The working definition of a “succession crisis” is based on the presumption that stability is a critical factor in a political system. The system becomes vulnerable if something deprives it of its steadiness and pushes it out of balance. A monarch in the medieval political system played the role of the stability factor which was supposed to harmonize contrary interests of different groups and circles in a kingdom. A “succession crisis” erupts when there is no political agreement regarding who should step into the role of a deceased monarch, i.e., who shows the most promise in achieving the goals of stability, harmony and a balance of power. The thrones in Central Europe were emptied nearly simultaneously at the turn of the fourteenth century. Since politics cannot bear a vacuum, these unexpected vacancies opened the field for new candidates to the throne(s). The paper reflects on three subjects. First, it raises the question of a “succession crisis” as a methodological tool for studying politics in the Middle Ages. Secondly, it outlines the stances of the modern Polish historiography on Łokietek’s coming back to power between 1305 and 1314 and his puzzling popularity among the nobility of Little Poland. It also reveals recent opinions of Polish historians about the Bohemian rule in Poland in the turn of the fourteenth century. Finally, the paper applies the concept of “succession crisis” and switch the focus of Łokietek’s attempts for the throne from a political microhistory to a picture of greater regional range. and Wojciech Kozłowski.
Art of seeing, John Rajchman argues in his essay, was in the center of Michel Foucault’s critical attention as well as practice. Foucault himself was a visual thinker and writer. More importantly, however, the ways in which historically changing vision determines not only what is seen, but what can be seen, are one of his major concerns. Rupture with self-evidences is then the first step one must take to make the invisible - yet not hidden - power visible. The invisibility of power, seen as the invisible light that makes other things visible, is what makes it tolerable. Knowledge and the practice of knowing themselves are constructed by the technology of the visual, such as the different types of spaces that bring about specific visibility. In Foucault’s histories, the prison or the clinic are such spaces that have visualized criminality, sexuality or madness in particular manner. However, problematization of these things needs to go beyond new ways of looking at them and has to question their entire field of vision. This implies that Foucauldian ethics is less concerned with what we do about things themselves, instead, it rather asks how we see them in the first place and how can they be seen differently. It thus requires not to look within us, on the contrary, we should look out, from outside of ourselves., John Rajchman., and Obsahuje bibliografii
Kritickú diskurzívnu analýzu (KDA) autorka predstavila predovšetkým z hľadiska súboru teoretických predpokladov, ktoré konceptualizujú vzťahy medzi diskurzom, poznaním, ideológiou a sociálnym subjektom. Poukázala na varietu predpokladaných súvislostí medzi subjektom a diskurzom, a to v kontexte posunu od štrukturalistickej paradigmy k postštrukturálnej, od jednostrannej determinácie k determinácii dialektickej. Z hľadiska metodologického autorka poukázala na tie teoretické zdroje (sociolingvistická teória jazyka, pragmadialektická teória argumentácie), ktoré prispeli k premene analýzy diskurzu na kritickú, systematickú a transdisciplinárnu metódu analýzy textu v makro a mikrospoločenských súvislostiach. V závere autorka naznačila výzvy, ktorý KDA (vrátane interdisciplinárneho a transdisciplinárneho prístupu) pre sociálnu psychológiu predstavuje.