Page:Lectures on The Historians of Bohemia by Count Lutzow (1905).djvu/85

 and incidentally to refute Thurn. These memoirs or paměty, as they are called in Bohemian, have great value, as Slavata constantly quotes state papers to which he had free access. They long remained in manuscript, but were edited and published by the late Dr. Jireček some years ago. They lend themselves very little to brief quotations. In my History of Bohemian Literature I have quoted a considerable portion of Slavata’s account of the banquet which King Frederick’s officials gave to the envoys whom the Sultan had sent to Prague. It is a masterpiece of finesse and skilful animosity.

In the last years of his life Slavata appears to have acquired a taste for writing history. He wrote a very extensive book, entitled Historical Works, consisting of fourteen manuscript volumes. The memoirs already mentioned were included in this book. The rest of the huge work, in which Slavata treats of the history of Bohemia from the earliest times, has little value. Slavata’s principal authorities are Aenaeas Sylvius and Hajek, and a lengthy treatise (included in the book), which attempts to prove that the Bohemian crown was hereditary, is inconclusive and was unnecessary, as the matter had been settled ‘by blood and iron’ at the battle of the White Mountain.

I shall now refer to Paul Skála ze Zhoře, one of the greatest historians of Bohemia, perhaps her greatest, before the days of Palacký. Skála was born at Žatec in 1583. He received his earliest education at Prague, and afterwards visited the then far-famed University of Wittenberg, then the centre of Protestant learning. In 1603 Skála returned to his country and settled at Žatec, where he took considerable part in local politics,