Institucija brez spomina je kakor podjetje brez knjigovodstva, mochni in mogochni v njej pochno, kar jih je volja, ker vse, kar pochno, utone v pozabljivi zavesti chasa. a ne gre za chas, ampak za dejstva zavesti, kjer chasa ni, je samo trajanje, obche vrednote so neposredna dejstva zavesti, vsakomur dojemljive, preverljive, nihche jih chloveku ne more ne dati ne vzeti, ne sistem ne institucija ne propaganda, tudi kulturna ne, samo che to sam hoche, jih bo nashel le v sebi, sebstvu svojem. Creativity and autonomy themselves, their justification in research, are in principle and generally not questionable, no one, or next to no one will oppose such an orientation. It is not until concrete action is undertaken that the problem will occur, and it is therefore unevident and hidden or even already concealed and thus difficult to solve. The problem of abolishing creativity (and autonomy) presents itself in numerous, but seemingly irrelevant details. We can either leave them undetected or drop down to the tangible level, in other words — become preoccupied with trifles — and grow petty. An institution with no memory is like a company without accounting, its strong and its mighty do what they please, because all they do is doomed to drown in the forgetful awareness of time. but it is not a matter of time, but a matter of the facts of awareness, where time does not exist, there is only length, general values are direct facts of awareness, understandable to all, verifiable, no one can bestow them or take them away, neither system, nor institutions nor propaganda — not even a cultural one, only if one so desires, will one find them only within oneself, in one's own self. »Torej vsako bitje, ki obchuti svojo eksistenco, obchuti zlochin pokorjenosti in tezhi k svobodi; che se she zhivali, ki so udomachene za sluzhenje chloveku, lahko podrede shele potem, ko jim zatro nasprotno zheljo, kakshna nesrecha je to lahko za chloveka, ki je edini resnichno rojen zato, da zhivi svobodno. Napravila ga je nenaravnega do te mere, da je izgubil praspomin na svoje prvobitno stanje, in na zheljo, da ga ponovno ozhivi ... Vedno pa se najdejo eni, srechnejshi od drugih, ti, ki so rojeni pod srechno zvezdo, ki obchutijo tezho jarma in ne morejo vzdrzhati, da bi ga ne stresli, ti, ki se nikoli ne navadijo na jarem ... Ko bi bila svoboda povsem izgubljena, Zunaj tega sveta, bi jo ti ljudje ozhivili v svoji predstavi, obchutili bi jo v svojem duhu in jo she vedno uzhivali. Suzhenjstvo nikakor ni po njihovem okusu, celo ko je to okrasheno, ne! ...« Etienne de La Boetie »So every being that feels its existence, feels the crime of submission and strives for freedom; if even animals that are tamed to serve man, do not submit until their opposing desires are crushed, what misfortune can this be for man, who alone is truly born, to live freely. It made him so unnatural, that he forgot the memory of his primeval state, and the desire to again revive it ... But you always find some who are happier than others, the ones who are born under a lucky star, who feel the weight of the yoke and cannot stop themselves, from shaking it off, the ones who never grow accustomed to the yoke ... If liberty were to be completely lost, out of this world, then these people would revive it in their imaginations, they would feel it in their spirit and continue to enjoy it. Servitude is by no means to their taste, not even if it is adorned! ...« Ltienne de La Boetie OPOMBA UREDNISHTVA LiVeS Journal (in Revija SRP): http://www.livesjournal.eu (http://www.revijasrp.si) Internetna uporaba Revije SRP je brez omejitev; enako velja za LiVeS Journal, ki mu je z vzporedno dvojezichnostjo namenjena shirsha dostopnost, tudi za izseljenske korenine. Predvideno je, da bodo med novimi sodelavci tudi prevajalci, ki bodo postopoma dodajali prevode iz Revije SRP v »globalnem jeziku« (za globalni zgodovinski spomin), danes v angleshkem (britanskem ali amerishkem). Izvirnik vsakega teksta je avtorski unikat, prevodov pa je lahko vech, zato bo v internetni izdaji LJ kak prevod lahko tudi dodan k predhodnemu ali pa ga bo nadomestil. EDITORIAL NOTE LiVeS Journal (and Revija SRP): http://www.livesjournal.eu (http://www.revijasrp.si) Internet use of Revija SRP is without limits; the same is valid for LiVeS Journal, for which the wider accessibility is intended by the means of two parallel languages, even to the roots of diasporas. It is expected that the new translators among the contributors gradually will add new translations of the texts from Revija SRP in the »global language« (for the global historical memory), today in English (British or American). Every original text is unique as a fact of authorship, but translations may be several, so in the Internet edition of LJ new translations also could be added to the preliminary ones, or those could be replaced. ó