Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Cambridžský rukopis Dalimilovy kroniky a doba Karla IV

RADKO ŠŤASTNÝ
Česká literatura
Vol. 31, No. 5 (1983), pp. 385-400
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43745432
Page Count: 16
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Cambridžský rukopis Dalimilovy kroniky a doba Karla IV
Preview not available

Abstract

The Cambridge Manuscript of the Dalimil Chronicle and the Time of Charles IV is the title of the author's next paper on the manuscript of the Old-Czech Chronicle in Verses by so called Dalimil. This Cambridge Manuscript is deposited in the Library of the Trinity College in Cambridge under the signature MS O. 7. 38. The literary historical analysis of this manuscript focuses the author's attention on the three question circles. At first the author deals with the history of the manuscript which came into being in Bohemia after 1350, was the most probably ordered by the Rosenbergs and by the end of 17th century came to England where it is deposited till the present day. From the first page, the original snaps of which were taken thanks to kindness and devotedness of the librarians of the Trinity College and whose real form has not been known in Czechoslovakia, the author thinks that the incomplete inscription on this first page UROZE — CH may be read as U (Ulrich) Oldřich Rosenberg (1402—1462). Marginal notes in the manuscript and further contents features of the manuscript also indicate connection with the House of the Rosenbergs. Then it is for instance the fact that in the 16th century the owner of the manuscript was the noble family of the Spanovskys from Lisov the membres of which were in the Rosenbergs' service. Even some language special terms the verb „drbiti“ point to the area of Southern Bohemia. In the second part of the study the author demonstrates that the changes in the Cambridge Manuscript (leaving out the vast parts of the text — about 500 verses) compared to other manuscript, especially the Franciscan Manuscript, is not a mere chance caused by the negligence of the scrivener or by his speed of rewriting as it is commonly judged. The author thinks the changes were done to the wish of the customer, probably to the order of Jošt I Rosenberg (died 1369), who by 1350 during the reign of Charles IV was the highest Chamberlain of the Kingdom of Bohemia. The customer by means of these changes and with the whole manuscript wanted to influence the meaning of the Czech nobility in the time of discussion about the proposal of the land's bill Maiestas Carolina, which Charles IV wanted it to be passed. But the proposal was not accepted by the majority of the noblemen led by the Rosanbergs. The following comparison of the Cambridge Manuscript by so called Dalimil to some of the laws of the bill Maiestas Carolina leads the author to support his thesis that this manuscript was uses by the Rosenbergs as the means of opposition to the law-making proposals of the Charles IV. Dalimil takes the state conception by which the nobility has the inalienable right of choosing the sovereign and the reight of playing an active role in the state administration. Maiestas Carolina on the other hand was the means of limiting the right of the nobility on itine sovereign's behalf. Through this function the original version of the Chronicle by so called Dalimil was made topical in the middle of the 14th century in connection with the political plans of the Rosenbergs, similarly as it was with the Zeberer Manuscript in 1440 (see the author's paper The Czech Literature 28, 1980, p. 537—551). Because the Cambridge Manuscript is one of the oldest ones, its better knowlodge makes it possible to penetrate into the into the form of the not preserved archetype of the Chronicle of the time by 1310.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
385
    385
  • Thumbnail: Page 
386
    386
  • Thumbnail: Page 
387
    387
  • Thumbnail: Page 
388
    388
  • Thumbnail: Page 
389
    389
  • Thumbnail: Page 
390
    390
  • Thumbnail: Page 
391
    391
  • Thumbnail: Page 
392
    392
  • Thumbnail: Page 
393
    393
  • Thumbnail: Page 
394
    394
  • Thumbnail: Page 
395
    395
  • Thumbnail: Page 
396
    396
  • Thumbnail: Page 
397
    397
  • Thumbnail: Page 
398
    398
  • Thumbnail: Page 
399
    399
  • Thumbnail: Page 
400
    400