Я вроде знала, что из «Истории инквизиции» Генри-Чарльза Ли под редакцией Лозинского в переводе Башкирова убрали «комментарии Ли не относящиеся прямо к истории инквизиции», но все равно удивляюсь тому, насколько русский перевод сокращен. (Тут подсказывают, что, возможно, дореволюционное издание было полнее, а сократили при переиздании в 90е; нужно проверить).
Например, вот английский текст: Peter Cantor, an unexceptionable witness, describes them as fishers for money and not for souls, with a thousand frauds to empty the pockets of the poor. They have, he says, three hooks with which to catch their prey in the depths—the confessor, to whom is committed the hearing of confessions and the cure of souls; the dean, archdeacon, and other officials, who advance the interest of the prelate by fair means or foul; and the rural provost, who is chosen solely with regard to his skill in squeezing the pockets of the poor and carrying the spoil to his master. These places were frequently farmed out, and the right to torture and despoil the people was sold to the highest bidder. The general detestation in which these gentry were held is illustrated by the story of an ecclesiastic who, having by an unlucky run of the dice lost all his money but five sols, exclaimed in blasphemous madness that he would give them to any one who would teach him how most greatly to offend God, and a bystander was adjudged to have won the money when he said, "If you wish to offend God beyond all other sinners, become an episcopal official or collector."
Французский, с которого переводил Башкиров, тут. А перевод на картинке.
Я вроде знала, что из «Истории инквизиции» Генри-Чарльза Ли под редакцией Лозинского в переводе Башкирова убрали «комментарии Ли не относящиеся прямо к истории инквизиции», но все равно удивляюсь тому, насколько русский перевод сокращен. (Тут подсказывают, что, возможно, дореволюционное издание было полнее, а сократили при переиздании в 90е; нужно проверить).
Например, вот английский текст: Peter Cantor, an unexceptionable witness, describes them as fishers for money and not for souls, with a thousand frauds to empty the pockets of the poor. They have, he says, three hooks with which to catch their prey in the depths—the confessor, to whom is committed the hearing of confessions and the cure of souls; the dean, archdeacon, and other officials, who advance the interest of the prelate by fair means or foul; and the rural provost, who is chosen solely with regard to his skill in squeezing the pockets of the poor and carrying the spoil to his master. These places were frequently farmed out, and the right to torture and despoil the people was sold to the highest bidder. The general detestation in which these gentry were held is illustrated by the story of an ecclesiastic who, having by an unlucky run of the dice lost all his money but five sols, exclaimed in blasphemous madness that he would give them to any one who would teach him how most greatly to offend God, and a bystander was adjudged to have won the money when he said, "If you wish to offend God beyond all other sinners, become an episcopal official or collector."
Французский, с которого переводил Башкиров, тут. А перевод на картинке.
On Feb. 27, however, he admitted from his Russian-language account that "Telegram channels are increasingly becoming a source of unverified information related to Ukrainian events." One thing that Telegram now offers to all users is the ability to “disappear” messages or set remote deletion deadlines. That enables users to have much more control over how long people can access what you’re sending them. Given that Russian law enforcement officials are reportedly (via Insider) stopping people in the street and demanding to read their text messages, this could be vital to protect individuals from reprisals. Telegram has gained a reputation as the “secure” communications app in the post-Soviet states, but whenever you make choices about your digital security, it’s important to start by asking yourself, “What exactly am I securing? And who am I securing it from?” These questions should inform your decisions about whether you are using the right tool or platform for your digital security needs. Telegram is certainly not the most secure messaging app on the market right now. Its security model requires users to place a great deal of trust in Telegram’s ability to protect user data. For some users, this may be good enough for now. For others, it may be wiser to move to a different platform for certain kinds of high-risk communications. Telegram has become more interventionist over time, and has steadily increased its efforts to shut down these accounts. But this has also meant that the company has also engaged with lawmakers more generally, although it maintains that it doesn’t do so willingly. For instance, in September 2021, Telegram reportedly blocked a chat bot in support of (Putin critic) Alexei Navalny during Russia’s most recent parliamentary elections. Pavel Durov was quoted at the time saying that the company was obliged to follow a “legitimate” law of the land. He added that as Apple and Google both follow the law, to violate it would give both platforms a reason to boot the messenger from its stores. "This time we received the coordinates of enemy vehicles marked 'V' in Kyiv region," it added.
from ru
