Kauza Remedius Prutký aneb O stylu vedení odborné debaty)
THE CASE 'REMEDIUS PRUTKY' OR ON THE STANDARDS OF A SCHOLARLY DEBATE
Languages of publication
This paper is a polemic reaction to the article by Marek Dospel, published in the Prazske egyptologicke studie ('The Prague Studies in Egyptology') VI, 2009. First of all, the author refutes Dospel's invectives against his lecture delivered six years ago and later published as 'Sine experientia nihil sufficienter sciri potest.' Die Welt der Antike im Itinerarium von Remedius Prutky, 1713-1770, in: Listy filologicke 128, 1-2, 2005, pp. 65-74, which is criticized by Dospel i.a. because of its allegedly 'uncritical attitude toward the analyzed text of the Itinerarium' written by a Franciscan missionary Remedius Prutky (1713-1770). Further on, it summarizes the author's research on the first volume of the Itinerarium itself. A detailed comparison of this work, which was pursued by the author after he had edited and translated some parts of Remedius Prutky's work, with the itinerary written by Jakub Rimar of Kromeriz (1682-1755), has revealed some new and surprising facts providing a new impetus for a further research. A close dependence of both works was discovered: the treatise by Rimar was used by Prutky as a pretext, and Prutky used it not only for his own narrative chapters on Egypt and its vicinity, but also for the passages written in rather subjective tone. Prutky's work, being a special kind of metatext, thus represents a particular example of using the sources without any analogy in the older travel books of Bohemian origin. It turned out that these conclusions which followed from a long-lasting preparatory research and which were published before the critique of Dospel, were not taken into account by Dospel at all, although he had a possibility to get acquainted with them.
Publication order reference
CEJSH db identifier