Path-development trajectories and barriers perceived by stakeholders in two Central European less developed regions: narrow or broad choice?

This paper aims at the comprehension of feasible development trajectories conceptualized within the new path-development model in the case of two less developed regions in Central Europe (CE). The main new element of this paper comprises the examination of the perception of key barriers and mechanisms hindering particular evolutionary trajectories by regional stakeholders and their comparison with those conceptualized in the literature. Although conceptual characteristics of prevailing path types in different regional innovation systems do exist, empirical verification from less developed regions such as those in CE is insufficient. On the basis of interviews with regional stakeholders, a typology of barriers for pathways conceptualized to date was elaborated from a CE perspective. Our study showed that the feasibility of a more radical path is hindered by a wide range of barriers operating at different levels. The elaborated typology of barriers for various path-development trajectories outlined the main hindrances constraining key regional actors, linkages and institutions. Given the general weakness of the overall RIS, path-extension and path-modernization trajectories are bound to be the most realistic options for this type of less developed regions. Our study revealed existing regional dynamics as built predominately upon incremental changes within rooted but prospective industrial branches.     

The Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition in Southeastern Central Europe (Czechoslovakia and Hungary)

Southeastern Central Europe is quite rich in finds of progressive Neandertals from Middle Paleolithic contexts and early modern humans associated with evolved Upper Paleolithic (Aurignacian and Pavlovian). There are no human fossils that can be related to the transitional Middle-Upper Paleolithic units (the Bohunician and the Szeletian); thus, from anthropology we know only that the transitional period began with Neandertals and ended with modern humans. The archaeological record is more complex. The Jankovichian industries of Hungary differ from the mostly non-Levallois Middle Paleolithic of Central Europe in the presence of some Levallois; they seem to be technologically related to the Levallois-Leptolithic Bohunician industries of Moravia, dated to 43,000–38,000 B.P., which are the first transitional Upper Paleolithic unit. The appearance of the Szeletian before 42,000 B.P. in Hungary and at about 39,000 in Moravia represents a technological variation of the transition, although retaining marked local Middle Paleolithic elements. The date of the appearance of the typical Aurignacian, the first culture clearly related to modern humans, is unclear, but it certainly developed after 36,000 B.P. and has several dates between 35,000 and 30,000 B.P.     

Antiquarianism and abduction: charles vallancey as harbinger of indo-european linguistics

Scholars generally dismiss the ideas of the eighteenth-century founder of the Royal Irish Academy, Charles Vallancey, who argued for links between ancient Irish, Phoenician, and Scythian languages and cultures. Vallancey's antiquarian writings were widely known at the time and impacted upon thinkers such as William Jones, who first correctly articulated the links between Indo-European languages. Earlier, Vallancey had hypothesized similar links and a “common source” of world languages, relying on Irish origin legends and supposed similarities between Ireland and the “Orient.” Though inaccurate, his ideas spurred fuller investigations, prompting philologers in new directions. The father of semiotics, Charles Sanders Peirce, argued for the value of speculative reasoning, outlining the logic of discovery. For Peirce “abduction” is the beginning of the scientific method, the formation of a hypothesis. Reading Vallancey's speculations as abductive suggestions accounts for his prominence at the time and asserts his influence in the history of philology and linguistics.