Suchergebnisse

The first part of this essay deals with the fundamental concepts of political science: what politics is -- its subject & its purpose; the nature of human beings as social or political (symbiotic) beings; the nature of authority & law in the function of maintaining & developing people's natural sociability in the political community. The second part looks into the character of political community or state as a universal symbiotic community, as a community of communities (particular public associations, towns, & provinces, which are communities of simple & private associations -- the families of associations). The author analyzes the definition of the universal symbiotic community (which the author calls a kingdom or at times a republic), the right to sovereignty (ius majestatis), or the right of supreme authority (ius regni), that inalienably belongs to the people or the entire political body. Adapted from the source document.

U svom djelu Zatvorena trgovačka država iz 1800. godine, njemački filozof Johann Gottlieb Fichte zagovara ekonomsku autarkiju kao radikalan oblik protekcionizma, dok 1840. njemačko-američki ekonomist Friedrich List izdaje »bibliju protekcionizma«, djelo Nacionalni sustav političke ekonomije u kojem se suprotstavlja učenju Adama Smitha o važnosti slobodne trgovine i međunarodne razmjene. Pitanje otvorene ili zatvorene privrede iznimno je aktualno s obzirom na to da su globalizacijski procesi rezultirali rastućim nejednakostima i drugim anomalijama te se, kao reakcija, ponovno javljaju, ako su ikad i nestale, snažne protekcionističke prakse. U radu će se pokušati odgovoriti na pitanje je li globalni kapitalizam nužno suprotstavljen ekonomskom nacionalizmu te koju poziciju u toj opreci danas zauzimaju lijeve i desne političke opcije. Naime, umjesto lijeva ili desna, sve češće može se čuti da je neka stranka sistemska ili prosvjedna, pri čemu se tzv. sistemskima predbacuje da žele zadržati status quo u provođenju neoliberalne agende, dok prosvjedne često klize u populizme i nacionalizme. ; Johann Gottlieb Fichte in his work The Closed Commercial State (1800) argued for economic autarky as the next reform of protectionism. German-American economist Friedrich List published The National System of Political Economy (1840) which is considered to be the "Bible of protectionism". List was the opponent of Adam Smith's theses on the importance of free trade and international market. The advocate in a shift from open to closed economy is actual in the globalized world, which is determined by growing inequality and other social and political anomalies. Protectionism is imposed as a possible response to the discontents of globalization. The paper attempts to answer if there is a link between global capitalism and economic nationalism, and how are left and right political parties related to that possible link. Recently, in the days of political dissatisfaction, the alternative between left and right positions is replaced by the opposition between system and anti-system or protest parties. While system parties are criticized for keeping a status quo of neoliberal agenda, protest parties slide into nationalism and populism.

Hrvatski izvornik: Senker, Boris (2019): S obiju strana rampe: Ogledi o hrvatskoj drami i kazalištu. Zagreb, Leykam international, str. 169–176; 223–235. Njemački izvornik: Laitko, Hubert: Die Etablierung der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Akademiehistorische Weichenstellung in der Frühphase des Kalten Krieges. U: Feichtinger Johannes i Heidemarie Uhl (2018): Die Akademien der Wissenschaften in Zentraleuropa im Kalten Krieg: Transformationsprozesse im Spanngsfeld von Abgrenzung und Annäherung. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, str. 341–364. ; Kroatischer Ausgangstext: Senker, Boris (2019): S obiju strana rampe: Ogledi o hrvatskoj drami i kazalištu. Zagreb, Leykam international, S. 169–176; 223–235. Deutscher Ausgangstext: Laitko, Hubert: Die Etablierung der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Akademiehistorische Weichenstellung in der Frühphase des Kalten Krieges. In: Feichtinger Johannes i Heidemarie Uhl (2018): Die Akademien der Wissenschaften in Zentraleuropa im Kalten Krieg: Transformationsprozesse im Spanngsfeld von Abgrenzung und Annäherung. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, S. 341–364.

Punih je sedam godina (1968. – 1975.) Ljubo Jandrić u svojoj knjizi Sa Ivom Andrićem portretirao velikoga pisca. Nije to prestao činiti ni osme 1975. godine svoga susretanja s njim, u čijih je dva i pol mjeseca preležanih bez svijesti u bolnici prenio i trinaest takvih Andrićevih dana iz prethodne 1974. godine. Od 17. listopada 1968. do 13. ožujka 1975. Jandrić je s Andrićem bio ono što je Johann Peter Eckermann bio s Johannom Wolfgangom Goetheom, Max Brod s Franzom Kafkom, Predrag Matvejević s Miroslavom Krležom, i njima sličnim. U tome je razdoblju Jandrić u ulozi strpljivoga slušatelja svoga mudrog sugovornika, koji bilježi sve što ga karakterizira i kao čovjeka i kao pisca, i kao intelektualca, diplomata, političara, zaljubljenika u Bosnu, njezine ljude i njezinu povijest. Jandrićeva knjiga tako postaje neka vrsta portreta Andrićeva unutarnjega života i portreta njegove umjetnosti, autentičan izvornik gotovo svih sadržaja njegova ljudskoga i stvaralačkoga lika. Od svoga sugovornika zapisivač uzima sve što mu on ponudi u šetnji, uz kavu, na raznim mjestima, i na stranicama svoje knjige sve to čuva kao poseban dar. ; Dans son livre Avec Ivo Andric, qu'il a mis sept ans à écrire (1968-1975), Ljubo Jandrić dresse le portrait de ce grand écrivain. Il a fini ce livre en 1975, huit ans après sa première rencontre avec Andric. Cette année-là, bien qu'hospitalisé et inconscient pendant deux mois et demi, il a réussi à décrire les treize journées d'une expérience similaire vécue par Andrić l'année précédente. Du 17 octobre 1968 jusqu'au 13 mars 1975, Jandrić était pour Andrić ce que Johann Peter Eckermann était pour Johann Wolfgang Goethe, Max Brod pour Franz Kafka, Predrag Matvejević pour Miroslav Krleža etc. Pendant ce temps-là, Jandrić a assumé son rôle d'auditeur patient de son sage interlocuteur en notant tout ce qui le caractérisait comme homme, intellectuel, diplomate, politicien et amoureux de la Bosnie, de ses habitants et de son histoire. Le livre de Jandrić devient ainsi une sorte de portrait de la vie intérieure d'Andrić et de son art, une source authentique de presque tous les traits de son caractère d'homme et d'artiste. Le preneur de notes prend tout ce qu'on lui offre – en promenade, autour d'une tasse de café et dans d'autres endroits – pour le restituer comme un don précieux dans les pages de son livre.

Poslije kratka presjeka važnijih događaja vezanih uz povijest Franjevačke provincije Bosne Srebrene autor analizira važnije odredbe franjevačkoga zakonodavstva s obzirom na školstvo koje su omogućile njegov snažan razvoj u razdoblju poslije Tridentskoga koncila i koje su bitno utjecale ne organizaciju i rad franjevačkih obrazovnih ustanova na ovim prostorima. Poseban je naglasak na odredbama što su se odnosile na studij filozofije čija je svrha bila pripremiti studente za što kvalitetniji studij bogoslovije. S tim je ciljem na generalnom kapitulu franjevačkoga reda održanome u Rimu 1694. godine propisano da se filozofija predaje najmanje tri godine i da se u njezinu okviru studiraju summulae (logica minor), logika (logica maior), fizika, metafizika, animistika (znanost o duši), učenje o nastanku i propadanju tvari te kozmologija. Nastavni je sadržaj bio vezan uz učenje Ivana Duns Škota i Bonaventure. Metoda je bila strogo skolastička. Međutim, daljnje su reforme išle za približavanjem državnih i crkvenih sveučilišnih programa. Iz odredaba vezanih za studij filozofije u Bosni Srebrenoj vidljivo je da su provincijske uprave nastojale što dosljednije provoditi propise što ih je donosio general reda i, koliko je to bilo moguće, držati korak s trendovima na zapadnim učilištima. Kada to okolnosti nisu dopuštale, svoje su gojence slali na studij u inozemstvo. ; After a short review of more important events related to the history of the Franciscan province Silver Bosnia the author analyzes more significant regulations of the Franciscan legislature with regard to education which enabled its strong development in the period after the Trident Council and which had a strong influence on the organization and work of the Franciscan educational institutions in these areas. The special emphasis is on the regulations which referred to the study of philosophy, the purpose of which was to prepare students for the quality study of theology. With that goal the general Franciscan body of canons held in Rome in 1694 stipulated that philosophy must be taught at least three years and that in its framework summulae (logica minor), logics (logica maior), physics, metaphysics, science about soul, study about the emergence and decadence of a matter and cosmology must be learned. The teaching content was connected with the study of Ivan Duns Scotsman and Bonaventure. The method was strictly scholastic. However, further reforms went in direction of drawing closer the state and church university curricula. From the regulations related to the study of philosophy in Silver Bosnia it is visible that the provincial authorities were trying to implement the regulations made by the general of order and, as much as possible, keep pace with trends in the western educational institutions. When the circumstances did not allow that, they sent their students to study abroad.

Na temelju Sabranih djela I–III (1997) Bonifaca Badrova (Livno, 1896. – Sarajevo, 1974), franjevca i profesora filozofije na Franjevačkoj teologiji u Sarajevu, u radu se obrađuje njegov pristup renesansnoj filozofiji i hrvatskim renesansnim misliocima. Badrov je u trećem dijelu svoje Povijesti filozofije (Sarajevo, 1959), koju je namijenio studentima za internu uporabu, uključio i neveliko poglavlje o renesansnoj filozofiji (1450–1600). On nalazi da su specifična filozofska i društvena strujanja na početku Novog vijeka iznjedrila nove, međusobno sasvim disparatne, renesansne filozofske sustave sa samo jednim zajedničkim obilježjem: odbacivanje tomističke filozofije. Prema Badrovu renesansna filozofija ima četiri glavne sastavnice: 1. obnova starih sustava: neoplatonizam, neostoicizam i hedonizam, 2. filozofija prirode, 3. politička filozofija i 4. skepticizam. Badrov hrvatske renesansne mislioce ubraja isključivo u prvu skupinu, dakle među pojedince koji su nastojali obnoviti stare filozofske sustave, i opet – isključivo među one mislioce koji se oslanjanju na Platonovu filozofiju. On smatra da je renesansni platonizam u svojoj bîti zapravo »eklektički neoplatonizam«. Na tragu spoznaje da je antički novoplatonizam eklektički zato što iz Platonovih, ali i drugih teorija probire, prihvaća i primjenjuje ono što mu se čini najprikladnije, gornju Badrovljevu tvrdnju treba razumjeti u smislu da se renesansni platonizam eklektički odnosi prema Platonovim djelima, ali i misaonim dostignućima antičkog novoplatonizma. Ipak, čini se da Badrov ne propituje detaljno izvore i izvornost renesansnog platonizma. Badrov se pojedinačno bavi trima hrvatskim filozofima: Jurjem Dragišićem, Benediktom Benkovićem i Franom Petrićem. Dodatno, o Dragišiću ističe da se bavio logičkim problemima, a da se Benković u pristupu Škotovim djelima koristio Aristotelovim logičkim aparatom. Pišući o Petriću Badrov citira Filipovića koji, pozivajući se na Überwegov Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie, tvrdi da je Petrić preteča i učitelj Giordana Bruna te da je utjecao na Bernardina Telesija. U kasnijim izdanjima Überwega naprotiv nalazimo da Brunov odnos prema suvremenicima nije dovoljno jasan i da se Petrić naslanja na Telesija u nekim svojim stavovima. Nadalje, Badrov o Petriću tvrdi da pobija Aristotelovu filozofiju i drži platonizam bližim kršćanskoj misli te u osnovnim potezima iznosi Petrićev nauk o svjetlu: ono je nematerijalna supstancija, samoegzistentno i sveprisutno, prvotni uzrok i princip svih stvari. Dalje, zbog stava o prostoru kao onom koji je postojao prije svijeta, neovisno o stvarima, Badrov Petrića smješta među mislioce koji imaju ultrarealističko mišljenje o prostoru. Načelno, takvi mislioci prostor poimaju kao neku apsolutnu i beskonačnu realnost, različitu od svih drugih tjelesnih realnosti, a za Petrića on je čak počelo, prvo od njegovih četiriju počela tvarnoga svijeta. Pri izradi svojih najopsežnijih skripata Povijest filozofije Badrov se, kako dokumentira njegov popis literature, oslonio na 17 djela iz povijesti filozofije tiskanih u 20. stoljeću, a u prikazu o hrvatskim renesansnim misliocima u mnogome na Filipovićevu Filozofiju Renesanse (1956). S obzirom na kratko izvješće o Petriću, nije utvrđen utjecaj Bazaline Povijesti filozofije, a Šanc u drugom dijelu svoje Povijesti filozofije hrvatske renesansne filozofe ionako ne spominje. ; Based on Sabrana djela [Collected Works] I–III (1997) of Franciscan Bonifac Badrov (Livno, 1896 – Sarajevo, 1974), professor of philosophy at Franciscan Theology in Sarajevo, the paper examines his approach to Renaissance philosophy and Croatian thinkers of this period. In the third part of Badrov's Povijest filozofije [History of Philosophy] (1959), which he wrote for the students' internal use, he also included a small chapter on Renaissance philosophy (1450–1600). He finds that specific philosophical and social mainstreams of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries gave way to new, mutually disparate Renaissance philosophical systems sharing a single common feature: rejection of Thomistic philosophy. According to Badrov, Renaissance philosophy has four main components: 1. revival of old systems: Neoplatonism, Neostoicism and hedonism; 2. natural philosophy; 3. political philosophy; 4. Renaissance scepticism. Croatian thinkers of the Renaissance, Badrov holds, fall exclusively within the first group, that is, among those who worked on the revival of old philosophical systems, or more precisely, among the philosophers who leaned on Plato's philosophy only. In its essence, he views Renaissance Platonism as eclectic Neoplatonism. Grounded on the understanding that Neoplatonism of the Antiquity was eclectic because from the theories of Plato and others it selected, accepted and applied what it considered to be most appropriate, Badrov's statement should be understood in the sense that Renaissance Platonism had an eclectic approach to Plato's works, but also to philosophical achievements of the classical Neoplatonism. However, it seems that Badrov's analysis of the sources and originality of the Renaissance Platonism lacks depth. The philosophers that Badrov treats individually are Juraj Dragišić, Benedikt Benković and Frane Petrić. In addition, he emphasizes that Dragišić devoted himself to logical problems, and that Benković in his approach to Duns Scotus' works used Aristotle's logical apparatus. While writing on Petrić, Badrov paraphrases Filipović's Filozofija Renesanse [Renaissance Philosophy] (1956): »Überweg considers Petrić to be the forerunner and teacher of Giordano Bruno. He also influenced another Renaissance philosopher, Bernardino Telesio.« In the later editions of Überweg's Geschichte der Philosophy, by contrast, we find that Bruno's relationship to Petrić lacks clarity and that Petrić leans on Telesio in some of his views. Badrov states that Petrić refutes Aristotle's philosophy and holds Platonism to be closer to Christian thought. The Sarajevo professor outlines Petrić's doctrine on light. Further, on account of Petrić's view of space as that which exists before the world, regardless of all things, Badrov places the philosopher of Cres among the thinkers who share an ultrarealistic view of space. Mainly, these philosophers understand space as some kind of an absolute and infinite reality, different from all other bodily realities, while for Petrić it is even a principle, the first of his four principles of the material world. While preparing his most extensive manual Povijest filozofije, Badrov, as documented in his bibliography, drew from 17 works of the history of philosophy: three Zagreb editions (Albert Bazala, Franjo Šanc and Vladimir Dvorniković), five Belgrade editions (Borislav Lorenc, Branislav Petronijević, Dragan Jeremić and Bertrand Russell), six German and three French. All these books were published in the course of the twentieth century. Being too short and general, Badrov's outline of Petrić offers sparse information for the establishment of any connection with Bazala's statements on Petrić published in the second volume of Bazala's Povjest filozofije [History of Philosophy] (1909). Šanc, however, in the second part of his Povijest filozofije [History of Philosophy] makes no reference to Croatian philosophers of the Renaissance.

U radu je riječ o opisu Dalmacije što ga je 1805. sastavio Maximilian De Traux, časnik u austrijskoj službi. Osim Dalmaciji, znatan prostor posvetio je i "Albaniji" (bivšoj mletačkoj pokrajini Albania Veneta), tj. području oko Boke kotorske. Glavni autorov interes usmjeren je prema utvrdama u tim novostečenim austrijskim područjima te mogućnostima njihove zaštite. Usto De Traux daje svoja zapažanja o tamošnjem stanovništvu, tradicijama, načinima privređivanja i drugome. Tekstualno izlaganje praćeno je s 29 slikovnih priloga (tlocrti utvrda odnosno gradova, karte Kvarnera, Dalmacije i "Albanije" te prikazi Zadra), čiji je odabir zanimljiv i odražava autorov strateški pogled na tadašnju političku situaciju. De Trauxovo djelo vrlo je malena formata, uslijed čega su tlocrti morali biti ograničeni u broju detalja; unatoč tomu i možda baš zato ti su prikazi neobično uspjeli, postigavši znatnu jasnoću i sugestivnost. ; Maximilian De Traux (1766-1817) was an engineering officer in the Austrian army. In 1803, he became the head of the engineering administration in Zadar, in which role he travelled all over Dalmatia during the following two years, gaining a solid knowledge of the region. In 1805, he produced a description of the land, nowadays preserved at the National Library of Serbia in Belgrade. It was published under a somewhat clumsy title Festungen Dalmatiens und Albaniens nebst vorliegenden Inseln, und Beschreibung (Fortifications of Dalmatia and Albania, as well as the neighbouring islands, and their description) and dedicated to Johann, Archduke of Austria, but in fact it was intended for the Austrian ruling house in general, in order to help them govern the lands which had come into their possession only a few years before. The book consists of two parts: textual and illustrative, the latter including 29 figures. In the textual part, De Traux largely focuses on the state of Dalmatian fortifications, including mainland settlements and those on the islands. He then describes the geography of the area and the communication lines with regard to the defence potential and the need of investing in the construction of new fortifications. The population is described in the tradition of Alberto Fortis, whereby he distinguishes between two types: the urban inhabitants, which resemble the Italians in all aspects, and those of the hinterland, the so-called Morlacs. He also describes "Albania", the area around Boka Kotorska, previously governed by the Venetian Republic under the name of Albania Veneta. In this section he addresses, among other things, the problem of the Orthodox population, arguing that it would be beneficial to appoint a separate Orthodox bishop (episkopos) for "Albania" and that the Orthodox will never be loyal subjects to a Catholic monarch as their religion creates a state within the state. The illustrative section of De Traux's report includes ground plans of various fortifications and maps of Dalmatia, the Kvarner Islands, and "Albania". At the very beginning, there are separate illustrations, with a particular focus on Sanmicheli's Land Gate. It was given a special place in the report and, although it was still a part of the fortification belt and played a role in communication and defence, De Traux did not waste a word on that aspect, commenting instead on its symbolic role as an entrance to the main Venetian city of Dalmatia. De Traux's booklet is rather small (11x19 cm) and thus the author calls it "a pocketbook" (Taschenbuch). This can be explained by its aim: it had to be handy and easy to use by its addressee, Archduke Johann, and this aspect was obviously more important than a possible representative character. Because of the size, De Traux's ground plans had to be limited in the number of details in order to remain clear, which resulted in unusually effective and suggestive depictions.

Pavao Ritter Vitezović was born in Senj on January 12, 1652 and died in Vienna on January 21, 1713. He attended elementary school in Senj and continued his education at a Jesuit high school in Zagreb, where his professor was Juraj Habdelić. After finishing the sixth grade in rhetoric, he quit school and went to Rome, where he met Johannes Lucius (Ivan Lučić). He was taught by cartographer Georg Matheus Vischer in Vienna. Vitezović spent the following two years in Bogenšperk (Wagensberg, Vagensperg), where Johann Weikhard Valvasor taught him surveying and copper-engraving. He prepared most templates for Croatian city views for Valvasor and engraved them in copper plates. He returned to Senj in 1679. As a city emissary, he travelled to the Viennese Parliament, where he advocated for Senj getting a royal charter and rights it had had for a long time. He participated in wars against Turks and became an officer for Nikola Erdödy. While he was staying as an emissary of Senj in Linz in 1684, he produced Odiljenje sigetsko and changed his German last name Ritter to Croatian Vitezović. He used to go outdoors and sketch cities and towers which he subsequently engraved in copper plates. This is how his copper-engravings were made which were incorporated in the album of Valvasor's Topographia Ducatus Carnioliae modernae (Topography of Duchy of Carniola), as well as in Die Ehre des Herzogthums Crain (Glory of Duchy of Carniola) in 1689. He participated in wars for liberation of Lika and Krbava and became the vice-prefect of Lika in 1691. He took over the Land Printing Office (Zemaljska tiskara) at the session of the Croatian Parliament in Varaždin in 1694. Several important books, textbooks, calendars, prayer books and proclamations, and especially important, his historiographic work in Croatian Kronika aliti spomen vsega svijeta vikov from 1696 and a booklet in Latin titled Croatia rediviva regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare (Croatia Revived under the Great Emperor Leopold's Reign) from 1700. He was the director of the Land Printing Office from 1694 to 1709, while he signed as Paulo Ritter de Segna, nobili Croata (Pavao Ritter of Senj, Noble Croatian). ; Rodio se u Senju, 12. siječnja 1652, a umro u Beču, 21. siječnja 1713. Osnovnu školu pohađao je u Senju. Školovanje je nastavio u Zagrebu na isusovačkoj gimnaziji, gdje mu je profesor bio Juraj Habdelić. Nakon završenoga šestog razreda retorike prekinuo je školovanje i otišao u Rim gdje je susreo Ivana Lučića. U Beču se obrazovao kod kartografa Georga Matheusa Vischera. Zatim je dvije godine proveo u Vagenspergu kod Johanna Weikharda Valvasora gdje je izučio mjerništvo i bakrorezbarstvo. Za Valvasora je priredio većinu predložaka za vedute hrvatskih gradova, a zatim ih urezivao u bakrene ploče. Godine 1679. vratio se u Senj. Kao delegat grada bio je na Saboru u Beču gdje se zalagao da Senj dobije kraljevsku povelju i prava koja je imao od starina. Sudjelovao je u ratovima protiv Turaka i postao časnik u taboru bana Nikole Erdödya. Dok je kao izaslanik Senja boravio u Linzu 1684. tiskao je svoje djelo Odiljenje sigetsko, kada je promijenio njemačko prezime Ritter u hrvatsko Vitezović. U prirodu je odlazio s blokom za skiciranje i crtao gradove i kule što je poslije prenosio na bakrene ploče. Tako su nastali njegovi bakrorezi koji su ušli u album Valvasorove Topographia Ducatus Carnioliae modernae (Topografija Vojvodine Kranjske), a zatim 1689. i u knjigu Die Ehre des Herzogthums Crain (Slava Vojvodine Kranjske). Istaknuo se u ratu za oslobađanje Like i Krbave te je 1691. imenovan ličkim podžupanom. Na zasjedanju Hrvatskog sabora u Varaždinu 1694. zaključeno je da preuzme upravljanje Zemaljskom tiskarom. U tiskari je otisnuto nekoliko važnih knjiga, udžbenika, kalendara, molitvenika i proglasa, a posebno treba izdvojiti njegovo historiografsko djelo na hrvatskom jeziku Kronika aliti spomen vsega svijeta vikov iz 1696. i knjižicu na latinskom jeziku Croatia rediviva regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare (Hrvatska oživljena pod vlašću velikog cara Leopolda) iz 1700. Ravnatelj Zemaljske tiskare bio je 1694–1709. kada se potpisivao kao Paulo Ritter de Segna, nobili Croata (Pavao Ritter Senjanin, plemeniti Hrvat).

Na Veliki petak 1494, 28. ožujka, u Sikstinskoj kapeli, pred papom Aleksandrom VI. (Borgiom) i članovima papinskog dvora rapski arhiđakon Martin Nimira održao je – dakako, na latinskom – propovijed o Muci; njezinu je pisanu verziju u travnju iste godine u Rimu tiskao Eucharius Silber. Propovijedati pred papom za vrijeme mise značajan je društveni uspjeh; objaviti održanu propovijed dodatno ističe njezinu važnost; pa ipak, Nimirin su život i djelo do danas u povijesti hrvatske i novolatinske književnosti neistraženi. Donijet ću ovdje osnovne podatke o Nimiri, društvenom kontekstu njegove propovijedi, o strukturi tog djela i njegovim kurijalno-humanističkim obilježjima te recepciji (knjižicu je posjedovao Marko Marulić, a 1522. nekoliko je Nimirinih stranica u svoje djelo uvrstio Giovanni Mercurio da Vipera). ; On Good Friday 1494, Martin Nimira, archdeacon of Rab and scion of a wellregarded Rab family, delivered a sermon on the Passion to Pope Alexander VI and members of the papal curia. After April 3 that same year the sermon was printed in Rome by Eucharius Silber. Nimira built his career in the Papal States of Italy as a client of the cardinal of Siena Francesco Todeschini Piccolomini (1439–1503); some years earlier, in March 1487, Nimira had already preached before the Roman cardinals, on the feast of Saint Thomas Aquinas in the Dominican church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva. Nimira's known writings and activities (a poetic prayer for the health of the cardinal Todeschini Piccolomini Hecatosticum carmen ad Christum optimum maximum pro cardinalis Senensis salute, perhaps in 1488; his copyediting of the Politics of Aristotle translated by Leonardo Bruni and commented on by Thomas Aquinas and Ludovico Valenza, 1492) suggest Nimira was a curial humanist, dependent on the patronage of the Roman court and its cardinals. Nimira's sermon on the Passion, in the printed edition dedicated to the cardinal Bernardin López de Carvajal (d. 1523), bishop of Cartagena, Spain, displays Nimira's learning, his command of theological, philosophical and lyrical registers of expression, as well as oratorical elegance and a readiness to adopt Cicero's rhetorical models (sentences from speeches Against Verres 2, 5, For Publius Quinctius and For Aulus Cluentius, as well as the famous fragment of Gaius Gracchus reported by Cicero in On the Orator). The sermon has an introduction, two main parts, and a short closing prayer for God's mercy, especially to the Pope. The first part is philosophical (in Nimira's words, stemming from ingenium), the second part lyrical (arising from pietas). The philosophical part considers the necessity of Christ's Passion and death, touching also on the suffering of the good and the success of the evil in this world, while the lyrical part shows how Christ suffered and died. There is a prosopopoeia of the Virgin Mary, and the piercing of Christ's body is seen as the culmination of his suffering. The Jews (including Judas Iscariot) are presented as the main enemies, their faith as utterly wrong and depraved (confirmation is presented in a collage of biblical quotes), and the piercing of Christ's body is seen as their most terrible crime. The extremely strong antisemitic tone of Nimira's sermon might have been set partly by the tradition of the liturgical Improperia as part of the observance of the Passion, partly by the rhetorical need to contrast blame (of the Jews) and praise (of Christ), but possibly also by the antisemitic leanings in the circle of Nimira's acquaintances: these must have included Antonio Lollio, the secretary of the cardinal Todeschini Piccolomini, who had already in 1486 composed another highly antisemitic sermon before the Pope, and the Dominican Paolo Moneglia from Genova, who as the magister Sacri palatii chose Nimira as the preacher for the Good Friday of 1494; in April of the same year Moneglia was appointed inquisitor of the March of Genoa, which was under strain because of the influx of large numbers of Sephardic Jews and Marranos expelled from Spain and Sicily (later, in Rome in 1498, Moneglia led a spectacular auto da fé of several hundred Marranos in front of St. Peter's Basilica). The success of Nimira's sermon can be inferred from the privileges granted to his family by the cardinal Todeschini Piccolomini later in 1494, from the relatively large number of printed copies of Nimira's small book that survive today (32 in public libraries), from the record of Nimira's preaching in the diaries of Johannes Burchard, papal Master of Ceremonies, and from those who read Nimira's sermon during the Renaissance: we know that a copy of the sermon was owned by Marko Marulić, and that Giovanni Mercurio da Vipera (bishop of Bagnoregio 1523–1527) quoted extensively from the philosophical part of the sermon in his Contra a recto divini cultus itinere aberrantes (Rome 1522). We present an edition of Nimira's sermon following a digital facsimile of a copy in Bavarian State Library. In the edition, the abbreviations are expanded, orthographic variants of ae, u and i are removed, the punctuation is modernized, the spelling and capitalization standardized. Nimira's explicit and implicit textual sources are identified wherever possible.