The Young Professor 1887-1902

2017 ◽  
pp. 63-100
Keyword(s):  
2006 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-152
Author(s):  
Luc Vandeweyer

Hendrik Draye, opponent of the carrying out of the death penaltyIn this annotated and extensively contextualised source edition, Luc Vandeweyer deals with the period of repression after the Second World War. In June 1948, after the execution of two hundred collaboration-suspects in Belgium, the relatively young linguistics professor at the Catholic University of Leuven, Hendrik Draye, proposed, on humanitarian grounds, a Manifesto against the carrying out of the death penalty. Some colleagues, as well as some influential personalities outside the university, reacted positively; some colleagues were rather hesitant; most of them rejected the text. In the end, the initiative foundered because of the emphatic dissuasion by the head of university, who wanted to protect his university and, arguably, the young professor Draeye. The general public’s demand for revenge had not yet abated by then; moreover, the unstable government at that time planned a reorientation of the penal policy, which made a polarization undesirable. Nevertheless, Luc Vandeweyer concludes, "the opportunity for an important debate on the subject had been missed".


2019 ◽  
pp. 4-82
Author(s):  
Paul Rusnock ◽  
Jan Šebestík

This volume provides the most complete biography of Bolzano in English to date. After a brief survey of the history of Bohemia, Chapter 1 recounts the main events of Bolzano’s life: his early upbringing and education, his activity as a young professor at the Charles University, his dismissal and trial, and his later life, including his intense relationship with Anna Hoffmann and his wide-ranging work as an independent scholar. (67 Words)


2011 ◽  
pp. 166-205
Author(s):  
Susan Howson
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-14
Author(s):  
Anton Kotenko

Ukrainian parliamentarism and constitutionalism have a long history. Its brightest episode occurred 100 years ago, in 1917–1921, when the Ukrainian activists tried to cope with the breakup of the Romanov Empire by suggesting various projects of its reconstruction. In this article, I argue that the history of these projects began at least half a century earlier, when a young professor of history at Kiev University, Mykhailo Drahomanov, started to reflect upon future reorganization of the Russian Empire into a parliamentary state. Being an ardent advocate of turning the empire into a representative democracy, Drahomanov still felt uneasy about unapologetic support of parliamentarism. Having embraced Proudhonian idea of anarchy or self-government, he realized that the existence of parliament was not a universal cure for all political ills of the Russian Empire, especially for the main one—extreme state centralization. Hence, his views of political reconstruction of the empire did not necessarily mean transforming it into the Russian Republic. It seems that a reasonable and reasoned monarch, who could turn the empire into a federal state with a wide local self-government, would totally fulfill Drahomanov’s ideas of future Russia. His enormous influence upon the pre-war Ukrainian intellectuals explains why only few of them seriously discussed an idea of Ukrainian state independence in 1917.


2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 275-284
Author(s):  
Gordon K. Booth

At first sight these two eminent Victorians appear to be most incongruous travelling companions: the one a relatively austere young professor of Hebrew in the Free Church of Scotland, the other a mature, hard-swearing, short-tempered, thoroughly agnostic trouble-maker with an unconcealed penchant for oriental erotica. Both men, however, had provoked widespread controversy and were regarded in high places as “unsound.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document