Вештина говорништва Николе Пашића

Апстракт

Аутор анализира до сада непознате говоре Николе Пашића
које је држао на политичким скуповима, страначким земаљским конференцијама и другим пригодама покушавајући да преко њих докучи „вештину
говорништва” и говора као историјског извора.

Резиме: Much has been written about Nikola Pa{i}, politician, statesman and
diplomat, during his lifetime, and even more lately on. And yet, historiography
has so far been denied a comprehensive work which would at least partly, elucidate his personality. For various reasons and despite numerous attempts, the
least was written about his speeches. His subsequently found statements and
above all, his speeches held at political meetings, party conventions and on festive occasions, were an object of an analysis with the aim of deciphering the „art
of oratory” and speeches as historical sources. Firstly, the contents of a speech
by a politician, statesman and a diplomat depends on the position the speaker
holds in the pecking order of social or political power, and on how he outlines
his programme. Another important factor of speech as a historical source lies in
the relation between the structure and contents of a speech and the audience for
which it is meant. The third factor is the question whether a speech represents a
turning point in form and way of delivery, and if it is innovative. As a historical
source, a speech can delineate personal characteristics and psychological type of
a historical personage. Speeches can be also regarded as the state of political culture on general or individual level. When selecting speeches of a statesman it is
important that their diversity help form an overall picture of his character and
activities. Historian should not let a speech itself reveal a historical personage;
with the aid of the critical apparatus he should explain the circumstances in
which a speech was delivered, establish veracity etc. On the example of selected speeches of N. Pa{i}, it is plain to see that the opinion of him as „bad speaker and excellent tactitian and parlamentary” universally held up to now, does not
hold true. His speeches show him to have been a pragmatic statesman, politician
and diplomat who could also be rethorically inspired if need be, knowing also to
stirr deeper emotions with his audience.