Zeitschriftenartikel zum Thema „1652“

The purpose of the article is to summarize information about extraordinary natural phenomena that were recorded on Ukrainian lands during 1648 – 1657, and to clarify their impact on social and political activity, economy and worldview of the local population. The article identifies and analyzes reports in written sources about extraordinary natural phenomena on Ukrainian lands during the Bohdan Khmelnytsky Uprising 1648 – 1657, their periodicity and impact on the socio-economic life of the early modern agrarian society is clarified. Written information on the extent of damage and territories affected by natural disasters was found. The Bohdan Khmelnytsky Uprising took place against the background of the First Climatic Minimum of the Little Ice Age. The impact of extraordinary natural phenomena on a turbulent society that found itself in the conditions of war was particularly noticeable. During 1648 – 1657, on Ukrainian lands an extreme meteorological phenomena were recorded (dry spring of 1648, unstable winter of 1652 – 1653, severe winters of 1654 – 1655 and 1655 – 1656); extraordinary optical phenomena (the appearance of a comet and mysterious signs in the sky in 1647, the eclipse of the sun on August 2, 1654, as well as unconfirmed reports of the eclipse of the moon in 1648 and the eclipse of the sun in 1653); extraordinary hydrological phenomena (floods in Halychyna and Podillya in 1649, 1651, 1656); earthquake of 1650; annual invasions of locusts 1647 – 1652; epidemics of 1648, 1650, 1651, 1652, 1657. The influence of weather conditions on the course of battles and the course of the main campaigns of the Bohdan Khmelnytsky Uprising remains underestimated by scientists. The pattern of man’s perception of extraordinary natural phenomena in early modern period was expressed in the presence of irrational and rational approaches, which, we note, were not always mutually exclusive. Thus, the irrational approach is represented by the church and folk interpretation of a natural disaster, in particular, its nature. The latter, in particular, is characterized by great variability, a mystical worldview, and an appeal to archaic magical practices. In turn, the rational approach consists in attempts at a pre-scientific interpretation of the nature and patterns of the occurrence of cataclysms.

Resum: Aquest article analitza tres casos diferents jutjats i sentenciats per la Visita del General de Catalunya durant les primeres dècades del segle XVII. L’estudi d’aquests processos ens permet acostar-nos al paper que tingué la institució fiscalitzadora a l’hora de controlar els oficials públics de la Diputació del General de Catalunya, observar-ne el desplegament arreu del territori i, finalment, sintetitzar quin era l’estat de les relacions entre la Diputació del General i la Visita del General just acabada la Guerra dels Segadors. Els dos primers casos s’emmarquen dins de la Visita duta a terme entre 1629 i 1630 i, més concretament, en la inspecció forana que els delegats designats pel consistori central de Barcelona dugueren a terme a la col·lecta (i. e. demarcació fiscal) de Vilafranca de Conflent. El tercer cas té lloc pocs anys després del final de la Guerra dels Segadors (1640-1652), essent-ne els actors principals el consistori dels diputats i oïdors de comptes del trienni de 1654-1656 i els visitadors de 1654-1655. Paraules clau: Història institucional, Generalitat de Catalunya, Visita del General, Monarquia Hispànica, segle XVII. Abstract: This article studies three different cases judged by the Visita of the Generality of Catalonia within the first decades of the 17th Century. Thanks to its study, we can comprehend the role developed by the Visita in controlling the actions of the public officers of the Generality of Catalonia during the whole century, how the Generality was established around the territories of the Principality of Catalonia and the political relations amongst the major institutions in Catalonia in the mid-1650’s. The first two cases that we want to analyse took place during the inspection conducted by the Visita of the Generality of Catalonia of 1629-1630 within the tax district of Vilafranca de Conflent, which focused their attention on its public officers. The third case, which took place after the conclusion of the Reaper’s War (1640-1652), pays particular attention to the relation between the diputats and the oïdors de comptes of the Generality of Catalonia of 1654-1656, the commanders of the institution, and the visitadors of 1654-1655. Keywords: Institutional history, Generality of Catalonia, Visita of the Generality of Catalonia, Spanish Monarchy, 17th Century.

<p>Interrumpido el avance al norte de las misionesjesuíticas de la Tarahumara Alta en 1652 por la muerte del padre Corneille Beudin (1650) y la de Giacomo Antonio Basile (1652), se prosiguió la labor misionera en esa región el año de 1673. A este efecto fueron nombrados Fernando de Barrionuevol y Juan Manuel Gamboa.</p>

Summary. The purpose of the research is to study the depiction of the events of the Cossack-Polish war of 1652–1653 in the works of the Polish historians of the late 19th century till 1939, and in particular, the battles of Batoh, Zhvanets and Zhvanets Peace Treaty; to find out the peculiarities of scientific approaches and interpretations by researchers of historical events and the influences on them of the intellectual discourse of the epoch in which scientists lived and worked; to identify the specifics of scientists’ interpretations of the facts of the past through the prism of their political sympathies and belonging to various historical schools and trends; to analyze the diversity of scientists’ approaches to the causes and consequences of battles and attempts to establish understanding between the parties to the conflict; to consider general historians’ assessments of the significance of the events of 1652–1653 in the fate of the Polish and Ukrainian peoples. The methodology of the research is based on the general scientific principles of objectivity, historicism, objectivism, scientific pluralism, systematics and reliance on historical sources. Both general scientific (analysis, synthesis, induction and deduction, comparison) and special-historical methods were used in the work: historical-genetic, historical-comparative, problem-chronological, historical-systematic ones etc. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the fact that it was the first to study the image of the events of the Polish-Cossack wars of 1652–1653 in Polish historiography of the late 19th century till 1939 on the basis of a significant set of historiographical sources. The peculiarities of ideological influences of political concepts and historical schools on the assessments of Polish scientists of the battles near Batoh and Zhvanets, Zhvanets Peace Treaty were studied in the research as well. Conclusions. Polish historians of the late 19th century – 1939 saw the cause of the new Polish-Cossack war of 1652 in the unresolved conflict during the Brest campaign, when the military victory of the crown armies was lost due to aristocratic anarchy and the flexibility of Polish commanders during negotiations at Bila Tserkva. Researchers believed that the difficult situation of B. Khmelnytsky after the defeat in 1651 pushed him to start a new round of war. Scholars exposed the Battle of Batoh itself as one of the greatest national tragedies of the Polish people and described these events in mythologized images. Special emphasis was placed on the depiction of the execution of captured Polish soldiers by Cossacks and Tatars, which emphasized the barbaric nature of the Cossacks. Scholars saw the very defeat of the crown troops as evidence of the problems of the society of the Commonwealth, which was ruled by aristocratic anarchy. For Polish scholars, the battle of Batoh became a symbol of the transition of the Polish-Ukrainian confrontation to a new stage, characterized by a special intransigence of the parties, and was a cornerstone in the destruction of the ancient brotherhood of both peoples. In the bloody finale of the campaign of 1652, scholars saw the reason for the conclusion of the Ukrainian-Moscow Agreement of 1654, because after the Battle of Batoh a peaceful settlement of relations between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Cossacks was no longer possible. The campaign of Zhvanets of 1653 was studied by many Polish historians in the context of the Moldavian campaigns of the crown and Cossack troops and it was considered to have been their finale. In assessing the significance of the Battle of Zhvanets, Polish researchers tended to define it as a hopeless forced confrontation between the hostile parties, who were aware of their futile chances for a final victory in this armed confrontation. Thus, scholars saw the campaign of Zhvanets as a failure for both sides of the conflict, which only exacerbated the depletion of their human and material resources. Similarly, scholars viewed Zhvanets Peace Treaty as a mere temporary agreement that was to suspend the military campaign of 1653 and had no prospect of continuing it to truly resolve the differences between the Ukrainian and Polish peoples. According to scholars, the treaty was forced by agreements with the Tatars for King John Casimir, while for B. Khmelnytsky it was fictitious because of his already reached agreement with Moscow. Historians have paid attention to the gradual strengthening of the role of the Crimean Khan as an arbiter in relations between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Ukrainian Cossacks during 1652–1653, as well as the growth of his role in the geopolitical structure of Central and Eastern Europe.

The conflict between the clergy and the earliest Quakers can be better understood in the context of the ‘mainstream’ Puritan tradition. Analysis of the pamphlets interchanged is used to investigate what the participants in the confrontation were hoping to achieve, what background they were were drawing on and what theological issues arose. Analysis of the pamphlets interchanged shows that the Quakers gave priority to the abolition of the paid professional ministry, while the clergy argued that the Quaker movement should be suppressed. The Quakers claimed to be guided by the inward light of Christ, but they supported their arguments with biblical references. Neither group were willing to admit to a source for their methods of biblical interpretation, but the clergy were clearly drawing on the patristic tradition, to which Jean Calvin and William Perkins were indebted; the Quakers may have learned from earlier radical groups. Each group used theological arguments to support very different codes of conduct. The clergy claimed to be entitled to the support of the magistracy in suppressing Quakers, but in the confused circumstances of the Interregnum the extent to which such support was forthcoming varied from place to place. This article focuses on different approaches to practice arising from these theological differences.

AbstractSince the 1993 publication, in this journal, of an article about Philips Wouwerman (1619-1668), little new information about the artist has emerged. There have been some shorter publications and recently a monograph with a catalogue raisonné of Wouwerman. The 1993 article discussed roughly two dozen dated works. In addition there are a few references to dated paintings in old sale catalogues. Among these was a Calvary, known to be dated 1651. This painting has recently been rediscovered (fig. i). It is in excellent condition and forms an important addition to the artist's known work, not only because it is dated, but also because its biblical subject is unusual for the artist. The crucifixion itself is given a relatively modest place in the composition. It is possible that an engraving by Lucas van Leyden inspired Wouwerman when he painted the scene. Stylistically the painting fits with Wouwerman's other works from around 1652. Certain aspects of the composition are reminiscent of his earlier work, but the rendering of landscape and figures, and the use of colour arc characteristic of his canvases from the period 1652-1654, for example Peasants making merry in front of an inn of 1653, now in Minneapolis (fig. 2) and the Peasant wedding in the Samuel Collection at the Mansion House, London. The painting was probably sold at auction in Amsterdam in 1709, together with two other New Testament scenes by Wouwerman, and a Crucifixion of 1661 by Karel du Jardin. Hofstede de Groot noted that the latter work and Wouwerman's Calvary were paintcd in response to a competition announced by the Count of Wassenaar, but this seems untenable. If both pieces were indeed painted for one collector, it seems more likely that this was Jacob Cromhout from Amsterdam. The rediscovery of the Calvary adds important information to our picture of Wouwerman and reminds us that he was not just a successful painter of horse scenes. It also provided a helpful reference point for the chronology of his mostly undated work.

Abstract. This article explores documentary evidence of droughts in Sweden in the pre-instrumental period (1400–1800 CE). A database has been developed using contemporary sources, such as private and official correspondence letters, diaries, almanac notes, manorial accounts, and weather data compilations. The primary purpose is to utilize hitherto unused documentary data as an input for an index that can be useful for comparisons on a larger European scale. The survey shows that eight subperiods can be considered as having been particularly struck by summer droughts, causing concomitant harvest failures and having great social impacts in Sweden. This is the case with 1634–1639, 1652–1657, 1665–1670, 1677–1684, 1746–1750, 1757–1767, 1771–1776, and 1780–1783 CE. Within these subperiods, 1652 and 1657 stand out as particularly troublesome years. A number of data for dry summers are also found for the middle decades of the 15th century, the first decade of the 1500s, and the 1550s.

This essay analyzes the ideas, events and processes leading to the establishment of Patriarch Nikon’s Iverskii (1653) and Krestnyi (1656) monasteries and their endowment by Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich, highlighting the explanations supplied in the patriarch’s Gramota o Krestnom monastyre (1656) and Rai Myslennyi (1658). The article offers a more complex picture of Nikon’s patriarchate (1652-1666) by locating his monastery building program within the context of the concurrent reforms church texts and rituals and his efforts to help promote the reimaging of Russian dynastic and “national” myths through the use of print, iconography and symbolic replications. Iverskii and Krestnyi monasteries were part of a lager “scenarios” designed to (re)establish Russia’s claimed inheritance of the Byzantine legacy and fulfill its potential as “New Jerusalem,” while simultaneously enhancing Nikon’s and the Romanov dynasty’s image and legitimacy. Nikon developed an updated version of the “ancient” past, connected it directly with the reign of Aleksei Mikhailovich (1645-1676), embedded it in the reforms of the Russian Church, and employed it to support his vision of Russia’s future as a new Israel, represented concretely in his monastic foundations. By reinforcing Aleksei Mikhailovich’s image as the “new Constantine,” Nikon offered the tsar a premier role in the construction of a Russian “New Jerusalem” and produced opportunities for he and his family to endow it. Thus, the construction of Nikon’s monasteries offered the Romanovs perfect forums to actively build their own image as the legitimate heirs to the Byzantine imperial legacy and as the ultimate champions of Orthodoxy.

Political and economic circumstances in Europe and the Civil War (1642–1660) in England so reduced the funds of the English Benedictine nuns of Cambrai that they were unable to provide for the community. Against sound advice they went ahead with a filiation in Paris in 1651. Thanks to the contacts of Dame Clementia Cary and their chaplain, Dom Serenus Cressy, community life began in rented accommodation in 1652. They moved six times before being enabled to purchase their own property in 1664. This was made possible by the messieurs of Port Royal with whom the community continued to have close ties, although they never seem to have been tainted with Jansenism. Novices were always recruited from England and their dowries and associated gifts and bequests were essential, but the survival of several account books reveals the extent and variety of the support the community enjoyed in Paris.

The chapel dedicated to Beata Lucia in the cathedral of Narni has been attributed to Nicola Michetti on the basis of both style and the fact that he had worked elsewhere for the patron, Cardinal Giuseppe Sacripante. The configuration of the altar surround, however, is not typical of Michetti's work. That structure, in fact, is by Carlo Rainaldi and originally stood in the chapel of S. Antonio di Padova in SS. Apostoli in Rome. Sacripante purchased the altar surround in October 1711 and had it set up in Narni sometime between 1712 and 1714. Michetti's contribution to the design of the chapel, therefore, is limited to the revetment of the walls, the windows, and the transverse oval dome. Rainaldi's altar surround is an important find. Conceived in 1652 and constructed between 1654 and c. 1656, it is the immediate forerunner of his urbanistic masterpieces of the early 1660s, S. Maria di Montesanto and S. Maria dei Miracoli, on piazza del Popolo.

Hieronim Wierzbowski herbu Jastrzębiec był starostą szadkowskim w latach 1655–1665. Dzięki monarszej protekcji piął się po szczeblach kariery urzędniczej, od chorążego większego łęczyckiego (1648–1652), do wojewody sieradzkiego (1661–1665). Po śmierci siostry Anny Nadolskiej z Wierzbowskich został w 1660 r. dziedzicem Łasku. W 1664 r. przewodniczył w Zwirowiczach na Białorusi polskiej delegacji na rokowania pokojowe z Rosją. Zmarł w Warszawie 1 maja 1665 r. Został pochowany w rodzinnej krypcie grobowej w kościele pw. św. Jakuba w Szadku.

Se aportan en el presente estudio dos trazas inéditas para la iglesia del Hospital de la Misericordia de Ávila firmadas por el arquitecto jesuita Pedro Mato. Según se desprende de la documentación, debió de realizarlas hacia los años 1652-1654. Tras no poder llevarse a cabo por problemas de financiación, se resolvió realizar un proyecto más reducido, aunque en buena medida basado en el de Mato, firmado por el arquitecto Miguel del Carpio, del que también se aporta la traza.

Por medio del hallazgo del inventario, tasación y almoneda de bienes del pintor Francisco de Palacios (h. 1622-1652), alumno de Diego Velázquez, damos a conocer nuevos aspectos de su vida y de su actividad profesional. Destaca de su colección una naturaleza muerta del gran especialista holandés Willem Claesz. Heda, que nos permite suponer el importante influjo que debió ejercer en él. Éste se refleja en sus dos conocidas pinturas de la colección Harrach, considerados por la historiografía como innovadores dentro del género en España.

AbstractA century ago the Rijksprentenkabinet in Amsterdam acquired a 19th-century album containing 56 rapid sketches in black chalk after 17th-century, mostly Dutch paintings (Note 1). The sketches, which are numberd, have the names of the painters wrillen on them in the artist's own hand. They were first published in 1895 (Note 2) by E. W. Moes, who concluded that they were by a Delft artist, and C. Hofstede de Groot, who convincingly attributed them to Leonaert Bramer (1596-1674) and identified two of the paintings in question. Since then various other paintings have been identified (Notes 5, 7, 8, 11 and 12), notably by A. Blankert, who has made his findings available for the present publication, and other drawings belonging to the series have been found, Frits Lugt leading the way here (Notes 9 and 10). The present study, the first to be undertaken in depth since 1895, has brought to light three more sketches after paintings by Bramer himself (cat. nos.9-11) and one probably after Wouwerman (cat. no.65), while seven more paintings have been identified and one of the sketches without a name has proved to be after a painting by Antonio Maria Viani. Two lists of the sketches so far found are given here: that of State I reproduces the original order, that of State II gives the artists in alphabetical order as they appear in the catalogue published here. These sketches are of exceptional documentary value, since they have not only given us the names of some previously unknown painters, such as M. de Berch, J. Garbaal, P. Monincx and A. Pick, but they have also revealed unexpected aspects of some well-known ones, e.g. a still life by P. van Groenewegen, a Dutch landscape by J.B. Weenix and a genre piece of a very Utrecht character by L. de Jongh. Moreover, the sketches afford a fine glimpse of collecting in Holland in the 17th century, a subject otherwise known uirtually only from non-visual documents. On the back of one of the drawings (cat. no.6) appears a list of the owners of the pictures sketched (Fig. I), possibly written by Bramer himself. This is reproduced here in an amplified version of Moes' transcription, with one completely new name yielded by the present study. The styles given in the list suggest that the men concerned appear in it in order of their social standing. The first, Simon Graswinckel (c.1611-71), was a member of a wealthy Delft family of brewers and regents. He owned a great deal of property in and around Delft, but is reported by his brothers-in-law to have spent his time in gaming-houses and taverns (Note 30). His will of 1663 is known, but no paintings are mentioned in it. The second man on the list was probably a Van Beresteijn, another family from the wealthy upper echelons of Delft society. His precise identity came to light in a roundabout way via the inventory of 28 February 1652 of Adriaen van Vredenburg, in which are listed a number of paintings that were very probably sketched by Bramer (Note 32), notably one of Jezebel, this mention and Bramer's sketch being virtually unique indications of this subject in Dutch 17th-century painting. Vredenburg does not appear in the list of owners of the paintings, but on his death his property went to his stepdaughter, whose guardian he had been and who married Theodorus van Beresteijn in November 1652. Antonie van Bronchorst is known only from the commission he gave Bramer in 1653 to painl frescoes in his house (Note 34), while Capitein van der Bon..., Nicolaas van der Werch and Johan Persijn have not yet been traced in the Delft archives. Willem de Langue (1599-1666), on the other hand, was a lawyer and a connoisseur of paintings unparalleled in Delft in the mid 17th century (Note 36). He himself made the inventories of the paintings in important estates and he numbered many artists among his clientele (Note 37). Portraits of him and his wife by Van Vliet are known (Note 38), while he also appears as an officer in a militia piece of 1648 by Jacob Willemsz Delff (Fig. 2). Abraham de Cooge (before 1600-after 1680) was the most versatile person in the list, being an engraver, painter, dealer in tulip bulbs, organs and paintings and pottery manufacturer (Note 39). He was registered in the Guild of St. Luke in Delft in 1632 and two paintings by him are known (Note 40). In 1646 Leonaerl Bramer made illustrations to the picaresque novel Lazarilo de Tormes for him (Note 17). In the 1650's De Cooge was increasingly involved in art-dealing and that on no small scale. He also had representatives in Antwerp, so was probably among the biggest art-dealers in the Northern Netherlands. Adam Pick (c. 1622-before 1666) enrolled in the Guild of St. Luke in Delft in 1642 (Note 43) and was active in the town up to the early 1650's as a painter of landscapes, genre pieces and still lifes (Fig.3) and also as the keeper of the Toelast ( Wine Cask) inn. He probably moved to Leiden, where he is mentioned in 1654 as a vintner, in 1653, perhaps as a consequence of the death of his first wife in 1652, f or he certainly sold the inn that year. The inventory of their joint property drawn up in 1653 includes a list of paintings, which tally with nos.8(?) -98 in the State I list. Only one painting by Pick is known (Fig.3), plus the sketch by Bramer after another (cat. no.44). Reinier Jansz Vermeer (1591-1652, Note 46), the father of Johannes, started out as a silk weaver, but appears in 1629 as an innkeeper and in 1631 was registered in the Guild of St. Luke in Delft as an art-dealer. From then on he came into frequent contact with local painters, Bramer included, but his dealing was probably only a sideline of his innkeeping. He died in October 1652. The last owner on the list is Bramer himself, who returned to Delft in 1628 after a lengthy period in France and Italy (1614-27, Note 49). He played a leading part in the Guild of St. Luke and was among the most successful painters in Delft around the middle of the 17th century. Later in life, however, he was often in financial difficulties (Note 50). He was one of the very few Dutch fresco painters (Note 51), as well as a painter of history and genre pieces and a prolific draughtsman and illustrator (Note 52), while just one document provides evidence of his dealing in paintirtgs (Note 54). The presence of works by Bramer himself among the sketches seems to rule out the theory that he made them as an aide mémoire for his own use (Note 15), while their very rapid character makes it unlikely that they were produced for one of the owners as an art-object. It also seems highly improbable that the collectors/owners would have wanted their collections of paintings sketched together in one book. The most acceptable suggestion appears to be that they were made in connection with a forthcoming sale of pictures, particularly as three of the owners listed were involved in art-dealing, while in the cases of Vermeer, Pick and Van Beresteijn there was every reason for paintings from their collections being sold around the end of 1652 or beginning of 1653: Vermeer's death left his family in dire financial straits, Pick will probably have sold his pictures (as he did his inn) before moving to Leiden and Van Beresteijn will probably have wanted to realize some money on his wife's inheritance. Thus the dates of Vermeer's burial in October 1652 and Pick's inventory of March 1653 would seem to provide crucial clues to the dating of the sketches, which were probably made in rapid succession, to judge from the unity of style, despite the great diversity of the models, and the straightforward consecutive numbering. Presumably the intention was to bring these pictures from Delft collections together for a sale (Note 18) and Bramer was commissioned to make sketches in advance (or even to make a certain selection, Note 19) possibly to give an idea of what was on offer to collectors or dealers elsewhere (which might explain the 'inking in' of the painters' names originally written in chalk on five of the drawings, cat. nos. 17, 35, 36, 47 and 64). Bramer made such chalk inscriptions on ten of the drawings (Note 20), probably while sketching them. Afterwards he inscribed and numbered all of them in ink (Note 5). Notes in another 17th-century hand appear on cat. nos.22 and 24. The sheets may all have been of the same size originally, but have since been cut down, often wholly or partly along the framing lines around the sketch. This may well have been done by Bramer himsef or the dealer he made them for. Just over half of them remained together and were stuck into the present album in the 19th century. There are no portraits among the sketches and only two stll lifes and two marine paintings, but eleven Italianate landscapes and 22 history paintings. Thus the subjects differ somewhat from the categories arrived at by Montiasfor mid 17th-century Delft from his study of inventories (Note 56). The preference for history pieces is probably to be explained by the high social standing of the owners. The majority of the pictures were very modern for that time and of the 41 artists, 28 were still alive in 1652-3 and eight of them were only 35 or younger. Bramer's material contradicts Montlas' conclusion that Delft collectors showed a preference for local painters (Note 58), whose work amounted to 40-50% of that listed in the inventories. Of Bramer's 41 painters, only thirteen were from Delft (Note 59) and only five are found in Montias' list of the most common painters in Delft inventories. Thus the pictures sketched by Bramer fall outside the 'normal Delft pattern' and evince a less provincial taste. However, the collectors were still not among the leading figures of their day in this field by comparison with, for example, Boudewijn de Man of Delft (Note 62), whose collection included works by Goltzius, Bloemaert, Rubens, Rembrandt and Ter Brugghen in 1644. The pictures sketched by Bramer were presumably to be brought together for public auction and the sketches may very probably have been made with an eye to the sale catalogue. While sale catalogues are known in the second half of the 17th century, they only relate to very important collections, which makes these sketches very unusual as a documentation of a sale of pictures from average well-to-do collectors and dealers. The collection of sketches as such certainly has no parallel at this period (Note 64).

O objetivo deste trabalho consiste em apresentar algumas mudanças promovidas por Hobbes entre Elementos da Lei e as edições inglesas de Leviatã e De Corpore no que diz respeito à sua teoria da linguagem. Sustenta-se que não é possível conceber uma unidade entre todas as obras supracitadas e que De Corpore contém a versão final da teoria da linguagem hobbesiana; e sugere-se que as alterações promovidas se devem, ao menos em parte, às críticas que Descartes promove nas respostas às Terceiras Objeções e à adoção, a partir de 1651, da geometria, enquanto método, na teoria da linguagem.

An Englishman in-between Two Worlds: Robert Bargrave’s Travel through East-Central Europe, 1652-1653 The article discusses a journey of a young Englishman Robert Bargrave (1628-1661), who in the early 1650s travelled from Constantinople to England. The travel diary recording this journey reflects Bargrave’s keen interest in the customs, everyday life and languages as well as natural conditions and economy of the places he visited and shows that he tried to place it in a wider context. As a result, closer analysis of this text gives us an excellent opportunity to examine the picture of East -Central Europe as seen by a mid-seventeenth century Englishman and the way he perceived it in relation to both the Ottoman Empire and Western Europe.