| Summary: | Works of literary history dealing with 16th-century Czech literature often speak of the contrast between Latin (aristocratic, Catholic) and national (burgher, Utraquist) humanism. Representatives of these trends fall into two groups which are presented as antithetical, independent and closed, and literary evaluations often favour national humanism for extra-literary (religious, social, linguistic) reasons. In the first part of this paper, we indicate that this contrast does not hold valid completely because, on the one hand, there are numerous cases which may not be easily assimilated within this scheme and, on the other, Czech nationalist humanism depends entirely on Latin models (ancient, medieval, Renaissance). In the second part, we focus on the work of Mikuláš Konáč of Hodíškov, considered to be a typical representative of national humanism. An analysis of his literary and printing work reveals several aspects which lie outside the conventional framework of national humanism. In his literary works (chiefly translations), Konáč draws not from the national (Hussite) tradition, but from international European Latin scholarship. As regards his religious beliefs, he appeared to be a conservative Utraquist, but his attitudes changed with time: an overall tolerance of and sympathy towards the Unity of the...
|
|---|
