"Es ist nicht leichters, als diese Difficultät zu heben..." Theresian Administrative Reforms, Centralisation of the Monarchy and the Approach of Bohemian Statehood on the Example of Ennoblements as a Part of the Sovereign Rights of the Bohemian Crown.
This study examines the possibilities and limitations of centralizing reforms within the western part of the Habsburg monarchy, as illustrated by the problematic issue of ennoblement in the Czech lands. The administrative reforms of 1749 resulted in the administrative union of both state entities in a single whole of (all) so-called Hereditary Lands. They also led to the closure of separate offices at court representing the Czech and Austrian lands, replacing them with a single Directorium in publicis et cameralibus, which took over the ennoblement programme hitherto operated by those two offices. Despite the apparently centralizing tendency of the reforms, this did not extend to any unification of entitlements to ennoblement, which continued to be based on particular ranks and titles specific to either the Kingdom of Bohemia or the Archduchy of Austria. It was not until 1752 that, on the urging of Maria Theresa herself, a unified, legally binding system for dispensing preferment and privilege, including a unified scale of aristocratic titles for all the Hereditary Lands, was introduced. In practice, ennoblement rights in the two state entities remained differentiated as to specific titles up until the early 19th century, when the two systems were superseded by a new Austrian Imperial ranking. Thus one of the last relics of the conception of the Czech Crown Lands as an autonomous historical entity finally ceased to exist., Jiří Brňovják., and Obsahuje bibliografické odkazy
The main aim of this paper is to propose an adequate interpretation of the concept esse apparens (apparent being) which was used by Franciscan philosopher and theologian Peter Auriol (c. 1280-1322), especially focusing on his account of sensory perception. Drawing on an analysis of the relevant passages of the commentary on the Sentences by Auriol, first, I introduce his famous account of sensory illusions, and then his own claims about the nature of esse appparens (Auriol refuses to treat it either as a separate entity serving as a mediator of perception, or as only an extrinsic denomination of the perceived object). In the next part, I reject the interpretation which identifies esse apparens with mental representation. In my opinion, it is more appropriate to place this concept into the context of scholastic doctrine of objectiver or intentional being (popularized mainly by Duns Scotus and his disciples). At the end of the paper, I return to Auriol's account of illusions and show that it is compatible with esse apparens being understood as mode of being., Lukáš Lička., and Obsahuje poznámky a bibliografii