Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  history of Polish science
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
A study by Stanisław Hubert titled The Partition and Rebirth of the Republic of Poland (Rozbiory i Odrodzenie Rzeczypospolitej) appeared in print in 1937 in Lvov. The author, born in Wadowice and a pupil of Ludwik Ehrlich, recalled in his book the concept of application of the ius postliminiiprinciple originating in Roman law, as a basis of the principle of restitution in force in the law of nations (today known as international law) and postulated its application to the interpretation of the issue of rebuilding the Republic of Poland in 1918. The aim of the present essay is a critical analysis of the main propositions and arguments of Hubert’s study. Although it did not resonate very broadly in the mainstream of the science of international law in Poland, some of the themes discussed in it appeared in the propaganda campaigns justifying Poland’s claims relevant to regained independence and also in the assessment of past events, especially the history of Polish lands in the 19thcentury. The propaganda arguments raised by Hubert can also be discerned in the discourse of other central European countries. The main research problem of the essay is to show that the arguments presented by S. Hubert were largely grounded in historical myths selected in such a way as to appear as indisputable ‘hard’ facts. The basic method of the present study is identification of Hubert’s major propositions and their critical assessment from the perspective of the science of the history of law in the 21stcentury. Such an approach allows to demonstrate which of his propositions stood the test of time and which can only be deemed as pure propaganda discourse.
PL
Celem niniejszego artykułu jest ukazanie stanowiska księdza Benedykta Joachima Chmielowskiego (1700-1763) wobec dogmatu przedmurza, z perspektywy mniej lub bardziej domniemanej megalomanii i ksenofobii. Dokonano próby odpowiedzi na szereg istotnych pytań. Czy Nowe Ateny należy uznać za kolejny megalomański pean na cześć sarmackiej ojczyzny? Czy w stosunku do sąsiadów Chmielowski kieruje się serią stereotypów, a swą polskość opiera na bezkrytycznym poczuciu wyższości? Wreszcie, jak wygląda jego wizja mitu Polski jako przedmurza? Nowe Ateny uznawane są za pierwszą polską encyklopedię powszechną sensu stricto (I wydanie 1745 r.). Szczególny nacisk kładł autor na elementy kuriozalne, co było typowe dla barokowej nauki. Podczas zaborów dzieło stało się ofiarą krzywdzącej czarnej legendy. Chmielowski gloryfikuje rolę Polski jako państwa stojącego na straży cywilizacji łacińskiej. Swój kraj nazywa szumnie „ojczyzną świętych”. Aczkolwiek jego dzieło dalekie jest od megalomanii i bezkrytycznego samouwielbienia. Przepełnione jest natomiast autentyczną żarliwą wiarą oraz gorącym patriotyzmem. Pomimo narodowej dumy i braku kompleksów, autor potrafi być krytyczny wobec swoich rodaków a obiektywny wobec sąsiednich nacji. Za rozbudzanie patriotyzmu, uczuć narodowych i religijnych – poza krzewieniem wiedzy – należy się autorowi wdzięczna pamięć następnych pokoleń. Sama popularyzacja mitu przedmurza powinna być poczytywana zaś jako znaczący wkład w budowanie polskiej tożsamości narodowej.
EN
The main goal of this article is to present the views of Rev. Benedict Joachim Chmielowski (1700-1763) towards the myth of Poland as bulwark of Christianity, from the perspective of more or less implied megalomania and xenophobia. Attempts have been made to answer a number of important questions. Should ‘New Athens’ be considered as another megalomaniac affirmation in honor of the so-called “Sarmatian” homeland? Is Chmielowski guided by a stereotypes towards Polish neighbors and is his Polishness based on an uncritical sense of superiority? Finally, what is his vision of the myth of “antemurale”? Chmielowski’s famous work – ‘New Athens’ – is considered to be the first Polish encyclopedia (first edition in 1745). Particular emphasis was put on the curiosities, which was typical for pre-Enlightenment science. After the Partitions of Poland (1795), POLSKA JAKO „ANTEMURALE” I „OJCZYZNA ŚWIĘTYCH” 199 encyclopedia became a victim of a black legend. Chmielowski glorifies the role of Poland as a state guarding the Christian civilization. He also called his country “homeland of saints”. Although his work is far from megalomania and uncritical national selfsatisfaction. It is filled with authentic religious faith and fervent patriotism. Despite the national pride and lack of complexes, the author is able to be critical for his compatriots and objective towards his neighbors and other European nations as well. For the awakening of patriotism, national and religious feelings – aside from the propagation of knowledge – the author should have the grateful memory of the next generations. The popularization of the myth of Poland as the bulwark itself should be also considered as a significant contribution for the building of Polish national identity.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.