著者

飯尾 唯紀

出版者

北海道大学スラブ研究センター

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, pp.95-112, 2001

---

In Habsburg Hungary, the religious liberty of all estates came into force by the Act of 1608. This article was enacted in the years of crisis of the Habsburg rule, and had been valid, with a little modification, until the end of the 17th century. It has been proposed that this article, accordant with the system of "Neo-Serfdom," gave the religious liberty only to the feudal lords and free royal towns, not to the serfs. In the struggle between the foreign dynasty and domestic feudal lords, the former gave up to intervene in the affairs of serfs. On the other hand, feudal lords reinforced the power on their serfs not only in the physical, but in the spiritual sphere too. For feudal lords, their privilege on religious affairs was self-evident on the premise that they assigned to themselves the power of exercising the right of church-patron. This paper aims at questioning this established account and pointing out two central problems. First, this account regards the act as a part of the regulation of serfdom. Investigating the process of enactment, however, it appeared that the main issue was not on serfs but on the people who lived on those lands belonging to the crown. The second point of debate is about an understanding of the word "villa" [village]. This was interpreted as an expression of the right of non-Catholic church patron to keep their serfs on their side. However, concerning the understanding of the word "villa," we must take into consideration the discretionary power of congregation, which had been developed through late medieval times. As the role of congregation was diverged in each part of the state, there were frequent signs of clashes of opinions among Hungarian feudal lords on the question of the religious liberty of villages. The Act of 1608 declared that the king could not interfere in religious affairs in Hungary, but the right of the villages was not denied. The relation between patron and congregation became a keen issue on the Diet after the 1610s, when the western magnates returned to the Catholic church, and friction between them arose again throughout the Kingdom.

著者

三苫 民雄

出版者

北海道大学スラブ研究センター

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.47, pp.367-384, 2000

著者

ボブロフ アレクサンドル 越野 剛 宮野 裕 毛利 公美 佐光 伸一

出版者

北海道大学スラブ研究センター

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.52, pp.261-280, 2005

著者

シュラトフ ヤロスラブ

出版者

北海道大学スラブ研究センター

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.54, pp.183-205, 2007

著者

渡辺 圭

出版者

北海道大学スラブ研究センター

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.53, pp.193-215, 2006

---

В данной статье мы попытаемся проанализировать идею «пустыни» схимонаха Илариона. Схимонах Иларион, пустынножитель Кавказских гор, известен как автор церковной книги «На горах Кавказа» (1907). В этой книге раскрывается сущность традиционной молитвы православия - «молитвы Иисусовой», которая включает в себя выражение «имя Господа Иисуса Христа есть Сам Он, Господь Бог». Это выражение вызвало богословский спор об имени Бога. Монахи, которые разделяли идею Илариона, называли самих себя «имяславцами». «Имяславие» известно как еретическая проблема русской православной церкви начала ХХ века. Так как вообще «На горах Кавказа» исследуют в рамках проблемы «имени Бога». Однако в ней есть и еще одна важная идея, а именно, т.н. идея «пустыни». В монашестве русской православной церкви «пустыня» имеет большое значение как место подвижничества монаха. Пока исследования книги «На горах Кавказа» с точки зрения идеи «пустыни» весьма скудны. В этом заключается актуальность темы данной статьи. Данная статья состоит из шести глав. В первой главе мы рассматриваем, как понимается идея «пустыни» в истории христианского монашества. Это основа полемики данной статьи. В Ветхом Завете «пустыня» выражается как место встречи Моисея с Богом (Исх. 3,1). И в Новом Завете «пустыня» - это место, в котором жил Иоанн Креститель (Мат. 3, 1-3. Мар. 1, 3-6. Лук. 3, 2-б. Иоап1, 23.), и место искушения Иисуса нечистой силой (Мат. 4, 1-11. Мар. 1, 12-13. Лук. 4, 1-13.). В начале христианского монашества много подвижников вступило в «пустыню» для того, чтобы подражать Иисусу и встретиться с Богом. Следовательно, «пустыня», является местом подвижничества и встречи с Богом. Во второй главе мы анализируем, какое значение имеет идея «пустыни» и как она выражается в истории монашества русского православия. Как отмечает И.К. Счолич, в России сама природа севера стала «пустыней» для монахов, особенно лес. Густые леса севера давали монахам покой для безмолвия и внутреннего моления. Исихасты России подвизались в такой «пустыни». Схимонах Иларион, пустынножитель Кавказских гор, также находился в рамках этой традиции. В третьей главе мы даем краткую биографию Илариона. Для того, чтобы рассуждать об идее «пустыни» Илариона, сначала нужно выяснить, кем был Схимонах Иларион. В четвертой главе мы рассматриваем то, как выражается «пустыня», в книге «На горах Кавказа». Здесь мы отмечаем, что для Илариона богатая природа Кавказских гор есть место встречи с Богом, т.е. «пустыня». Через природу Кавказских гор Иларион славил Господа Бога. В пятой главе мы анализируем, как Иларион понимал разницу между общинной жизнью в монастыре и жизнью в «пустыне». Здесь обнаруживается, что для Илариона жизнь монаха в «пустыни» представляет собой самый высокий уровень подвижничества монаха. В последней шестой главе мы рассмотрели взгляд Илариона на «молитву Иисусовую». Путем этого анализа мы выяснили, к чему восходит высокая оценка Иларионом «молитвы Иисусовой». Иларион развил мысль о «молитве Иисусовой» под влиянием молдавского старца Паисия Величковского Особенность идеи «пустыни» Илариона заключается в утверждении о том, что именно в «пустыне» нужно делать внутреннее дело, т.е. «молитву Иисусовую». В результате анализ данной статьи позволяет нам сделать вывод о том, что схимонах Иларион, пустынножитель Кавказских гор, находится в линии традиции монашества русского православия, но у его идеи о «пустыне» есть свои особенности. Особенность идеи Илариона заключается в том, что в «пустыне» монахам нужно делать «молитву Иисусовую». Этот вывод дает новый взгляд на богословскую мысль схимонаха Илариона.

著者

伊東 孝之

出版者

北海道大学

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.22, pp.135-190, 1978-03-25

著者

広瀬 佳一

出版者

北海道大学

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.34, pp.105-144, 1987

著者

吉岡 潤

出版者

北海道大学スラブ研究センター

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

no.52, pp.1-37, 2005

---

This article examines political dynamics in Poland immediately after World War II, paying particular attention to the multiparty system in that period and the communists' policies toward non-communist parties. Postwar Poland started in July 1944 with the establishment of the Polish Committee of National Liberation (the Lublin Committee) in which the communists exercised hegemonic power. The Lublin Committee and its successor, the Provisional Government, were nominal coalition governments that consisted of four parties: the communist Polish Workers' Party (PPR), the Polish Socialist Party (PPS), the Peasant Party (SL), and the Democratic Party (SD). Postwar Poland was initially characterized by coalition government and political pluralism, which both the domestic and foreign environment made necessary. As for the latter, the Soviet Union had in particular elaborated a "national front" strategy in order to help weak communists in Eastern Europe to participate in postwar administrations, a strategy which was intended to relax the Western Allies' vigilance against the establishment of puppet communist governments. In Poland, the communists, who seized power in spite of their lack of mass support and who, at the same time, had to follow the Soviet "national front" strategy, created for themselves their "allied" parties and adopted their prewar party names. In this "multiparty" system, which this article calls "the Lublin system," the communists allowed only those who accepted the hegemony of the PPR and had no intention to struggle for hegemonic power to be an allied partner. They carefully nipped in the bud any intention by their "allies" to be independent. It was often the case that they used the "plug," the party member dispatched to allied parties as an executive in order to control these parties. These tactics helped the communists to make the SL and the SD their satellite parties, though the excessive use of the "plug" tactic, which took the teeth out of the multiparty system, aroused criticism even in the PPR leadership. The formation of the Provisional Government of National Unity in June 1945, which was to be set up according to the Yalta agreement, together with the return of Mikołajczyk, the former prime minister of the Polish government in exile and an outstanding leader of the Polish peasant movement, caused a change in the Lublin system and the political situation as a whole in Poland. The communists made an effort to draw Mikołajczyk and his followers into their Lublin system, but he refused to be involved in a political framework initiated by the communists and founded a new party in substantial opposition, the Polish Peasant Party (PSL), relying on wide support from the masses. Confronted with the challenge of the PSL, the communists tried to modify the Lublin system into a bipolar structure which would compel the PSL to play the role of the only legal opposition. In this way, they intended to limit the energy required in dealing with scattered targets in struggles for power. At the same time they continued efforts to induce the PSL into the platform of the Lublin system. They offered the PSL an electoral bloc which assured the PSL the same number of seats in the parliament as the PPR and the PPS would occupy, but again Mikołajczyk and his party refused to accept the proposal and decided to enter the general election on its own. In such a situation, the communists played for time by carrying out a referendum. The result of it, however, disappointed the communists, revealing a largely hostile attitude which forced them to falsify the official results in favor of the communists. This falsified referendum cast a shadow on the stability of the Lublin system, activating the socialists (PPS) who intended to mediate between the PPR and the PSL and, by doing so, find their way out of dependency on the communists. Facing such a crisis of the Lublin system, the communists reaffirmed the bipolar structure of the political scene and aimed both to shake the PSL and to bring the PPS back to their side by the time of the forthcoming general election. They succeeded at the latter task, but failed at the former. After recognizing the difficulty in reaching an agreement with Mikołajczyk, the communists decided to destroy the PSL by resorting to underhand means, including far more intensified violence. In the end, the general election was won by force. The collapse of the PSL marked the beginning of the last stage of a political pluralism which had somehow functioned within the limitations of the communist hegemony. It was indeed a significant step toward the establishment of a substantial single-party system in Poland, but this process did not proceed smoothly according to any blueprint. The political unification in postwar Poland was not a linear process of realization of the initial, clear and unchanging purpose of the communists, but rather the result of a series of reactions to circumstances the communists came up against. The political dynamics contributed by various elements, including non-communists, should not be overlooked. It would be more appropriate to say that the series of events which took place in the first period of postwar Poland reveal the problems and obstacles faced in establishing their desired system of hegemonic communist rule.

著者

松田 潤

出版者

北海道大学

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.34, pp.145-171, 1987

著者

岩田 昌征

出版者

北海道大学

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.28, pp.47-72, 1981

著者

巽 由樹子

出版者

北海道大学スラブ研究センター

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.55, pp.249-272, 2008

---

In Russia, the printing press began to develop rapidly during the era of the Great Reforms under the reign of Aleksandr II (1855-1881). At the same time, readership expanded, implying not only a rise in the number of readers but also a change in the readership structure. A. I. Reitblat analyzed this changing readership structure in his Ot Bovy k Bal'montu (Moscow, 1991), in which he divided readers into three groups: (1) intellectual readers (scholars, students, and intelligentsia) who read voluminous academic journals and polite literature; (2) semi-intellectual readers (merchants, middle and lower class officials, servants, intellectual workers, etc.) who read illustrated journals and popular novels; and (3) village readers (peasants and migrant workers) who read religious books, educational pamphlets, and lubki (booklets with illustrations and short texts on wood blocks or copper plates). His study provides important insight, particularly related to the inadequately studied Russian readership in the second half of the nineteenth century. However, his study has two shortcomings: One is that his scheme is too static to demonstrate the emergence of new readers and the accompanying change in the readership structure, and the other is that he relates each group of readers to one particular printing medium too clearly. This paper aims to resolve these problems and further explore the readership analysis of the period after the Great Reforms. For this purpose, we will examine Russian public libraries, one of the main institutions through which books were circulated in those days. First, we will examine the history and environment of Russian public libraries. The process of the establishment of libraries in the Russian Empire comprised three phases: (1) gubernskie publichnye biblioteki (provincial public libraries) in the 1830s and 1840s, (2) obshchestvennye or gorodskie biblioteki (society libraries or city libraries) in the period 1860-1890, and (3) narodnye biblioteki (libraries for the common people) in the 1890s. Geographically, the public libraries were spread across provincial cities (gubernskie goroda) in the 1830s and 1840s, county towns (uezdnye goroda) in the period 1860-1890, and to villages in the 1890s. However, they served as information repositories only for Russian users. Studying public libraries provides us with useful material for solving the two problems mentioned above. The first point concerns the social ranks of readers. They were recorded in the libraries' annual reports and provide us with the following concrete evidence on the process of the expansion of readership: The small group of the nobility and clergy in the 1830s and 1840s expanded to encompass merchants and townspeople in the period 1860-1890, and further to include peasants and workers in the 1890s. Second, we examine the emergence of various readers' groups. Library reports proved that new reading practices such as "light reading" and reading popular novels and illustrated journals appeared after the era of the Great Reforms. Librarians contrasted these practices with those of "serious reading" and reading polite literature and voluminous academic journals. The reports indicated that none of the readers' groups were directly related to a particular medium; instead, readers from various social ranks gradually made a transition from serious reading to light reading. We conclude that in the second half of the nineteenth century, reading in Russia was not limited only to the privileged classes, as is evident from the changing readership structure. Moreover, in the words of J. Habermas, we can consider the readers with new reading habits as "a culture-consuming public." Thus, it can be concluded that the expansion of readership is one of the important phenomena that occurred during the change of the social structure in nineteenth-century Russia.

著者

横手 慎二

出版者

北海道大学スラブ研究センター

雑誌

スラヴ研究(Slavic Studies) (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.29, pp.41-69, 1982

著者

百瀬 宏

出版者

北海道大学

雑誌

スラヴ研究 (ISSN:05626579)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.11, pp.103-121, 1967