The Diary as a Source on the History of the Early Modern Period: the Finer Elements of Academic Publication and Interpretation (Erich Lassota von Steblau. Kreuz und quer durch Europa. Von Krieg, Politik, Kultur und Religion. Das Tagebuch des habsburgerischen Diplomaten und Landsknechtführers Erich Lassota von Steblau (1573–1594) / hrsg. Th. Riis. Kiel, 2021)

 
PIIS013038640017190-7-1
DOI10.31857/S013038640017190-7
Publication type Review
Source material for review ERICH LASSOTA VON STEBLAU. KREUZ UND QUER DURCH EUROPA. VON KRIEG, POLITIK, KULTUR UND RELIGION. DAS TAGEBUCH DES HABSBURGERISCHEN DIPLOMATEN UND LANDSKNECHTFÜHRERS ERICH LASSOTA VON STEBLAU (1573–1594) / Hrsg. Th. Riis. Kiel: Solivagus-Verlag, 2021. 446 S.
Status Published
Authors
Affiliation: Lomonosov Moscow State University
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Journal nameNovaia i noveishaia istoriia
EditionIssue 6
Pages196-200
Abstract

   

Keywords
Received02.09.2021
Publication date19.10.2021
Number of characters19532
Cite  
1 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.
1 The last quarter of the twentieth century gave history – as an academic science – a number of new methods for studying sources, thanks to which a rather familiar and seemingly well-studied corpus underwent a thorough rethinking. This primarily applies to personal documents. To classify them, the famous Dutch historian J. Presser proposed a new term back in the late 1950’s – “ego-documents”. Despite the controversy of many definitions given to the ego-documents, it has established itself in the academic literature since the 80’s – 90’s of the twentieth century1 and is often used in the classification of memoirs, autobiographies, personal letters and diaries, since in all of these sources reveal not just private information, but the author's personality, his own unique and inimitable “I”. The anthropological and linguistic transcends with their inherent concentration on a person, the ways and evidence of his self-expression gave an impetus to the active publication of archival ego-documents and the scientific reprint of valuable (but not commented on in accordance with the modern laws of source study) publications of the 19th century. 1. For more, see.: Krusenstjern B. von. Was sind Selbstzeugnisse? Begriffskritische und quellenkundliche Überlegungen anhand von Beispielen aus dem 17. Jahrhundert // Historische Anthropologie: Kultur, Gesellschaft (1994). S. 462–471; Ego-Dokumente. Annäherung an den Menschen in der Geschichte (Selbstzeugnisse der Neuzeit 2) / hrsg. W. Schulze. Berlin, 1996; Dekker R.M. Jacques Presser's heritage. Egodocuments in the study of history // Memoria y Civilización. Anuario de Historia. 2002. № 5. P. 13–37. In Russia, publications on the subject be. См.: История в эго-документах. Исследования и источники / гл. ред. Н.В. Суржикова. Екатеринбург, 2014.
2 The publication of various personal testimonies in the last two-three decades has repeatedly become the basis for numerous successful projects of historians to introduce new ego-documents into academic circulation2. The publication of the diaries of the imperial diplomat and military leader Erich Lassotte von Steblau (1550–1616), undertaken by the Danish historian Professor Thomas Riis and a group of his colleagues, is a successful continuation of this already stable tradition of presenting little-known, enriched historic documents of personal origin to readers. This publication allows you to expand the discussion both about the term “ego-document” and the appropriateness of its use in relation to the copyright certificates of the 16th–17th centuries, and to refer to the possibilities of diaries and the boundaries of these texts as a historical source in the Early Modern period. The publication of E. Lassota's diary paves the way not only for new accents in the study of sources in the Early Modern period, but may also become a key to expanding narratives on the history of this period. 2. For more, see.: Зарецкий Ю.П. Новые проекты изучения личных свидетельств (Нидерланды, Германия, Франция) // Автор, биография, письмо и чтение. Сборник докладов междисциплинарного исследовательского семинара факультета философии НИУ «Высшая школа экономики» / под ред. Ю.П. Зарецкого, В.П. Лихачева, А.Ю. Зарецкой. М., 2013. С. 24–41.
3 E. Lassota von Steblau belonged to the aristocratic elite of the Holy Roman Empire, being a descendant of a noble family, well-known in Silesia. He received a good education, graduated from the University of Leipzig3, and then, in accordance with the ideals of classical education of the second half of the 16th century. went on a European tour for several years, staying in Padua in 1576 to complete his studies at the University of Padua. E. Lassot began his career in the service of the Spanish King Philip II (1556–1598): he took part in the Spanish Conquest of Portugal in 1580. Returning home, he spent some time in his native Silesia, and later received the post of a diplomatic agent under the Archduke Maximilian (1558–1618), then – a diplomatic post under Emperor Rudolf II (1576–1612). His career was interrupted when he was taken prisoner by the Swedes (his Swedish captivity stretched for three years, from 1590 to 1593). His loyalty to the Austrian Habsburg dynasty was rewarded, and in 1611 he became an “imperial adviser” – a position that in most cases testified to personal ties with the imperial family, rather than about the real impact on internal and foreign policy affairs in the empire. Lassota’s service ended in Kosice, then the capital of Upper Hungary, where he was – for several years – remained in charge of army supplies. Numerous events from of E. Lassota von Steblau’s intriguing life were reflected in his diary. 3. Absmeier Ch. Das schlesische Schulwesen im Jahrhundert der Reformation. Stuttgart, 2011. S. 193.
4 T. Riis took as the basis for his publication materials that first saw the light in the second half of the 19th century, thanks to the German professor Robert Schottin4. Of course, the modern publication of the diary differs strikingly from the 19th century publication. Considering Lassota's diary not only as a historical source, but also as a source on the history of the language, T. Riis did not correct the grammar and style of the author's writing, allowing his “protagonist” to write as was customary for his time. Nevertheless, all nouns, in contrast to the publication of Shottin, were unified by the historian according to the modern rules of German writing. From the original edition, as noted by T. Riis in the preface, his publication is distinguished by a number of other important points, in particular, he deciphered the numerous abbreviations that Lassota constantly used, such as, for example, “village” (in the original “v”.), “city” (in the original “c”) “market / fair” (in the original M), “breakfast” (in the original frst), making reading the text of the diary much more convenient. Scrupulous work with many archival originals allowed the historian to come to a number of important discoveries, including a chance to prove, thanks to the paleographic analysis of Lassota's archival letters, that the published manuscript was subjected to the author's own handwritten correction (p. 9). This discovery is extremely important for understanding the diary as a historical source. Traditionally, it is believed that the authors who kept the diary did not work on their periodic entries in the future, trying to keep in memory all the episodes, “how they actually happened”. However, for the early modern times, this statement cannot be unambiguous and universal, as T. Riis beautifully proves in his publication. The diaries of the early modern era could be revised by the author, depending on the life circumstances in which he fell. The text carried significant information, and its value began to be realized more and more during the formation of a single European communicative space of the 16th–17th centuries. The publisher rightly assumes that Lassota revised the manuscript of the diary, probably deliberately excluding certain passages that could cause him trouble in Swedish captivity. 4. Tagebuh des Erich Lassota von Steblau. Nach einer Hs. der von Gerdsdorff-Weicha’schen Bibliothek zu Bautzen / hrsg. R. Schottin. Halle, 1866.

Price publication: 1

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 439

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Istoriya v ego-dokumentah. Issledovaniya i istochniki / gl. red. N.V. Surzhikova [History in ego-documents. Research and sources / ed. N.V. Surzhikova]. Ekaterinburg, 2014. (In Russ.)

2. Dekker R.M. Jacques Presser's heritage. Egodocuments in the study of history // Memoria y Civilización. Anuario de Historia. 2002. № 5. P. 13–37.

3. Ego-Dokumente. Annäherung an den Menschen in der Geschichte (Selbstzeugnisse der Neuzeit 2) / hrsg. W. Schulze. Berlin, 1996.

4. Krusenstjern B. von. Was sind Selbstzeugnisse? Begriffskritische und quellenkundliche Überlegungen anhand von Beispielen aus dem 17. Jahrhundert // Historische Anthropologie: Kultur, Gesellschaft (1994). S. 462–471.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up