Journal articles on the topic 'Emperors – Succession – Rome'

Abstract Growing generals: the military representation of the child-emperors Gratian and Honorius on coins and in panegyricBetween 367 and 455 the Roman empire witnessed a series of children being elevated to the imperial throne. Meaghan McEvoy (2010; 2013) has convincingly shown that in the successive reigns of these child-emperors the imperial office was transformed from being active and military to being far more passive and ceremonial. Powerful generals were to take over the emperor’s military functions, while the young ruler came to fulfil an increasingly religious and ceremonial role. This article looks into the early phase of this transformation by investigating how the need for military leadership was dealt with in the cases of the child-emperors Gratian (r. 367-383) and Honorius (r. 393-423). A substantial amount of contemporary source material has survived from their reigns in the form of panegyrics and coinage. A systematic analysis of these sources relating to the various stages of their reigns shows that these emperors still had to live up to traditional expectations, at least in terms of their self-representation, and thus play the part of strong military leaders.

AbstractThis paper will explore the significant role appropriated objects played in Ottonian artistic production through a close examination of the Ambo of Henry II. Created by the last Ottonian emperor for the Palace Chapel at Aachen between 1002 and 1014, the Ambo of Henry II abounds with spolia. I will argue that the spolia reused on the Ambo of Henry II presented an innovative statement of Henry II's political, economic, and cultural agenda. The spolia from ancient Rome and contemporary Byzantium portrayed Henry II as the political successor to an illustrious Roman past, and as an equal to the Byzantine emperors in the East. The luxury objects reused on the Ambo also served as commodities whose symbolic value increased dramatically when they were taken out of economic circulation and used on this precious artwork. Finally, the Islamic and Byzantine spolia on the Ambo allowed Henry II to define himself and his Western Roman Empire in terms of an Other, associating his rule with the power, prestige, and sophistication of contemporary and competitive foreign cultures.

According to Renan, the day of Marcus Aurelius’ death could be considered as the decisive moment in the downfall of the ancient civilization. He, thus, wonders: “If Marcus Aurelius, the unique emperor-philosopher, did not succeed in saving the world, who else, then, could have saved it?” He notes that the emperor’s death was followed by the succession to the throne of his corrupted son, Commodus, and his friends, who all were all ignorant. Renan observes that the emperor’s kindness could not have prevented the unfortunate fate that befell the Roman Empire after his death. What we have here is the perennial problem, already established in Plato, regarding the role of the philosopher-king in establishing a good state and educating good citizens. However, the case of Marcus Aurelius, as demonstrated by Renan in his book, shows the inability of philosophy to serve the real needs, which ultimately leads to disastrous and irreparable consequences. The present paper attempts to reconstruct the reasons for the unsuccessful application of philosophy, especially the philosophy of the Hellenistic era, to the administrative system of the Roman Empire. It is argued that the failure is mainly due to political, religious and cultural problems.

According to Renan, the day of Marcus Aurelius’ death could be considered as the decisive moment in the downfall of the ancient civilization. He, thus, wonders: “If Marcus Aurelius, the unique emperor-philosopher, did not succeed in saving the world, who else, then, could have saved it?” He notes that the emperor’s death was followed by the succession to the throne of his corrupted son, Commodus, and his friends, who all were all ignorant. Renan observes that the emperor’s kindness could not have prevented the unfortunate fate that befell the Roman Empire after his death. What we have here is the perennial problem, already established in Plato, regarding the role of the philosopher-king in establishing a good state and educating good citizens. However, the case of Marcus Aurelius, as demonstrated by Renan in his book, shows the inability of philosophy to serve the real needs, which ultimately leads to disastrous and irreparable consequences. The present paper attempts to reconstruct the reasons for the unsuccessful application of philosophy, especially the philosophy of the Hellenistic era, to the administrative system of the Roman Empire. It is argued that the failure is mainly due to political, religious and cultural problems.

In Greece, as in the E Mediterranean as a whole, the ruler-cult was well established during the Hellenistic period, but whereas in the Attalid, Seleucid and Ptolemaic kingdoms the same dynasty had ruled for centuries and the cult of the living ruler and the dynastic cult were stable institutions, the ruler-cult in Greece, though at first part of the Macedonian kingdom, was affected by the series of rulers of different dynasties who followed one another in rapid succession. This led to a large number of dedications for and offerings by Hellenistic rulers in Greece. Roman Republican leaders and figures were also subject to specific honours in Greece from an early stage. Compared to the excesses of rulers such as Demetrios Poliorcetes, the well-organized and at first rather modest cult for the Roman emperors must have seemed a distinct improvement. After the behaviour of previous Roman leaders the Greeks were probably relieved at Augustus's attitude towards cultic honours, and it is no surprise that the imperial cult was widely diffused in Greece, as literary sources and inscriptions show. Almost every city must have had one or more places for the worship of the emperors and their families, but archaeological evidence for the cult has remained rather slim and the only two attested Sebasteia or Kaisareia (at Gytheion and Messene) are known only from inscriptions. The Metroon at Olympia is the only specific building in which an imperial cult is attested on good archaeological evidence. Statues of an emperor and perhaps a personification of Roma found at Thessaloniki point to a Sebasteion there. Athens must have had more than one building where the emperor was worshipped. At Beroia a provincial sanctuary for the imperial cult of Macedonia has been posited. Yet even at the Roman colony of Corinth, the location of the temple for the imperial cult is far from clear, all of which underlines the interest of a building at Eretria which we identify with the municipal temple for the imperial cult.

The preserved presentations of the Byzantine basileis of the XIII, XIV and XV centuries show that the creators of the late Byzantine monarchical portraits adhered to certain traditional rules when selecting the personages from the ruling house, which they were to portray. Defining which figures were to be depicted in the portrayal of power depended to a large extent on the changing circumstances and events in the imperial house. However, at the same time this was also based on a significantly more profound conception that rested on principles that had evolved in the course of a long history. The understanding of who could personify power was refracted through the prism of ideology and reflected in carefully shaped iconographic matrices. The omission of the images of certain members of the ruler's house, just as much as their inclusion, carried a certain meaning, as did the hierarchical arrangement of those who were portrayed. Generally speaking, this depended on the degree of their kinship with the sovereign, their sex, titles or dignities, and the connection of the members of the dynasty with the emperor's particular marriage. Therefore, one can rather clearly distinguish certain constants, if not rules, according to which some figures were omitted and others included, and, the specific changes that occurred from the end of the Middle Byzantine period till the fall of the Empire. The development of a unique kind of feudalism played a particular role in the specific characteristics in determining who was to appear in the monarchical portraits of the Palaiologan epoch in Byzantium and the states in its neighbourhood. As the preserved portrait ensembles and known written testimonies indicate, we find the images of the rulers' daughters did not feature in presentations of the 'emperors of the Romans' from the Late Byzantine period. In the Palaiologan epoch, they did not participate in the governing of the state nor were they taken into consideration in plans for succession to the throne. In the earlier period of Byzantine history, slightly different circumstances and views prevailed. That is why, owing to some specific circumstances, the emperor's daughters were sometimes depicted in the portraits of the imperial family. However, from the time of the Komnenoi when the medieval dynastic awareness finally asserted itself in Byzantium, the images of the emperor's female progeny practically vanished from the pictures of those who wielded supreme authority. The custom of omitting the figures of the emperors' daughters from the presentations of the ruling houses was also accepted and rather strictly obeyed for a long time in the portraiture of the neighbouring Orthodox Christian countries. In Serbia, this was disregarded only till just before the state collapsed, while in Bulgaria, exceptions to this rule were observed a little earlier. This was the result of accepting the ideological and iconographic models that were distinctive for the nobility, at the height of the feudal period. The images of daughters-in-law had always been omitted even more consistently than in the case of the figures of daughters in the monarchical presentations of the Byzantine and other Orthodox Christian rulers. As a rule, they were not depicted close to the image of the sovereign, even when they were the wives of the proclaimed and even crowned co-rulers, and successors to the throne. It is very probable that this custom survived into the Palaiologan era even though there are some signs that in Byzantium, this rule may have been disregarded in some cases. The figures of sovereigns' wives and sons had a significantly different status from the images of daughters and daughters-in-law. As a rule, they played an essential and customary role in the monarchical presentation because the rulers' wives and male successors had a stake in authority, in its transfer and succession. Still, it often happened that even wives and sons were omitted from such a presentation - all or some of them. The principle of presenting the individual portraits of emperors was inaugurated in early Byzantium and later, was continually applied even when depicting rulers who were married and had numerous offspring. Different factors could have influenced the decision to depict the monarch alone, even trivial factors. Nonetheless, when insisting on the individual image of the emperor, the ideology upon which this image was based was crucial. The separate portrait of the supreme ruler best explained the iconic essence of monarchical power as a reflection of the King of Heaven and brought to the forefront the exclusivity of the emperor's mimetic collusion with the divine source of power. That is why such a presentation was able to represent the idea and the authority of all earthly majesty through the image of one anointed man. The introduction in the monarchical portrait of the ruler's sons, who were not crowned or proclaimed co-emperors, is a very interesting phenomenon that was characteristic of monumental and miniature painting in the Palaiologan epoch. In the Middle Byzantine period, only those male descendents, who had the status of co-rulers and were crowned, were depicted next to the imperial sovereign. The custom of including uncrowned sons and ruler's sons who had not been initiated in the affairs of state in the presentation of the ruler's house can also be observed from the second half of the XIII to the middle of the XV century in Serbia. It appears that this custom also left traces even in Bulgarian art. On the other hand, the images of the ruler's sons, who had not received the imperial crown, were omitted in the presentations on coins dating from the Palaiologan epoch. Such action was fully in keeping with ancient Byzantine customs in defining the monetary image of authority. An exception could be only one type of coin that many believe to have been produced in the time of Andronikos III, which bore the image of the very young emperor's son, John. Nevertheless, it is more probable that this coin came into being during the regency period, after Andronikos' death in 1341 and the coronation of John V. A little later in the Palaiologan era, however the image of the co-ruler was omitted in the Byzantine monetary image of authority even when he was crowned and bore the title of autokrator. Apparently, the joint presentations of the rulers and co-rulers disappeared completely from Byzantine coins, after the final rupture between John V Palaiologos and John VI Kantakouzenos. In fact, not one of the types of coins bearing the joint images of the ruler and co-ruler has been reliably attributed and classified in this period. Meanwhile, it is important to note that the suppression of the joint presentation of the emperor and co-emperor on Byzantine coins occurred parallel to the unusual appearance of separate co-ruler coins. Separate coins were produced simultaneously by John V and Matthew Kantakouzenos, John V and Andronikos IV, Manuel II and John VII. The production of such coins reflected the complicated political circumstances in the Empire. The situation was affected not only by clashes between the rulers and the co-rulers but also by the periodical assumption of supreme power by the co-rulers, as well as by the later development of Byzantine feudalism. Circumstances characteristic of the later period in Byzantium, which was caught up in a particular process of feudalisation, changed the customs and led to unusual iconographic solutions even in other media. An illustrative example of this is the well-known ivory pixis, which is kept in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection in Washington. Displayed on it, despite the customs of long ago, are the two separate imperial families of John VII, and Manuel II, one beside the other. In iconographic terms, this looks less like a presentation of co-rulership and more like a presentation of almost parallel rules. In the Late Byzantine epoch, another peculiarity is that the image of the augusta is only encountered in exceptional circumstances on coins of the Byzantine Empire. Among the numerous empresses from the Palaiologan dynasty, only Anne of Savoy was depicted on coins and this seems to be just from the moment when she became the regent. Meanwhile, on the presentations of the rulers of the Serbian and Bulgarian states, one can follow the iconographic consequences of the dynastic complications caused by the remarriages of the rulers. The monarchical presentations from the period of the kings Milutin and Stefan Decanski, or the emperor John Alexander, show that it was quite hard to assemble the figures of the new wives of the said rulers and the sons of those same rulers from their earlier marriages, who were heirs to the throne near the figure of the state's sovereign ruler. If one desired to present a clear dynastic situation, those persons ruled each other out. Sometimes, the ruler's son from a previous marriage took precedence, while in another case the emphasis was on the new queen and her offspring.

AbstractAlexander the Great and his legacy suffuse The Prince, a fact that has received little attention. Machiavelli uses Alexander to illustrate the form of rule in which one is lord and all others are slaves. In recounting the Roman Republic's conquest of Greece, Machiavelli treats Alexander's vanquished successors. Alexander's legacy enters Rome itself, igniting in Romans the desire to subject the world to sole preeminence. According to Machiavelli, Caesar imitated Alexander, and Caesar overturned the republic, initiating the rule of one in Rome. Caesar had his own Roman successors, the emperors who ruled under his name. Rome succeeded in imposing the rule of one on Europe. That form of rule exists in Machiavelli's times with the states of the Turk and the Sultan as well as with the papacy in a limited respect. Something of the old Rome and its Alexandrian aspirations persists in Christian Rome.

The article focuses on the principles and mechanisms of the supreme power transition from one ruler of the Roman Empire to another one and on Theodosius’ the Great accession to power. Hereditary monarchy principle was not always basic in the history of imperial Rome in spite of dynasties. Actually, throughout the era of the Empire, the army proclaimed each new emperor; also, the recognition of the legal heir required the soldiers’ approval. An attempt to create an artificial mechanism, presented by the system of tetrarchy, failed, therefore after Constantine the supreme power transition by hereditary principle seemed to be affirmed. However, the sudden death of Julian, who had no heirs, made the Empire return to the choice of emperor by the army. It led to the establishment of the Valentinian dynasty. After the Battle of Adrianople and the death of the eastern emperor Valens, the power succession problem was resolved in an unexpected way: Spaniard Theodosius, retired military commander was proclaimed the new emperor and he was the third one, because two Augusti from the Valentinian dynasty had already existed. The circumstances of his rise and accession to power are differently covered in the sources and do not allow researches to make firm conclusions about how it actually happened. As is often the case in history, not the only one factor could play a role, but their combination and intermingle. Theodosius had founded a dynasty, which remained in power for almost a century and which could be considered the last dynasty of the Roman Empire that reigned both in western and eastern parts of the Roman Empire.

This article explores the degree to which the rule and style of the bishops of Rome after the deposition of the last Roman emperor in the West in 476 had any imperial elements, in the light of the evidence contained within the Liber pontificalis. Papal rule in Rome was cast as a replacement of imperial rule in religious matters, an opportunity for the bishop to assume political responsibility and also a deliberate emulation of imperial behaviour. This is manifest above all in the textual record in the Liber pontificalis of the papal embellishment of Rome, and in the physical evidence of the extant basilicas of the city. The deliberately imperial elements of papal self-presentation and the importance of Rome's primacy, apostolic succession and orthodoxy, all articulated so emphatically within the Liber pontificalis, indicate the multitude of strands by which the papacy wove the fabric of its own imperium or power.

Elector Maximilian II Emanuel of Bavaria’s marriage to Archduchess Maria Antonia of Austria gave him a central role in the complex context of Charles II of Spain’s succession. To achieve his main goals and, ultimately, the Spanish succession for his son Joseph Ferdinand, the elector needed to have a strong diplomatic network at Madrid’s court that could defend his interests. But Bavaria had not had an important presence in the court of the Spanish Monarchy before, so the elector and his main collaborators needed to build a powerful network in the court of Madrid, unconnected to Emperor Leopold I, practically from the ground up. To do it, the elector sent to Madrid in 1695 one of his most treasured diplomats, Pierre, baron of Bertier. In the following pages, we will analyze the background of the diplomatic relationship between Bavaria and the Spanish Monarchy before Charles II’s reign, how the elector’s envoys communicated with the members of a court where there were almost no precedents whatsoever of a steady presence of Bavarian ambassadors and how they built a very important network for their master with the help of the queen mother, Mariana of Austria.

Following the death of Emperor Henry VI on September 28th 1197 in Messina, Sicily, a dispute arose over the accession to the throne of the Holy Roman Empire. A large opposition to the Staufer dynasty, centred around the “kingmaker” Adolf I of Altena, the Archbishop of Cologne, refused to accept Frederick, the deceased emperor`s two-year-old son, as successor. As a result of this resistance, Philip, Henry VI’s brother and Duke of Swabia, declared his candidacy for the Roman-German throne. His election by the pro-Staufer party in Mühlhausen on March 8th 1198 finally led to his coronation in Mainz half a year later. Meanwhile, the anti-Staufer group of nobles searched for their own suitable counter-candidate. Before the election in Cologne on June 9th 1198 of Otto of Poitou, the son of the Welf Henry the Lion and the nephew of English king Richard Lionheart, Adolf of Altena looked for other alternatives. Besides Duke Bernhard of Saxony, who relinquished his candidacy fairly early on, another who took on this role was Berthold of Zähringen. The following essay will explore his candidacy.

Riassunto: Antinoo rappresenta un tema caro alla let­teratura archeologica, anche recente, a causa del ruolo che il giovane riveste per Adriano, ma anche per la fascinazione che la sua bellez­za continua a esercitare. La parabola dei suoi ritratti ne riflette una di natura ideologica più complessa, che si può leggere come una vera e propria elaborazione dell’iconografia, cui co­rrisponde la progressiva costruzione del cul­to del Bitinico. Il presente articolo analizzerà contemporaneamente le informazioni offerte dalle fonti storiche su Adriano, quelle ricava­te dai testi geroglifici dell’obelisco del Pincio a Roma e le testimonianze poetiche trádite, sullo sfondo dell’ordinamento della città di Antinoupolis, attraverso le quali si narra parte del mito della morte e della successiva diviniz­zazione del giovane Antinoo.Abstract: Antinous is a subject loved by the archae­ological literature, even recent, due to the role that the young man plays for Hadrian, but also for the continuous fascination that his beauty inspires. The series of portraits reflects a sequence of a more complex ide­ological nature, which can be read as a true elaboration of iconography, corresponding to the progressive construction of the cult of the young Bitinic. The article will analyze the informations provided by the historical sources on Hadrian, by the hieroglyphic texts of the Pincius’ obelisk in Rome and the poetic texts preserved, looking at the background of the organization of the city of Antinoupolis, through which part of the myth of death and the subsequent deifica­tion of the young Antinous is told.Parole chiave: Antinoo, Egitto, imperatore Adriano, POxy 4352, ritratti.Key words: Antinous, Egypt, emperor Hadrian, POxy 4352, portraits.

Europe was christened in the waters of Roman Christianity. Creeds, liturgies, hierarchies, saints, and ascetic practices favored in later imperial Rome washed over the European peoples in successive centuries and marked their Christianity indelibly. The splendor of that imperial era, rescued from facile notions of a declining Rome, has come to historical life in a distinct epoch called “late antiquity” (300–650). Its monuments testify to an ethos at once classical and spiritual. Late antique Christians instinctively took from Roman surroundings all that suited their new religious ends, from the architectural form given churches to the rhetoric and philosophy that mediated sermons and theologies. This Roman imprint passed to European Christians as a sacred legacy: the basilica as a church rather than a civic hall, the metropolitan as a clerical rather than a civic official, Rome as the city of Saint Peter rather than the emperor, the Empire as destined for Christ's birth as much as Augustus's triumphs. Medieval believers, seeking to re-create the church of first-century Jerusalem, fixed repeatedly upon exemplars from late antique Rome: the teachings of Augustine, the Bible of Jerome, the philosophical theology of Boethius, the laws of Leo, the Rule of Benedict, the prayers ascribed to Gregory. Even the story of Rome's religious transformation entered into the self-understanding of medieval and modern Europeans, the conversion narrative joined to biblical history with its outcome treated as providential and decisive.

AbstractDuring the Thirty Years’ War, the affairs of the Italian imperial fiefdoms could not be at the centre of Imperial Court policy. The correspondence of the nuncios with the Roman Secretariat of State, however, shows that disputes over enfeoffments and other feudal-law problems were not important only in connection with the War of the Mantuan Succession, but that conflicts arose in various areas of northern Italy and kept the Imperial Court Council and imperial commissioners occupied. On the one hand, there were conflicting views concerning the feudal status of territories annexed by the Papal States. In addition, there were unclear legal conditions and disputes regarding many small dominions in the border regions of Savoy-Piedmont, Milan, Genoa and Tuscany, and not just because of the efforts of these principalities to incorporate imperial fiefdoms. There were also serious conflicts over generously granted imperial enfeoffments not in line with Spanish interests. The reports of the nuncios also name some of the fief holders who were taking legal action in Vienna. Additionally, they show that measures taken by the Imperial Court regarding the Italian imperial fiefdoms were considered with great suspicion in Rome and that the Curia in various cases conformed to the French position, which tended to ignore or expressly reject the idea that the imperial fiefdoms were under the control of the Emperor.

Since mid-nineteenth century, Eurasian space has always been a place of political and cultural competition of several superpowers’ national meta-narratives. Now the competition continues. Reverse post-colonialism with idea of European Union guilt before former European colonies, Muslim assault on Eurasia, idea of incessant Chinese expansion, Russian idea are the major competitors in ideological tense struggle. That who wins in this struggle, will dominate Eurasia not only in cultural sense, but politically too. A special attention is given in the paper to investigating the “Russian idea,” a set of ideological stories having emerged in late nineteenth – early twentieth centuries within Eurasianism social movement. “Russian idea” has much in common with ideas of Slavophiles as it is to emphasise Russia’s dominating role in Eurasia. The ideological and political influence of Russia on Eurasia reached its apogee at the end of the nineteenth century, during the reign of Alexander III. Now in his international Eurasian politics, Vladimir Putin obviously wishes to be a successor of the last Russian emperors. However, his administration was critically defeated in its Eurasian claims, due to internal ideological insolvency of Putin’s regime in Siberia and external factors such as Chinese economic and trading Crusade on the whole of Eurasia.

Abstract In the first half of the 17th century, the image of the imperial embassy in Rome was dominated by the long-standing service of the brothers Paolo and Federico Savelli. In comparison, the period in between, during which Scipione Gonzaga held the office, has left hardly any traces. Yet a closer look at his years of service reveals the political problems of those years and shows the prince of Bozzolo to be a committed diplomat. Furthermore, the circumstances of his life show the envoy’s activity in an unusual context, that of a lower-ranking prince in Imperial Italy who sought to gain stature for the empire in order to maintain the limited power attained by himself and his family, and to improve their overall status by acquiring another ancestral entail that had fallen into other hands. Beyond his personal involvement in the costly office, his brothers and other relatives placed themselves at the service of the empire and also entered a network of influential noble families close to the imperial court through marriage. The Gonzaga reigns in Bozzolo and Mantua ended with the War of the Spanish Succession. However, the social and cultural influence they had accumulated lasted longer. Through their family connections, the relatives of the former imperial envoy contributed to the pervasive adoption of the Italian language and way of life, which had become established among the upper classes of Austria, Bohemia and Hungary and remained dominant throughout the reign of Emperor Leopold I.

Abstract During the reign of Maria Theresa (1740-1780) a reassessment of the role women played in a closed society occurred. The main question this article aims to answer is how one can identify these changes by analysing images with high symbolic value, which celebrated and presented Maria Theresa in instances of official relevance, images produced in a period when nations were designing themselves. The present article seeks to underline some of the most representative ideas on how the monarchical identity of Maria Theresa was constructed in art to serve political and propagandistic functions, in an age considered the richest in formal expressions, that is the Baroque, or the ‘Late Baroque’. Hereditary successor to a long line of Holy Roman emperors, Maria Theresa changed the perspective on monarchy and constructed a different identity, that of female agency. Metaphorical images and realism define the analysed portraits in order to demonstrate how the political and the natural body of the monarch combined to illustrate power and aristocratic descent. In my study, the theoretical works on the role Maria Theresa played as female heir to the throne of the Habsburg Empire (rex femineus) are to be viewed as main sources of the imagery surrounding her natural and political body. What I propose is an inquiry into the iconographic representations of Maria Theresa’s body of state, which was public and eternal, and thus privileged as a site of discourse for absolutist statehood.

The Empress Judith has been assigned a central role in the reign of Louis the Pious. But the part she has played has been a controversial one. Judith has been stigmatized as a problem, if not the problem, in the reign. In July 817 Louis had made arrangements for the succession in the Ordinatio imperii, which divided the Empire between his three legitimate sons, Lothar, Pippin, and the young Louis: a few months after the death of their mother, Irmengard, in October 818, the forty-year-old Emperor married for a second time. The young Judith gave Louis another son, Charles, born on 13 June 823. A long historiographical tradition has isolated Judith’s political activities on behalf of her son as a cause of strife, provoking, for example, the rebellions against Louis in 830 and 833. And she stands condemned for this as a woman. In the nineteenth century Judith was seen as motivated not by reason but by emotion—blind Mutterliebe—and as having deployed ‘feminine wiles’ to further her ends. In the 1980s the language may have changed, but Judith is still seen in similar terms: Pierre Riche has described her influence over her middle-aged husband as ‘toute-puissante’. This view of Judith is overly dependent upon two sources which are not only hostile to Judith, but also reveal a strong ecclesiastical bias.

AbstractEarly Christian and Jewish texts responded to the “family values” campaigns mounted by successive emperors from Augustus and Hadrian with varying combinations of accommodation and resistance. This dialectic of resistance and accommodation appears in central aspects of 4 Maccabees and the Pastorals, texts that have frequently been assigned to the earlier part of the second century, that is, to the reigns of Trajan and Hadrian, and that foreground martyrs as the exemplars of their teaching. Both the Jewish and the Christian text give the virtue ευσεβεια a central role, constructing that virtue along the lines of the Roman virtue pietas, that is, as duty and devotion not only to the divine, but also to those of one’s household and family. The specifically post-Augustan character of this virtue is manifest in their displays of an a ideal of chastity for women that responds to the Julian laws—not only the avoidance of adultery and stuprum, but also a commitment to marriage and remarriage as long as the woman can bear children. Both likewise espouse the long term Roman idealization of the univira and both are insistent that the husband must be the teacher of the wife. Among the most significant aspects of this comparison are the close correspondences between the exegeses of Genesis 2-3 in 4 Macc.18:7-10 and 1 Tim. 2:13-15.

It is difficult to fully understand the period in the history of the Russian Empire called the "palace coups" from Peter I to Paul I, and even to Nicholas II, without considering in detail the political history of the guard. That is why the article describes the era of "palace coups" (1725–1762) in the Russian Empire, their preconditions and reasons. The author notes that the XVIII century is one of the most interesting periods in the history of the Russian state represented by the time of palace coups. This period is characterized by constant struggle in the middle of aristocratic groups and many behind-the-scenes intrigues. As the law was not a priority at that time, political issues were usually decided by the ruling force. The article notes that the frequent change of power in the Russian Empire in the eighteenth century. Was violent, not public. And such a force during the n "palace coup" was represented by a privileged part of the regular army organized by Peter I, namely two Guards regiments - Preobrazhensky and Semenovsky, to them during the reign of Anna Johannovna added two others - infantry Izmailovsky and Horse Guards. The Guard played an active role in all the political changes of the eighteenth century, when questions arose about the succession to the throne. No change of emperors on the throne during the 38-year period took place without her active participation. The article analyzes the evolution of the transformation of a privileged part of the regular Russian army - the Guards, into a powerful political force. The author emphasizes that the military influence of the Guards regiments does not increase due to "loud" victories, but on the contrary, the lack of successful military campaigns leads to a change in the vectors of the Guards. After the Poltava victory and the Prut defeat for many years of the XVIII century, the guard did not take much part in hostilities. Surprisingly, politics became the main sphere of activity of the Guards. Thus, the eighteenth century was a time of political instability in the country, various noble groups tried to realize their interests with the help of weak and limited in power rulers, whom they also elected. That is why the author tries to determine the main consequences of strengthening the political role of the guard in the Russian Empire.

In late December 1668 the Kangxi 康熙 emperor (r. 1662–1722) asked the Jesuit astronomer Ferdinand Verbiest (1623–1688) to give publicly verifiable proof that the western astronomical system introduced to China by the Jesuits was accurate. In response Verbiest proposed that he and his Chinese opponents should be set the task of predicting the length of the shadow cast by a gnomon of a given length at a given time on a given day, and his suggestion was accepted. Success in this experimental trial was vital to the future of the Jesuit mission in China. After repeating the trial at noon on three successive days, Verbiest was judged to have succeeded in showing the superiority of western methods in this respect. In this paper, we provide a detailed technical analysis of the methods used by Verbiest to make his predictions of gnomon shadows, and trace the sources of his skills back to his astronomical studies in Europe before his departure for China. In the course of this investigation, we discuss changes in European astronomical techniques up to the mid 17th century that played a decisive role in his predictive task. As a result of this analysis, we are able to explain certain previously puzzling features of Verbiest’s predictions as a rational response on his part to the contentious circumstances under which the trial was conducted.

The Empire of Nicaea was a successor of the Byzantium shattered in 1204. In the newly established state marine traditions of Byzantines, remain alive. The best testimony to this, are the evidence contained in the chronicle of Georgios Akropolites, devoted to activities of the rulers of Nicaea, aimed to build their own naval forces. In this paper I'll also try to answer, where was beating the heart of the Nicean shipbuilding industry and how large was the navy of this state. This is important from point of view of the maritime history, because of the fleet of the Empire of Nicaea, filled the gap created after the fall of Constantinople and the Byzantine Empire, which was the local naval power in previous centuries. Akropolites give us a clear and direct answer to a question, where we should search for a center of Nicaean shipbuilding industry. Georgios Akropolites suggest us, that was in two towns, Holkos and Smyrna. The above-mentioned fleet consisted of the few squadrons, each counting 5-6 ships. We can only guess that a fleet of the John III, could count about 50 warships, whose quality was worse to that belonging to the Venetians. We must say that the fleet of the Empire of Nicaea, which we see in the chronicle of Akropolites, was the force, that lent itself to the support of ground forces. And in this role worked well. The situation was different when it comes to clashing with the Venetians, with the experienced crews of their ships, who surpassed Nicaean in this matter. Even with the advantage of numbers, Nicaean was unable to overcome at the sea, the citizens of the Republic of St. Mark. The plan to build their own naval forces, which was taken by the emperors of Nicaea, was a good direction.

The involvement of the Avar nomad horde in 557/558 in the political system under the leadership of Constantinople coincided with the appearance of the formers in the Eastern part of Europe. Upon signing the agreement in 557/558 A.D., under which nomads became federates of the Empire, the parties upheld the power balance in Balkan and Black Sea coast regions until the death of Justinian I in 565. According to this agreement, Avar Khagan Bayan I undertook to defend the Danube Limes of the Empire provided that basileus would pay and provide supplies and, in perspective, – would give territories of Moesia and Pannonia provinces to nomads for settlement. Also, during this short period, the Avar nobility tried to form their own political course, as opposed to the actions of Roman emperors. Romans, though, aimed at decentralizing the threat from barbarians. In practice, it led to a spontaneous, expansionist politic of Avars inside the Roman Empire’s sphere of interests in Central-Eastern Europe. This included: Avar raids on Antes tribals, Romei federates since the 60s of VI cent. A.D; territorial claims to Constantinople; provision and payment demands, and also misinforming Justinian the Great by Avar ambassadors. After Justin II (565–578) sat on the throne in Constantinople, Bayan I continued his attempts to quit diplomatic dependence of the Empire. As a result, the successor of Justinian the Great, Justin II, tried to cut down the Gordian knot in relations with nomads, which provoked the short-term armed confrontation. Just like nowadays, at the time of the conflict, opponents repeatedly made use of diplomatic parleys as a way to exert pressure on their enemy. Apart from that, both parties, during the war, enlisted support from the third sides, negatively disposed against the Empire (Francs, Langobards) on the one hand and the newly formed Khaganate (Turks) on the other.

A brief overview of the state of Russian medicine of the XVII century is presented firstly. The main attention is paid to the treatment of eye diseases during the XVIII century and the influence of famous foreign doctors and scientists on the origin and formation of Russian ophthalmology and its scientific basis. Special attention is paid to the role of the outstanding Dutch doctor and world-famous scientist G. Burhaave, who was called the teacher of the whole Europe, in the development of medicine and identification of ophthalmology as an independent section of medicine and as a special discipline. This contributed to the further development of ophthalmology not only in Europe but also in Russia. The important role of the Vienna ophthalmology school and its representatives, including G.Y. Beer, Y. Bart, J.Ya. Morenheim and others, is stated in relation to the formation of the Russian scientific school of ophthalmology, which was the successor of Vienna best traditions. Great attention is paid to scientific papers and textbooks on ophthalmology published in the XVIII century in Russian. We also studied the student book by G. Burhaave Public lectures on eye diseases that was the main textbook of the XVIII century for medical students throughout Europe and was published in Russia in 1798. We also analyzed the little-known in Russia handwritten document from the funds of the Russian State Historical Archive an essay by the Austrian doctor of medicine and surgery Professor J. Ya. Plenka Doctrina de morbisoculorum (Doctrine of Eye Diseases) translated into Russian by the doctor of medicine A. Maslovsky (1798). A. Maslovsky dedicated the translation of this recognized in Europe scientific work to the Chief Director of the Medical College Baron A. I. Vasiliev. On September 23, 1818, according to the Highest Order of Emperor Alexander the I the first department of optics in Russia was established at the Saint Petersburg branch of the Medical and Surgical Academy with the approval of doctor of medicine and surgery I. E. Grubi in the position of full professor.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the historical memory of the two contemporaries of Batu invasion – the Grand Princes Mikhail Vsevolodovich of Chernigov and Alexander Yaroslavich (Nevsky) – in the era of the formation of the Russian Kingdom and of the Russian Empire. During the Mongol-Tatar invasion, neither prince proved himself as defender of the Russian land: Mikhail fled his lands and picked his way to the West, while Alexander, most likely, preferred to wait out in Novgorod without getting involved with the clash with the Tatars. Nevertheless, in the subsequent period, their services to the Orthodox Church overshadowed the history of their behavior during the invasion. In the reign of Ivan IV, who initiated the transfer of the relics of Mikhail Vsevolodovich from Chernigov to Moscow, the aura of the defender not only of the faith, but also of the Fatherland formed around the prince, and his Christian feat even became a model for writing the new version of the “Life of Alexander Nevsky”. In the period of victories over the “pagan kingdoms” (Kazan and Astrakhan khanates), as well as in the conditions of incessant clashes with the Crimeans, the veneration of St. Michael became the most important factor in the confrontation with the “infidels”. However, by the time of the formation of the Russian Empire, the relevance of that topic, as well as the interest of those in power in the figure of Mikhail Vsevolodovich declined. In the reign of Peter I the leading role among Russian princes passed on to Alexander Yaroslavich: the first Russian emperor was perceived by his contemporaries as the successor of the hero of the Battle of the Neva, as a kind of alter ego of the holy prince.

The article focuses on the issue of the international status of Russia during the reign of Peter the Great, which progressed from regional power in Eurasia to great power. It seeks to establish when and how Russia officially became a great power. The Poltava victory over the Swedish army (1709) showed that Russia had created the military-industrial poten- tial necessary for great power. The tsar gradually prepared the conditions for the proclama- tion of Russia as an empire and himself as an emperor. Arguably, the recognition of the title by the European states cannot be the main criterion for determining the time of Russia's transformation into a great power because recognizing the imperial title dragged on for sev- eral decades. The great power position of Russia and its new role in international relations began to find its reflection in the treaties between the leading European powers before the official recognition as an empire. International treaties of Russia with France, Austria, Prussia, Rzeczpospolita, Sweden, China, the Ottoman Empire and the Crimean Khanate show that for the first time, the new role of Russia as a great power, as the guarantor of the common Eu- ropean contractual system after the War of the Spanish Succession (1701 / 1702-1714) was enshrined in the Amsterdam Treaty (1717), which was concluded between Russia, France, and Prussia. The subsequent treaty, which had a similar significance for the assertion of the great power role of Russia in Europe, was signed in Vienna on July 26 (August 6), 1726, with another great power - Austria. The system of treaties that Russia was part of in the last years of the reign of Peter the Great was strikingly different from the one that was at the beginning of the reign. According to the Treaty of Nystad, Russia was registered as the guarantor of the new internal state structure of Sweden (which ceased to be an absolutist state) and even the guarantor of the rights to the throne of King Fredrik I (Article 7). Under the allied defense treaty with Sweden (February 22, 1724), both countries agreed to be the guarantors of the internal political structure of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The analysis of docu- ments allows us to make a general conclusion that the treaties of Russia with other countries at the end of the reign of Peter the Great were one of the pillars of the system of international relations in Europe, which signified that Russia acquired new great power status.

AbstractThe introduction and diffusion of Italian Renaissance forms in sixteenth-century Netherlandish art has usually been described as a process initiated by artists who travelled south, adopted the new style and reaped success after their return to the Netherlands. In giving full credit to the artists and considering this phcnomenon to be a process of artistic exchange in the modern sense, art historians have wrongly disregarded the historical circumstances that caused patrons' preference for the new style. The earliest use of Renaissance forms in the Low Countries on a large scale may be observed in the triumphal decorations of the 1515 Joyeuse Entrée of Charles of Hapsburg, the future emperor, in the town of Bruges. From that moment on, Renaissance forms were used abundantly in objects which served as a kind of propaganda for Hapsburg policy, such as church windows and chimney-pieces glorifying Charles v and the Hapsburg dynasty. Antique motifs fitted well in the imperialist visual language favoured by the Hapsburg dynasty and the Dutch nobles who supported its power politics. Derived from imperial Roman monuments, these forms unequivocally alluded to the absolute power of the ancient ancestors of the Holy Roman Emperor, thus legitimizing his authority. In the author's opinion this functional aspect is one of the main reasons for the ready acceptance and diffusion of the Renaissance style in the Low Countries. One of the first artists to travel from the Netherlands to Italy was the painter Michiel Coxcie (Malines 1499-1592). He stayed in Rome from about 1530 to 1538, painting several frescoes in Roman churches which brought him recognition among Italian colleagues. Only one example has survived: the fresco cycle in the chapel of St. Barbara in S. Maria dell'Anima, which he painted between 1532 and 1534. His mastery of the 'maniera italiana', which is evident in these paintings, is highly praised by Vasari, who met Coxcie in Rome in 1532. Vasari also states that Coxcie transferred the 'maniera italiana' to the Netherlands. Upon his return to Malines in 1539, Coxcie received several prestigious commissions, of which perhaps the most outstanding was to paint cartoons for the stained glass windows in the church of St. Gudule in Brussels, with its decoration of triumphal arches glorifying the Hapsburg dynasty. His ability to work in the high Renaissance style gained him the favour of Charles v and his sister, Mary of Hungary, governess of the Netherlands, who engaged him as a court painter. In the said series of Brussels windows, a remarkable change of style regarding the use of Renaissance forms is to be observed after Coxcie started supplying the cartoons in 1541. The windows completed between 1537 and 1540 had been made under the supervision of Bernard van Orley, allegedly Coxcie's teacher. They were rendered in an early Renaissance style characterized by the hybrid Italianate motifs that were in fashion during the 1520S and 1530s. Upon Orley's death in 1541, Coxcie was appointed his successor as cartoon painter for St. Gudule. The first window for which he was responsible, the window of John III of Portugal in the Chapel of the Holy Sacrament, exhibits a distinct caesura: the architectural decoration is high Renaissance in the Vitruvian or Serlian sense and the human faces and postures are derived directly from the examples of Raphael, Leonardo and Michelangelo. After careful perusal of the documents concerning the production of the windows and study of the stylistic differences between the windows made before and after 1541 (and the related preparatory drawings), one cannot but conclude that Michiel Coxcie was the initiator of the use of the high Renaissance style in the Brussels windows. Hitherto Bernard van Orley has been credited for this, on the assumption that he designed the whole cycle, including all its ornamental details and stylistic features. Although his contribution to the diffusion of the high Renaissance style in Netherlandish art was decisive, Michiel Coxcie's return to the Low Countries should not be regarded as the principal incentive for this process. The general predilection for this style to be found after 1540 could be a consequence of the impressive presence of Charles v and his retinue in the Netherlands during that year. The emperor, who came to quell the Ghent resurrection against the central government, brought with him the style that had been used in the triumphal decorations which accompanied his entries to Italian towns during the 1530S. The influence exercised on prevailing taste by the ephemeral monuments erected on the occasion of imperial entries must have been considerable, as the Brussels windows clearly show.

Constantius, as though the Temple of Janus had been closed and all enemies had been laid low, was longing to visit Rome and, following the death of Magnentius, to hold a triumph, without a victory title and after shedding Roman blood. For he did not himself defeat any belligerent nation or learn that any had been defeated through the courage of his commanders, nor did he add anything to the empire, and in dangerous circumstances he was never seen to lead from the front, nor even to be among the front ranks. But he wanted to display an exaggeratedly long procession, standards stiff with gold and the beauty of his attendants, to a population who were living more peacefully, neither anticipating nor wishing to see this or anything like it. For perhaps he was unaware that some earlier emperors had been content with lictors in peacetime, but when the heat of battle could not allow inactivity, one of them had entrusted himself to a small fishing boat, blasted by raging gales, another had followed the example of the Decii and offered up his life in a vow for the state, and another had himself explored the enemy camp alongside the regular soldiers; that, in short, various of them had won renown for magnificent deeds, and so committed their glories to the distinguished memory of posterity. …When he was approaching the city, observing with a serene expression the respectful attendance of the Senate, and the venerable likenesses of the patrician families, he thought, not like Cineas, the legate of Pyrrhus, that a multitude of kings had been assembled together, but rather that this was the refuge of the whole world [cumque urbi propinquaret, senatus officia, reuerendasque patriciae stirpis effigies, ore sereno contemplans, non ut Cineas ille Pyrrhi legatus, in unum coactam multitudinem regum, sed asylum mundi totius adesse existimabat]. Next, when he turned his gaze to the general populace, he was astonished at the speed with which every type of men from everywhere had flowed into Rome. As though he were trying to terrify the Euphrates or the Rhine with the sight of arms, with the standards in front of him on each side, he sat alone in a golden chariot, glittering with the shimmer of many different precious stones, whose flashes seemed to produce a flickering light. After many others had preceded him, he was surrounded by dragons, woven from purple cloth and affixed to the golden, bejewelled tips of spears, open to the wind with their broad mouths and so hissing as though roused with anger, trailing the coils of their tails in the wind [eumque post antegressos multiplices alios, purpureis subtegminibus texti, circumdedere dracones, hastarum aureis gemmatisque summitatibus illigati, hiatu uasto perflabiles, et ideo uelut ira perciti sibilantes, caudarumque uolumina relinquentes in uentum]. Then there came a twin column of armed men, with shields and plumed helmets, shining with glittering light, clothed in gleaming cuirasses, with armoured horsemen, whom they call clibanarii, arranged among them, masked and protected by breastplates, encircled with iron bands, so that you might have thought them to be statues finished by the hand of Praxiteles, not men [sparsique catafracti equites, quos clibanarios dictitant, personati thoracum muniti tegminibus, et limbis ferreis cincti, ut Praxitelis manu polita crederes simulacra, non uiros]. Slender rings of metal plates, fitted to the curves of the body, clothed them, spread across all their limbs, so that, in whatever direction necessity moved their joints, their clothing moved likewise, since the joins had been made to fit so well.When he was hailed as Augustus with favourable cries, [Constantius] did not shudder at the din that thundered from hills and shores, but showed himself unmoved, as he appeared in his provinces. For, when passing through high gates, he stooped his short body, and, keeping his gaze straight, as though his neck were fixed, he turned his head neither right nor left, as though an image of a man, and he was never seen to nod when the wheel shook, or to spit or wipe or rub his face or nose, or to move his hand [nam et corpus perhumile curuabat portas ingrediens celsas, et uelut collo munito, rectam aciem luminum tendens, nec dextra uultum nec laeua flectebat, tamquam figmentum hominis, nec, cum rota concuteret, nutans, nec spuens, aut os aut nasum tergens uel fricans, manumue agitans uisus est umquam]. Although this behaviour was an affectation, it, and other aspects of his more private life, were however indications of extraordinary endurance, granted to him alone, as it was given to be supposed. This passage, which describes the aduentus of Constantius II into Rome in 357, is one of the best-known episodes in the Res Gestae of Ammianus Marcellinus. This historical work was completed by the retired military officer in around 390, with the surviving books covering the period from 353 to the aftermath of the Battle of Adrianople in 378. Unsurprisingly, this passage is also one of the most debated. Throughout his work, Ammianus regularly criticized Constantius as a weak, vicious ruler, influenced by women and, in particular, eunuchs, and so contrasted him with his cousin and successor Julian, the emperor who receives the most favourable treatment within this text. The degree and nature of criticism within this particular passage has, however, been the subject of a variety of wildly differing interpretations. It is clear that, at the outset, Ammianus is inveighing against the notion of holding a triumph for victory in a civil war, but there has been debate over whether Constantius was actually celebrating a triumph or merely the anniversary of his accession. Similarly, the description of the Senate as ‘the refuge of the whole world’ has been read in contrasting ways, being regarded as derogatory by Johannes Straub, as neutral, or even positive, by Pierre Dufraigne, and as respectful by R.C. Blockley. While this passage as a whole is generally read as an attack on Constantius for his pretentions to ill-deserved military glory, it also raises the question of whether Ammianus was also criticizing Constantius for the way in which he performed his aduentus, emphasizing his pompous and autocratic behaviour in order to contrast him with Julian, who preferred to behave more like a ciuilis princeps in public. Of course, such a reading almost inevitably produces a portrait of Ammianus as an impractically nostalgic figure, harking back to a style of rule which was anachronistic in the post-Diocletianic Later Roman Empire. In addition, Ammianus also presented Julian as performing an aduentus into Constantinople in 361, employing some phrases that were similar to those used to describe Constantius’ procession in 357. Furthermore, as John Matthews has illustrated, Ammianus’ presentations of the occasions when Julian eschewed late-antique imperial protocol are not without tinges of criticism, and his judgement on the propriety of different modes of imperial behaviour varied dependent on the context.

Michael Lucas Leopold Willmann (1630–1706) was born in Königsberg (now Kalinin grad in Russia), where his first teacher was Christian Peter, a well -off guild painter. After years of journeys of apprenticeship and learning in the Netherlands, the young artist returned to his homeland, after Matthias Czwiczek’s death in 1654 probably hoping for the position of the painter at the court of Great Elector Frederick William (1620–1688).What served to draw the ruler’s attention to himself was probably the lost painting, described by Johann Joachim von Sandrart as follows: ‘the Vulcan with his cyclops makes armour for Mars and a shield and a spear for Minerva’. The failure of these efforts led the future ‘Apelles’ to emigrate to Silesia, where he created a family painting workshop in Lubiąż (Leubus), and following the conversion from Calvinism to Catholicism, he became a Cistercian painter, creating famous works of art in religious or secular centres of Crown Bohemia. What connects him to Prussia is another painting of great importance in his career, the little -known ‘Apotheosis of the Great Elector as a Guardian of Arts’ from 1682. The successor to Great Elector Frederick III (1657–1713) was crowned in 1701 as the ‘king of Prussia’. The ceremony required an appropriate artistic setting, which prompted many artists to flock to Königsberg, including a Dutchman from Leiden, the painter Justus Bentum, a pupil of Gottfred Schalken, who reached the capital of the new kingdom together with his son Philip Christian. After studying from his father, Philip Christian Bentum (ok. 1690 – po 1757) followed in the footsteps of the famous Willmann, and went on a journey, from which he never returned to Prussia. He went first to imperial Prague, where he collaborated with Peter Brandl and converted to Catholicism, following which he travelled to Silesia. After 1731, he took part in the artistic projects of Bishop Franz Ludwig von Pfalz–Neuburg of Wrocław (Breslau) and Abbot Constantin Beyer, who completed the project begun by Freiberger and Willmann: the extension and decoration of the Cistercian Abbey in Lubiąż. It was there that he made the largest in Europe canvas -painted oil plafond of the Prince’s Hall and completed his opus magnum: covering all the library walls and vaults with painting. Those pro -Habsburg works were finished two years before the death of Emperor Charles VI (1685–1740) and the military invasion of Silesia by Frederick II Hohenzollern (1712–1786), great - -grandson of the Great Elector. The fate of the artists mentioned in the title was intertwined with Königsberg and Lubiąż. Both converts set off for the professional maturity from the Prussian capital via Prague to Silesia. They can be compared by the Dutch sources of their art and a compilation method of creating images using print ‘prototypes’. Their inner discrepancy can be seen in the choice of these patterns, as they followed both the Catholic Rubens and the Protestant Rembrandt Van Rijn. They were connected with the provinces playing a key role in Central -European politics: here the Hohenzollerns competed for power in Central Europe with the Habsburgs. They were witnessesto the game for winning Silesia, and even took part in it by creating propagandistic art. Both of them worked for Bishop Franz Ludwig von Pfalz–Neuburg (1664–1732), associated with the Emperor, a kind of the capo di tutti capi of the Counter -Reformation in Silesia. Bentum eagerly imitated selected compositions of his predecessor and master from Lubiąż, and I think he even tried to surpass him in scale and precision. The artistic competition with Willman is visible in the paintings of the library in Lubiąż. There, he presented an Allegory of Painting, which shows the image of Willmann carried by an angel, while the inscription praising the qualities of his character calls him ‘Apelles’. The work of both painters, who took their first steps in the profession as Protestants in Königsberg, but became famous through their work for Catholics, provides an interesting material for the analysis of the general topic of artistic careers on the periphery of Europe, the relationship between the centres and the periphery, as well as for two stages of re -Catholisation in Silesia treated as an instrument of power. It was usually pointed out how much separates the two painters, but no one has ever tried to show what unites them. The comparison of the sources, motifs, and outstanding achievements of both of them, especially in Lubiąż, gives a more complete picture of their activity deeply immersed in the politics of their times. This picture is not as unambiguous as it has been so far, highlighting the political and propaganda aspects of their career spreading out between the coastal Protestant north and the Catholic south. The drama of their lives took place in Silesia, where the multiple dividing lines of Europe intersected. The idea of narrating the parallel fates of two artists with great Politics in the background (as in he case of Plutarch’s ‘Parallel Lives’) came to my mind years ago when I curated the Exhibition ‘Willmann – Drawings. A Baroque Artist’s Workshop’ (2001, National Museum in Wrocław, in cooperation with Salzburg and Stuttgart). The present paper was to be included in the volume accompanying that project initiated by Andrzej Kozieł (Willmann and Others. Painting, Drawing and Graphic Arts in Silesia and Neighbouring Countries in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, ed. A. Kozieł, B. Lejman, Wrocław 2002), but I withdrew from its publication. I am hereby publishing it, thanking Małgorzata Omilanowska for her presence at the opening of this first great exhibition of mine in 2001, as well for the excellent cooperation with my Austrian, Czech, German, and Polish colleagues. This text, referring to the topic of our discussions at the time – as on the event of the above -mentioned exhibition I spoke at a press conference in Stuttgart’s Staatsgalerie, where the curator of the German exhibition was Hans Martin Kaulbach, exactly two days after the attack on WTC.

The article analyzes and highlights the origins and preconditions of the Lviv University, emphasizes the longevity of educational and scientific academic traditions at the university, shows what were the obstacles for the Ukrainian people of the Middle Ages in the conditions of statelessness to create a national higher education institution, particularly in Lviv. The preconditions and the time of the Faculty of Law foundation are studied, as well as its place and role at the Lviv University are determined. Much attention is focused on the characteristics of two traditions on determining the date of foundation of the Lviv University: the Eastern European tradition, which is based on the royal privilege of 1661; it has a formal character, based on documentary sources; as well as the Western European tradition, which is based on the establishment of the first school of the Western European standard in Lviv, also based on the source documents and international experience. It is substantiated that the formation and development of the first educational institutions in the Western Ukrainian lands, particularly in Lviv, date back to the times of the Galicia-Volyn state, which was the heir and successor of the Kyiv-Rus’ state. One of the first links in the emergence of the elements of university education in Lviv can be considered a parish school founded on November 11, 1372, and later a monastic school, which in 1451 became a cathedral school. The next link in the formation of university education in Lviv in accordance with the Western European tradition was the Lviv Stauropean Fraternal School (1586). Thereafter follow the Lviv Jesuit College (1608), the Academy (1661) as well as the University (1784). Due to the lack of historical sources, we do not have proper historical data about the parish (monastery) school in Lviv in 1372, in particular about its teachers and disciplines read by certain professors, famous graduates, as well as about their own statutes etc. However, we do possess the necessary historical data based on primary sources about the Lviv Fraternal School of 1586, from which, it seems, we can trace the origins of the Ivan Franko National University of Lviv. It is emphasized that since 1661, the Faculty of Law of «both laws» was envisaged among the four faculties («facultatis») of the Lviv University. In the first period of the Lviv University's existence, the faculties mentioned in the royal privilege began to operate in its structure, including the faculty of «both laws», which trained specialists in canon and Roman law. At that time, the faculties in their modern sense as organizational and educational-scientific units of the university, providing for the creation of departments, did not exist, as the training was conducted according to the program of Jesuit schools, developed in the late XVI century. It is also noted that in the first period of the Lviv University (1661–1773) the following legal studies (courses) were taught at the «both laws» Faculty of Law: basics of Roman law, public law, history of state system, political geography, «natural law», civil law (based on comments to the Justinian Code), the administrative system of European countries. In the process of teaching canon law and the so-called «incidents» - moral theology, certain aspects of criminal law were studied. From 1739, they began to teach the history of law. Teaching was in Latin. Within the framework of educational reforms from the beginning of the XVIII century, at the University of Lviv, a separate professor of canon law was appointed, and later – a professor of Roman law. The teaching system changed under the influence of new socio-economic and political conditions in the Commonwealth and Western Europe. After the annexation of Galicia to the Austrian Empire, a system of state bodies was formed, which required a significant number of qualified civil servants. There were few people willing to go to Lviv or other cities in Galicia and Bukovyna from Vienna or Prague. Based on the urgent need for training for the newly created province of Galicia and Lodomeria personnel of various specialties (government officials, judges, medical teachers, priests, etc.), the Austrian Emperor Joseph II on October 21, 1784 issued a diploma, which formally established and actually restored Lviv University consisting of four faculties (philosophical, law, medical and theological), as well as an academic gymnasium with the same rights for all universities of the state. The created gymnasium served as a base for staffing university students. The training of lawyers, who made up the vast majority of civil servants, as well as judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and notaries in Galicia, was entrusted to the Faculty of Law of the Lviv University. Since then, the Faculty of Law at the Lviv University had been functioning as an organizational and educational-scientific structural unit of the Lviv University, where a certain cycle of related scientific disciplines was taught and the specialists in law were trained, as well as the creation of departments and administration was provided for etc. Unlike other faculties of the Lviv University, the Faculty of Law did not cease its activities, due to the liquidation of the Faculty of Philosophy in 1924 and the Faculty of Theology in 1939, the Faculty of Law is also the oldest faculty of the Ivan Franko University of Lviv.

Resumen El artículo es, en rigor, una propuesta de cuestión a investigar: una sociología histórica de las ciencias sociales latinoamericanas que, en una perspectiva de larga duración, recupere la extensa etapa protocientífica (o estudios sociales de primera generación), básicamente ensayística, pero generadora de dos legados que las ciencias sociales institucionalizadas y profesionalizadas (desde mediados del siglo XX) asumieron y potenciaron: la vocación por el cambio social, es decir, la interacción entre conocimiento y política, y la constitución de redes (personales en el primer caso, institucionales, en el segundo). El proceso de constitución de las ciencias sociales latinoamericanas, se sostiene, debe analizarse teniendo en cuenta la estrecha relación con las sucesivas coyunturas internacionales, especialmente a partir de la segunda posguerra, coyunturas que permiten explicar mejor la cambiante agenda de problemas abordados por los científicos sociales -básicamente desde una perspectiva de pensamiento crítico- a lo largo de los últimos setenta años. Así, por caso, los debates sobre el carácter feudal o capitalista de la colonización, los estudios de situaciones de dependencia, el Estado y la democracia. Estas cuatro grandes cuestiones derivan, de algún modo, de las críticas a la teoría de modernización, tan importante en los inicios de la institucionalización. Para el análisis de ésta, asimismo, debe tenerse en cuenta el primordial papel desempeñado por tres organismos internacionales -CEPAL, FLACSO y CLACSO- y por los centros académicos independientes. Se enfatiza el carácter innovador de nuestras ciencias sociales, particularmente durante las décadas de 1960 y 1970, el cual se diluyó a partir de fines o mediados de los años 1980, cuando se produjo un retorno a prácticas caracterizadas por el colonialismo cultural. Empero, en los últimos años se está gestando un proceso de retorno a pensar América Latina desde América Latina, proceso que abre la perspectiva de un rico debate. Palabras claves: ciencias sociales latinoamericanas,ResumoO artigo é, a rigor, uma proposta de questão a investigar: a sociologia histórica das ciências sociais latino-americanas que, em uma perspectiva a longo prazo, recupere a extensa fase protocientífica (ou estudos sociais de primeira geração), basicamente ensaística, mas que acabou gerando dois legados que as ciências sociais institucionalizadas e profissionalizadas, em meados do século XX, assumiram e reforçaram: a vocação para a mudança social, ou seja, a interação entre conhecimento e política, e o networking (pessoal, no primeiro caso, e institucional, no segundo). O processo de formação das ciências sociais latino-americanas, argumenta-se, deve ser considerado tendo em conta a estreita relação mediante sucessivas articulações internacionais, especialmente desde a Segunda Guerra Mundial. Tais articulações permitem explicar melhor a variante agenda de questões abordadas pelos cientistas sociais - basicamente, a partir da perspectiva de pensamento crítico ao longo dos últimos 70 anos. Assim, por exemplo, as discussões sobre o caráter feudal ou capitalista da colonização estudam situações de dependência, do Estado e da democracia. Estas quatro grandes questões derivam de alguma forma, das críticas à teoria da modernização, tão importante no início da institucionalização. Para esta análise também deve ser observado o papel fundamental desempenhado por três organizações internacionais -ECLAC, FLACSO e CLACSO- e pelos centros acadêmicos independentes. O caráter inovador de nossas ciências sociais são enfatizados, principalmente durante os anos 1960 e 1970, que foi diluída a partir de finais ou meados dos anos 1980, quando houve um retorno a práticas caracterizadas pelo colonialismo cultural. No entanto, nos últimos anos se tem feito um processo de volta para a América Latina pensada pela América Latina, tal processo expõe a possibilidade de um debate mais profundo. Palavras-chave: --- AbstractThe article is, in fact, a proposed research question: a historical sociology of Latin American social sciences, in a long term perspective, recall the vast stage of the social studies of first generation basically essays, but generating two legacies that institutionalized and professionalized social sciences (from mid-twentieth century) assumed and reinforced: the vocation for social change, the interaction between knowledge and policy, network building (personal in the first case, institutional, in the second). The process of formation of Latin American social sciences should be analyzed taking into account the close relationship between the successive international situation, especially since the Second World War, joints that allow better explain the changing list of problems approached by social scientists from basically perspectives critical thinking over the last seventy years. So, for instance, the discussions on the feudal or capitalist nature of colonization, studies of dependency situations, the state, and democracy. These four major issues arise, somehow criticism of modernization theory, so important in the early institutionalization. For this analysis, it should also be noted the key role played by three international agencies -CEPAL, FLACSO, and CLACSO- and independent academic centers. The innovative nature of our social sciences is emphasized, particularly during the 1960s and 1970s, which was diluted from mid or late 1980s, when there was a return to practices characterized cultural colonialism. However, in recent years it is developing a process to think back to Latin America from Latin America, a process that opens up the prospect of a rich discussion. Keywords: Latin American Social Sciences,

Martial dedicated many epigrams to the four successive emperors of Rome with whom he had been contemporary: Titus, Domitian, Nerva and Trajan. In all the poet’s volumes, his epigrams were similar with respect of their underlying strategy even if they were praising a different sovereign. Each time the poet depicted the current emperor as a perfect ruler, endowed with the most noble virtues and in total contrast with the previous monarch who was loaded with vices. During the reign of Nerva, while recurring to his usual tactics of praising the current leader and attacking the previous one, Martial arrived in the position of posthumously denigrating Domitian whom he had adulated many years before.

Abstract Two damaged and partially restored Roman portraits in the collection of the British Museum, previously identified as either the emperor Caligula or an unknown “Julio-Claudian prince,” are here reassessed and identified as Agrippa Postumus, the youngest grandson and adopted heir of Augustus. The first portrait, from southern Britain, may have come from a temple dedicated to the worship of the Julio-Claudian house, while the second was probably part of an equestrian group standing outside the Aedes Castoris in Rome. This is a significant reinterpretation, providing potential evidence not only for links between Rome's first family and the rulers of a distant client kingdom, but also for the framing of imperial power and the uncertain nature of the Augustan succession in the early years of the 1st c. CE.

Our exploration shows that the ruling of Sasanyan crown princes in Armenia was one part of Sasanyan 1st ruler’s policy for solving the problem of the succession of the throne. Choosing the crown in the way of monopoly the Sasanyan king of kings did their best to srenghten their smart sets positions as much as they could. For the transferation of the throne they chose the types of iconography preaching used in earlier Achaemenid Empire with the military-administrative mechanisms used in Parthian empire. The title of "Great King of Armenian'' given to the Sasanyan crown princes served the same aim. In it “The Great King" had the honor's meaning which refered predominantly to the crown and, it also refered to Armenia in a way that with its boardering position it was the garden of the heir of crown prince and the central place for the army. The role of Armenia in the Sasanyan administrative system was not static; it was conditioned with the west direction of the external policy of early Sasanian Empire. It was not by chance that in the militaryadministrative system of Sasanyan empire Armenia retained its role untill the sighning of the peace treaty between emperor Probus and Varahran the First in 276. After the mentioned treaty in 276-293 Nerseh, who ruled in Armenia, already bore not the title of “The Great King of Armenia’’ but the title of “The king of Armenian”.

AbstractFluids mediate the transport of subducted slab material and play a crucial role in the generation of arc magmas. However, the source of subduction-derived fluids remains debated. The Kamchatka arc is an ideal subduction zone to identify the source of fluids because the arc magmas are comparably mafic, their source appears to be essentially free of subducted sediment-derived components, and subducted Hawaii-Emperor Seamount Chain (HESC) is thought to contribute a substantial fluid flux to the Kamchatka magmas. Here we show that Tl isotope ratios are unique tracers of HESC contribution to Kamchatka arc magma sources. In conjunction with trace element ratios and literature data, we trace the progressive dehydration and melting of subducted HESC across the Kamchatka arc. In succession, serpentine (<100 km depth), lawsonite (100–250 km depth) and phengite (>250 km depth) break down and produce fluids that contribute to arc magmatism at the Eastern Volcanic Front (EVF), Central Kamchatka Depression (CKD), and Sredinny Ridge (SR), respectively. However, given the Tl-poor nature of serpentine and lawsonite fluids, simultaneous melting of subducted HESC is required to explain the HESC-like Tl isotope signatures observed in EVF and CKD lavas. In the absence of eclogitic crust melting processes in this region of the Kamchatka arc, we propose that progressive dehydration and melting of a HESC-dominated mélange offers the most compelling interpretation of the combined isotope and trace element data.