Krrfi?~-'--' 
 

 ..s&r PRINCETON, N. J. V *?V 
 
 
 
 Purchased by the 
 Mrs. Robert Lenox Kennedy Church History Fund 
 
 
 BX 4917 .L87 1909 
 
 L utzow, Franz Heinrich 
 
 Hieronymus Valentin, 1849- 
 The life & times of Master 
 
 .Tnhn Hue 
 
 
THE LIFE & TIMES 
 
 OF 
 
 MASTER JOHN HUS 
 

"'& 
 
 * DEC I 5 1909 
 
 THE LIFE & TIMES W- 
 
 <&o 
 
 OF 
 
 "/GAL ; 
 
 
 MASTER JOHN HUS 
 
 BY 
 
 / 
 
 THE COUNT LUTZOW 
 
 Hon. D.Litt. Oxon., Hon. Ph.D. Prag., Author of 
 A History of Bohemian Literature, Prague, etc. 
 
 WITH ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 MCMIX 
 
 LONDON: J. M. DENT & CO. 
 NEW YORK : E. P. DUTTON & CO. 
 

 All rights reserved 
 
PREFACE 
 
 It is hardly necessary to state that it is not without diffidence 
 that I attempt to give an account of the life and times of John 
 Hus. So much has been written on the great subject of the 
 Bohemian reformation, and yet so little that is satisfactory. 
 Hus has often been described as a martyr and as a forerunner 
 of the German reformation, and both statements are to a 
 certain extent true. It has equally often been attempted to 
 blacken the memory of Hus, frequently by the most unworthy 
 means. I write as a fervent admirer of Hus, both as an enthu- 
 siastic Bohemian patriot and as a fervent and pious Christian, 
 whose life-purpose was to strive for a return to the conditions 
 of the apostolic church, and to rescue the Church of Rome from 
 the state of unspeakable corruption into which it had then 
 fallen; and from which, partly by the action of Hus, it has 
 since been delivered. It is no part of my task to attempt to 
 prove that Hus was perfect. No man, indeed, would have 
 resented such an attempt more than he, who in his writings 
 constantly refers in a childlike and touching manner to his — 
 very insignificant — shortcomings. 
 
 The very fact that my sympathy is entirely with Hus has, 
 I hope, been to me an inducement to sift carefully all reliable 
 evidence that may be contrary to him, and to study diligently 
 the writings of all those who have written unfavourably of Hus. 
 This impartiality appears to me as a duty for those who 
 attempt, as historians, to pass judgment on the great men of 
 bygone days. Not one of these great men has been judged 
 
vi THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 more differently than Hus ; and recent German historians have 
 with great ingenuity attempted to classify the writers who 
 have dealt with the life of the greatest man who belonged to 
 the Czech or Bohemian race. It is sufficient to note here that 
 these writers are either favourable to the Church of Rome 
 and therefore, though often with great limitations, hostile to 
 Hus, or opponents of Rome, who revere in him one of the 
 earliest champions of religious liberty and one of the fore- 
 runners of the German reformers. This division may appear 
 obvious, but it is far less absolute than might be imagined. 
 Thus Romanist writers who belong to the Czech or Bohemian 
 nationality have often written somewhat favourably of Hus. 
 Though condemning those of his views — far less numerous 
 than has often been thought — which are opposed to Rome, 
 these writers have done thorough justice to the beauty of his 
 truly saintly character, and they have admitted that it was 
 the virtuous indignation caused in him by the immoral life 
 led by many — and principally the higher — ecclesiastics of 
 the Roman Church that induced him to denounce that church 
 in very strong terms. 
 
 On the other hand, Protestant German writers have, prin- 
 cipally within the last years, violently attacked the memory of 
 Hus. They saw in him mainly the undaunted champion of 
 the oppressed Czech or Bohemian nationality. It was found 
 easier in Germany to render justice to Hus at a time when the 
 national cause for which he struggled so manfully appeared to 
 be doomed, than it is now, when the Bohemian language, 
 which owes so much to Hus, has attained a development that 
 was undreamt of a century ago. Incidentally, and no doubt 
 unintentionally, these German writers have done great service 
 to the fame of Hus by drawing attention to the great part 
 
PREFACE 
 
 vn 
 
 which he played as a Bohemian patriot. It was the word 
 of Hus, as well as the sword of Zizka, which preserved the 
 autonomy and the national character of Bohemia, which at 
 the period of the Hussite wars were seriously menaced by the 
 numerous German colonists whom the policy of the Premy- 
 slide princes had established in the Bohemian towns. It will, 
 of course, be my duty to point out the great part that Hus 
 played as a Bohemian patriot. He believed as firmly as the 
 Bohemian patriots of the present day that the nation as an 
 individuality stands and falls with its language. Hus devoted 
 much time and care to the development of that language, 
 and a little-known part of his activity also consisted in his 
 endeavour to introduce into the churches the singing by lay- 
 men of hymns in the national language. 
 
 The fact that the movement in favour of church-reform, 
 which had in England found expression in the writings of 
 Wycliffe, found in Bohemia a particularly fruitful soil, was a 
 consequence of the condition and past history of the country. 
 Bohemia had first received the Christian teaching from Greek 
 monks of Salonika, and even after it began to form part of the 
 Western Church, Roman institutions penetrated into the 
 country gradually and slowly. Thus the celibacy of the 
 clergy was introduced into Bohemia later than into most 
 countries, and it seems probable — though this is a most con- 
 troversial matter — that communion in the two kinds continued 
 to be customary there up to a late period, perhaps up to the 
 beginning of the fifteenth century. It also requires mention 
 that, in consequence of its geographical position, Bohemia for 
 a long time suffered less from the extortions of the Roman 
 pontiffs than many other countries. Only when, in conse- 
 quence of the schism, the rival popes found that the number 
 
viii THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 of countries from which they could derive funds was diminish- 
 ing, the claims of Rome on Bohemia became more urgent and 
 more frequent. The discontent caused by the rapacity of the 
 rival pontiffs, whose violent controversies did not raise the 
 Western Church in the esteem of the Bohemian people, found 
 a centre in the University of Prague. Under the influence of 
 this university, a school of theologians sprung up who are 
 known as the forerunners of Hus. These writers long re- 
 mained almost unknown, and it is only since the revival of 
 Bohemian literature in the nineteenth century that their 
 works have again begun to attract attention. Even now 
 much work has to be done and many MSS. remain imprinted; 
 still it can already be stated that recent research has thrown 
 much new light on Hus and the Hussite movement. I have 
 in this work endeavoured to give a resume of the studies of 
 modern Bohemian writers on this movement. These works, 
 mostly written in the national language, have by no means 
 received hitherto the attention which they well deserve. 
 
 It may be here stated that these writings prove clearly 
 the existence in Bohemia of a strong national movement in 
 favour of church-reform, which depended by no means entirely 
 on foreign influences. As Dr. Kybal recently wrote in his 
 valuable work on Matthew of Janov, the greatest of the fore- 
 runners of Hus: " The view that Hussitism is merely artifici- 
 ally fostered Wycliffism appears to me logically and historically 
 as nonsense." x It would be invidious to attribute to racial 
 antagonism the recent attempts of German writers to depre- 
 ciate the importance of Hus. Yet it is certain that the German 
 writers, who recently have extolled Wycliffe at the expense of 
 Hus, have attributed to the English divine greater originality 
 
 1 Dr. Kybal uses the English word " nonsense." 
 
PREFACE 
 
 IX 
 
 and greater depth of thought than is generally attributed to 
 him by his countrymen. 
 
 I have under the heading " Bibliography " given a large 
 though by no means complete list of the authorities which I 
 have consulted, and specially drawn attention to the writings 
 of the modern Bohemian historians, on whose labours this 
 work is mainly based. I wish to express my particular thanks 
 to Dean Miiller of Herrnhut, who has kindly forwarded me a 
 photograph of the portrait of Hus — reproduced here — which 
 has been preserved by the community of Herrnhut. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Church of Rome 
 
 Preface ....... 
 
 I. Europe and Bohemia at the Time of Hus 
 
 II. The Forerunners of Hus 
 
 III. The Youth of Hus .... 
 
 A IV. The Beginning of Hus's Opposition to the 
 
 V. Hus as Leader of His Nation . 
 
 VI. Hus in Exile ..... 
 
 VII. Hus at Constance .... 
 
 VIII. The Trial and Death of Hus . 
 
 IX. Hus as a Bohemian Patriot 
 
 X. The Writings of Hus — Portraits of Hus 
 
 XI. Jerome of Prague .... 
 
 XII. The Hussite Wars .... 
 
 Appendix — 
 
 Contemporary Bohemian Account of the Death of Hus 
 
 Bibliography ........ 
 
 Index ......... 
 
 i 
 
 17 
 
 63 
 
 93 
 
 114 
 
 167 
 
 20S 
 
 244 
 
 293 
 310 
 
 3 21 
 
 335 
 
 373 
 383 
 3S7 
 
 Xi 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 Portrait of John Hus (Photogravure) .... Frontispiece 
 
 ,, King Vexceslas of Bohemia (Photogravure) facing page 82 
 ,, Pope John XXIII. (Photogravure) . . 96 
 
 ,, Emperor Sigismund (Photogravure) 
 Plan of Constance at Time of Council 
 Distribution of Food at Constance during the Council 
 Burning of John Hus ...... 
 
 Scattering Hus's Ashes ...... 
 
 Medals of John Hus ....... 
 
 136 
 182 
 
 1S4 
 2S4 
 284 
 318 
 
THE LIFE AND TIMES OF 
 MASTER JOHN HUS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 EUROPE AND BOHEMIA AT THE TIME OF HUS 
 
 Hostility to the Church of Rome is almost as ancient as the 
 prosperity of that church. The fabled " donation of Con- 
 stantine," the subject of the lamentations of Dante and so 
 many other mediaeval writers, certainly denotes a landmark 
 in the history of the church. The suffering early church has, 
 in the Christian martyrs, given to humanity some of its noblest 
 types, and the comparison of Hus to these sufferers frequently 
 recurs in the writings of the Bohemians. When Constantine 
 granted to the church, not indeed sovereign power, but great 
 authority and riches, a very sudden change took place. The 
 contrast between the martyrs of the year 313 and the wealthy 
 and worldly prelates who, under imperial presidency, discussed 
 matters of dogma at Nicaea in 325 is very great. Henceforth 
 the power and influence of the church constantly increase and 
 the conception of the priest as an individual who, by virtue 
 of his office, is superior to the layman, becomes more and more 
 widely spread. As in many cases the life of the layman was 
 simpler, more moral, more virtuous than that of the priest, 
 this assumption caused great animosity against the clergy. 
 Claims such as that of receiving communion more frequently, 
 and of partaking of the sacrament in the two kinds — a favour 
 not granted to laymen — were constantly brought forward 
 by the priests, particularly in Bohemia. These pretentions, 
 indeed, played a very great part in the Bohemian movement 
 for church-reform, for the Bohemians considered them as 
 
 A 
 
2 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 indicating an ever-increasing endeavour on the part of the 
 priests to raise new barriers between themselves and those 
 who were not in holy orders. Thence sprang the fervent 
 devotion of the Bohemians to the chalice which has surprised 
 many writers, and has exposed the Bohemians to the ridicule 
 of both ultramontanes and agnostics ever since the days of 
 Hus. To the Hussites the chalice was an emblem signifying 
 the equality of all true Christians. 
 
 The ideal object of all mediaeval opponents of the Church of 
 Rome was a return to the simplicity of the primitive church, 
 and the poverty of the clergy which that return was considered 
 to imply. All those who, in mediaeval times, wished to rescue 
 the church from the evil plight into which it had fallen — 
 whether they remained in the Church of Rome or were ex- 
 cluded from it — felt and expressed profound veneration for 
 poverty. As Cardinal Newman writes: 1 "It will not be 
 denied that, according to the Scripture view of the church, 
 though all are admitted into her pale, and the rich inclusively, 
 yet the poor are her members with a peculiar suitableness 
 and by a special right. Scripture is ever casting slurs upon 
 wealth and making much of poverty." 
 
 It has often been noted that, during the long struggle between 
 the popes and the rulers of Germany, known as the contest 
 about investitures, the German emperors very rarely appealed 
 to the popular feeling in their contest with the Roman pontiffs. 
 We find, of course, an exception in the case of Frederick II., 
 who, after his deposition by Pope Innocent IV. at the Council 
 of Lyons in 1245, appealed to the sovereigns of Europe 
 against the pontiff. 2 This case is, however, an isolated one, 
 and though the victory of the papacy over Germany cannot be 
 
 1 Cardinal Newman, Historical Sketches, vol. i. p. 341, ed. of 1894. 
 
 8 In the course of this letter the emperor writes: " Semper fuit nostrae 
 voluntatis intentio clericos cujusumque ordinis ad hoc inducere, et praecipue 
 ad ilium statum reducere ut tales persevereut in fine quales fuerunt in ecclesia 
 primitiva apostolicam vitam ducentes et humilitatem dominicam imitantes. 
 (Huillard Breholles, Historia diplomatica Frederici Secundi, quoted by 
 Lechler.) 
 
EUROPE AND BOHEMIA 3 
 
 considered a complete one, the tendency to increase the 
 authority and powers of the pope and of the upper ranks of 
 the Roman hierarchy at the expense of the parish-priests 
 and laymen continued, with brief interruptions, up to the time 
 of Hus. The Hussite movement, indeed, can be considered 
 as the first serious obstacle which confronted the extreme -j 
 autocratic tendencies of Rome. As has been often pointed 
 out, these tendencies were greatly aided by the development 
 of the study of canonic law. These codes, founded on the 
 writings of the jurists of imperial Rome, who maintained 
 the absolute and unlimited power of the sovereign, strongly 
 favoured the claims of the popes to a similar unrestricted 
 authority. The excessive study of canonic law to the detri- 
 ment of the study of the Bible greatly displeased those who 
 wished the church to be poor and pure. One of the earliest 
 Bohemian reformers, Matthew of Janov, has expressed himself 
 strongly on this subject. 1 
 
 In close connection with the papal claim of unrestricted 
 authority was the question of the validity of the sacraments 
 when dispensed by unworthy priests. It is difficult to overrate 
 the importance of this question; for if it was admitted that 
 immoral or dishonest priests could not validly administer the 
 sacraments, the whole system of the papal hierarchy ceased 
 to be sustainable. The popular mind was far more agitated 
 by questions such as these than by the subtleties of dogmatic 
 controversy on which later writers have laid so great a stress. 
 
 As already mentioned, the rulers of Germany had, during 
 their prolonged struggle with papacy, entirely confined them- 
 selves to endeavours to limit the influence of the popes on the 
 pohtics of Germany. If we except the belated attempt of 
 
 1 He writes: " Magis nunc sunt in precio doctrine et studium eorum que 
 vulgo jura canonica dicuntur quam studium biblie, prophetarum et evangeli- 
 orum et multo pinquiores transferunt ad studendum jura et leges quam 
 sanctam theologiam et studentes talium legum et doctrinarum humanarum 
 magis et cicius promoventur quam scribe et docti in lege Jesu Christi et 
 theologia." (Mattheas de Janov, Regulae Veteris et Novi Testatrienti- I 
 .have preserved the spelling as printed by Dr. Kybal from the MS.) 
 
4 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Frederick II., nothing was done to arrest the development of 
 the Roman hierarchy in an ever-increasingly absolutist sense. 
 The German rulers also made but slight attempts to enlist 
 to their side the popular feeling then strongly opposed to the 
 Roman hierarchy, many of whose members were believed by 
 the people to be haughty, avaricious, and devoid of all morality. 
 
 In the subsequent struggle between the papacy and the 
 kings of France, matters were different. Writers such as John 
 of Paris and Egydius Colonna, Archbishop of Bourges, strongly 
 opposed the papal claims, and the latter went so far as to deny 
 to the pontiff all right to temporal power. 1 In this struggle 
 the kings of France were victorious, and it was one of the 
 results of their victory that the papal court was transferred 
 to Avignon, a city in the immediate vicinity of the French 
 territory, and which was under the rule of a relation of the 
 King of France. During this struggle between papacy and the 
 rulers of France, the University of Paris played a very great 
 part, and it became for a time the central authority in France 
 on questions of theology; its position was somewhat similar 
 to that of the University of Prague at the beginning of the 
 Hussite wars. The University of Paris thus acquired great 
 fame and students flocked to it from all parts of Europe. 
 Among them was Matthew of Janov, one of the earliest 
 Bohemian church-reformers, whose name will be frequently 
 met in these pages. 
 
 The successful struggle of France against papacy was no 
 doubt one of the causes of the energetic resistance offered to 
 Rome by Louis of Bavaria, King of the Germans. A man of 
 moderate intelligence, he entirely overlooked the immense 
 difference between the position of a ruler of Germany, where 
 
 1 Egydius writes: " Tertio declarandum est quod Christus in institutione 
 spiritualis potestatis nullum commisit vel potius promisit Dominium terre- 
 norum. . . . Ecce Christus Jesus, Rex Regum Dominus dominantium regale 
 fugit dominium et fastuosum fastigium. Iqitur qua ratione vel autoritate 
 vicarius ejus vindicabit sibi culmen vel nomen Regiae dignitatis ? " (Goldast., 
 Monorchia Imperii Romani, torn. ii. p. 95 and fl.) 
 
EUROPE AND BOHEMIA 5 
 
 the local potentates were ever increasing their power, and that 
 of a king of France — a country in which even then a contrary, 
 that is to say, a centralist tendency, began to appear. As had 
 been the case in France, in Germany also, the sovereign found 
 able literary men who devoted much talent and erudition to 
 the defence of Louis of Bavaria. Such men were Marsiglio of 
 Padua, John of Jandun, William of Occam, and others. 1 If, 
 on the whole, Louis's struggle with papacy may be considered 
 as having been unsuccessful, this cannot be entirely attributed 
 to his incompetence, but to a certain extent also to the extreme 
 vehemence of his literary allies, which alienated many mode- 
 rate-minded men. These were fully aware of the necessity 
 for church-reform — no right-minded man at that time could 
 fail to perceive it — but they objected to the revolutionary 
 character of some of the writings of Louis's allies. This applies 
 particularly to (Marsiglio of Padua's Defensor Pacisj In this -f— • 
 strange work almost all the subsequent attacks on papacy are 
 foreshadowed, and it has, as Neander has written, already 
 what may be called a " Protestant " character. The Defensor 
 is one of the most important works that belong to the Middle 
 Ages. It contains the germ not only of Protestantism, but also 
 of all those liberal and democratic views that only attained their 
 full development centuries later. I shall here, however, as far 
 as the necessary coherence of my work permits, limit myself 
 to outlining that part of Marsiglio's work in which he expresses 
 opinions similar to those of Hus and the other Bohemian 
 reformers. Marsiglio of Padua, born in the city of that name 
 about the year 1270, studied for a considerable time at the 
 University of Paris and was, in 1312, rector of that university. 
 It is stated that in Paris he fell under the influence of William 
 of Occam. They were men of about the same age, but it is 
 probable — though the dates of the works of both writers are 
 uncertain — that Occam expressed disagreement with the papal 
 
 1 The best account of the lives and writings of these men is still that given 
 by Dr. Riezler in his brilliant work, Die Liter ■arischen Widersacher der Pdpste. 
 
6 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 rule at an earlier period than Marsiglio. The latter appears 
 also at this period already to have made the acquaintance 
 of several Italian and German scholars — mostly monks belong- 
 ing to the order of the minorites — who afterwards became his 
 allies when he undertook to defend the cause of King Louis 
 against papal agression. Marsiglio, whose views were on most 
 subjects entirely opposed to those then generally accepted by 
 the Roman Church, appears to have at this period already 
 incurred the suspicion of heresy. It was at Paris that, in con- 
 junction with his colleague, John of J an dun, he composed his 
 masterpiece, the Defensor Pacis. It was reported that the two 
 scholars had written the book in the space of two months. 
 To all those who have even a superficial acquaintance with the 
 Defensor this can only mean that it was during that time 
 that they gathered together and shaped into a unity the results 
 of many years of study. With this newly-written book as an 
 introduction, Marsiglio and Jandun proceeded to the court of 
 King Louis, who was then residing at Nurnberg. 
 
 As Dr. Riezler has written, the Defensor is one " of those 
 books that have been more praised than read." The reason is 
 not far to seek. The constant repetitions, the incessant minute 
 definitions, and all the armoury of mediaeval scholasticism 
 render the book most difficult and tedious to read. The 
 medievalism of the form of the book is the more striking 
 when we note how very modern are the ideas which it contains. 
 After referring to the necessity of peace in the world, a wish 
 from which Marsiglio derived the name of his book, the author 
 first gives a definition of the state, founded on Aristotle, in 
 accordance with whom he also enumerates the different forms of 
 government. Every state should be governed by laws, and 
 all citizens, with the exception of foreigners, bondsmen, and 
 women, should act as legislators. The prince, being human, 
 cannot be considered as being infallible, and he should there- 
 fore be controlled in his actions by the legislators. In the 
 last — nineteenth — chapter of the first part, Marsiglio raises the 
 
EUROPE AND BOHEMIA y 
 
 question why this system, which would ensure peace, cannot 
 be carried out. The answer is: Because of the extreme power -J— 
 which, since the donation of Constantine, the church has 
 acquired, and because of the interference of the clergy in 
 temporal matters. This leads to the second part, which is 
 far more important for the study of Hus, whose ideas Marsiglio 
 here frequently anticipates. In this part the author deals 
 with papacy, priesthood, and their relations to the temporal 
 power. Marsiglio begins by denning the conception " church " 
 (ecclesia), which according to him can be described as being the 
 community of all who believe in Christ, be they priests or lay- » 
 men. The following chapters deal with the authority of the 
 pope to act as judge and ruler. By means of a vast array of 
 biblical passages quoted in the manner usual in the scholastic 
 school, the writer endeavours to prove that the pope has no 
 legislative or punitive power over laymen, or even over priests, 
 except so far and so long as it is granted to him by the temporal 
 authorities. In chapter seven, Marsiglio proceeds to dispute 
 the papal right to excommunicate temporal sovereigns or 
 officials — a power that the popes had during their prolonged 
 struggles with the German and French sovereigns frequently 
 misused. The right of excommunication, according to Mar-^_ 
 siglio, belongs only to the whole Christian community or to a 
 general council representing it. Marsiglio then expresses dis- 
 approval of the exemption of the clergy from temporal juris- 
 diction, a rule that then and for many years afterwards was 
 universally accepted. He next denies the power of the popes 
 to inflict temporal punishment on heretics. Such men, he 
 writes, should be punished by the civil power, but only if their 
 conduct is also in opposition to civil law. After these deduc- 
 tions — of which I have here only given a brief outline — 
 limiting in many respects the then generally admitted powers 
 of Rome, Marsiglio devotes the following chapters to a definition 
 of apostolic poverty. Like all antagonists of papacy, he lays 
 great stress on this point, which, in consequence of the luxury, 
 
8 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 immorality, and avarice of the clergy of that time, was always 
 before the mind of all thoughtful men. Christ, Marsiglio 
 writes, did not sanction this pride and avarice; He, though 
 it was in His power to appear in the world as a great 
 king, yet preferred poverty. Marsiglio then studies the con- 
 stitution of the church; like many other church-reformers he 
 declares that the distinction between bishops and priests 
 (presbyteros) does not go back to the time of Christ, but was 
 established far later. 1 In chapter seventeen, which treats of 
 the " authority by whom bishops and other priests and servants 
 of the church should be appointed," Marsiglio declares that 
 Christ alone is the Head of the church. 2 The apostles were 
 consecrated by Christ Himself, and the apostles ordained their 
 immediate successors. Afterwards the priests were chosen by 
 the community of the faithful, or by persons delegated by them. 
 The writer then maintains the unity of the church, which can 
 ' have but one creed founded exclusively on the teaching of 
 Scripture. Scripture undoubtedly requires interpretation, and 
 we cannot accept any other interpreter than a universal council 
 inspired by the Holy Ghost. No such authority can be claimed 
 by the popes, who have frequently erred and even fallen under 
 the suspicion of heresy. Marsiglio then again refers to the 
 gradual development of the papal primacy. Beginning, as 
 was customary, with the donation of Constantine, he notes how 
 the power of the Roman bishops, and with it the self-assertion 
 of the pontiffs in their relations to temporal rulers, continued 
 uninterruptedly to increase. After strongly insisting on the 
 depravation of the papal court and of the higher ecclesiastics, 
 
 1 Compare Hus, De Ecclesia, chapter xv. : " Tunc autem non ordinaverat 
 (Deus) nisi Diaconos et Presbyteros, tunc etiam idem presbyter erat et 
 episcopus, ut ait Hieronymus ut et patet ex texto Apostoli. . ."." 
 
 a The passage is so important that it may be given in Marsiglio's own words: 
 " Expedit narrare primum institutionis et determinationis episcoporum seu 
 presbyterorum modum circa statum et initium ecclesiae primitivae unde 
 cetera postmodum derivata sunt. Horum autem omnium principium 
 accipiendum est a Christo qui caput est et petra super quam fundata est 
 ecclesia catholica secundum quod dixit Apostolus ad Ephesios." {Defensor 
 Pads, ii. chap, xvii.) 
 
EUROPE AND BOHEMIA 9 
 
 who despised theological studies while they cherished the legists 
 who were, through their knowledge of canonic law, able to 
 support the unjustified claims of the priesthood, Marsiglio 
 proceeds to discuss the conflict then raging between papacy 
 and his patron, King Louis. It is difficult to overrate the 
 historical importance of the Defensor Pads. Many subsequent 
 church-reformers have, perhaps unknowingly, borrowed from 
 him ; for the ideas contained in the Defensor seem to have been 
 so generally shared by the thinkers of the time that they had 
 almost become common property. As regards Hus, Dr. Lenz 
 has, writing on the treatise De Ecclesia of Hus, declared — 
 rightly from his standpoint as a Roman Catholic priest — that 
 many statements contained in the treatise De Ecclesia had 
 already been declared heretical when Pope John XXII. , in 
 1327, decreed that the Defensor Pads was a work " false, 
 heretical, and contrary to Scripture." x 
 
 The writings of William of Occam also express views on the 
 government of the church and the power of the pope which 
 anticipate those of Wycliffe and Hus. Occam's work was 
 written during the pontificate of John XXII., who, mainly 
 from political motives, and through the influence of France, 
 waged a bitter and prolonged war against Germany. Though 
 himself accused, not entirely without foundation, of professing 
 heretical views, 2 John XXII. expanded the pretensions of the 
 papal see in a manner that none of his predecessors had 
 attempted. Occam writes as a strong defender of the authority 
 of temporal rulers. The pope, he declares, has no right to 
 secular authority. Christ neither exercised nor claimed such a 
 power. 3 
 
 1 Prof. Dr. Lenz, Uaeni Mistra J ana Husi (The Teaching of John Hus), p. 48. 
 
 1 It is beyond the purpose of this work to enter into this matter. Pope 
 John XXII. was accused of having said that it was only after the day of 
 judgment that the chosen enter heaven. 
 
 * " Papa non est magis exemptus a jurisdictione imperatoris, quam fuit 
 Christus, sed Christus in quantum homo mortalis subjectus fuit jurisdictioni 
 imperatoris, ergo et Papa modo simili, et par consequens imperator est judex 
 ordinarius Domini Papae." (" Ockam Dialogus," p. 50, in Goldastus, 
 Monarchia Imperii Romani, vol. ii.) 
 
 r 
 
id THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 This brief note on the state of Europe about the time of the 
 birth of Hus is in many respects applicable to Bohemia. Yet 
 the geographical and ethnographical position of the country 
 and its history placed Bohemia in a position that was some- 
 what different from that of Western Europe. The country 
 first received Christianity from the East, and though it after- 
 wards acknowledged the rule of Rome — forming at first part 
 of the archdiocese of Maintz in Germany, and being since the 
 time of Charles IV. under the jurisdiction of the archbishop 
 of Prague — yet it is certain that many of the rites and regula- 
 tions of Rome were accepted in Bohemia later than in most 
 European countries. Celibacy of the clergy became general 
 at a late period and very gradually. Communion in the two 
 kinds continued to be customary up to the fourteenth century, 
 though the learned work of the gifted Professor Kalousek has 
 proved * that it had probably died out before the time of Hus. 
 The Bohemian exile, Paul Stransky, writing in the seventeenth 
 century, states that the Eastern Church continued to have ad- 
 herents among humbler men in Bohemia even after Romanism 
 had been generally accepted. If we consider the great tenacity 
 of the Bohemian people, which has so often been blamed by 
 its enemies and praised by its friends, it does not appear im- 
 probable that this may have been the case, at least for a 
 considerable period. Thus when the terrible persecution of 
 all opponents of Rome that began in Bohemia in 1620 was 
 ended by the " Toleranz Patent " of the Emperor Joseph II. 
 in 1781, it was ascertained that in outlying parts of the 
 country many peasants had, during this long period, continued 
 to hold religious services according to the Hussite rites. 
 
 It is at any rate certain that, during the latter part of the 
 nineteenth century, many prominent Russian scholars such as 
 Novikov, Helferding, Vasiljew, and Palmov have, following the 
 example of Stransky, maintained that the connection of 
 
 1 O Historii Kalicha v. dobach predhusitskych (The history of the chalice 
 in the period anterior to Hus) . 
 
EUROPE AND BOHEMIA n 
 
 Bohemia with the Eastern Church was of more importance and 
 longer duration than had formerly been supposed. 1 Some of 
 these writers have even maintained that the Hussite move- 
 ment itself was an attempt of the Bohemian people to return 
 to the church from which it had first received Christianity. 
 This supposition is entirely unfounded. It can be stated 
 positively that we find in Hus no trace of the influence of 
 the Eastern Church, though we cannot affirm this with the 
 same certainty with regard to Jerome of Prague. It is a proof 
 of the close connection between political and ecclesiastical 
 matters that exists up to the present day in Austria, Bohemia, 
 and Eastern Europe, that the question of the connection of 
 Bohemia with the Eastern Church acquired a certain political 
 importance during the period (1866 -1872) when Russian 
 opinion, and to a far lesser extent Russian diplomacy, supported 
 the Bohemians in their struggle against the centralist policy 
 of Vienna. 
 
 At the time when Bohemia first became part of the domain 
 of the Western Church, it appears to have preserved a far 
 greater degree of independence than did countries lying 
 farther west. Immediately after the acceptation of the Roman 
 rites the country was under the rule of the German Bishop 
 of Regensburg; but when in 973 the bishopric of Prague was 
 founded, it was but loosely connected with Rome. Its 
 administrators were, on the other hand, greatly dependent on 
 the rulers of Bohemia who considered them as their chaplains. 2 
 For several centuries after the foundation of the bishopric of 
 
 1 Paul Stransky writes: " Nobilitas praecipue et plerique omnes qui cum 
 Germanis vicinis frequentiores esse, commerciaque habere consuerant a 
 ritibus Graecis recesserunt. Tenuiores duntaxat et plebs rebus domi prae- 
 sentibus contenta Graeci ritus sacra tenaciter servabat." (Respublica Bo j etna, 
 p. 271.) 
 
 2 As late as 1182, when the Bishop of Prague attempted to appeal to the 
 German Emperor against a decree of Duke Frederick of Bohemia, the latter 
 " fertur respondisse per procuratorem suum: Cum sit omnibus notum 
 Pragensem episcopum meum fore capellanum, sicut omnes praedecessores 
 sui patrum et avorum meorum fuerunt capellani, discernite quaeso si liceat ei 
 agere contra dominum suum, vel si tenear ex aequo respondere capellano meo." 
 {Chronicle of Jarloch Fontes Rerum Bohemicarum, ii. p. 480.) 
 
i* THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Prague, the influence of the papal see on the lands of the" 
 Bohemian crown 1 was very insignificant. The supremacy of 
 Rome, indeed, only finds expression in the fact that the popes 
 confirmed the most important decrees of the Bohemian 
 sovereigns which referred to ecclesiastical matters. 2 This 
 state of semi-independence in the course of time became dis- 
 pleasing to the rulers of the Western church. On several 
 occasions papal legates appeared in Bohemia, who endeavoured 
 to bring the Bohemian Church into closer subjection to Rome. 
 They, however, encountered the hostility both of the sovereigns 
 and of the people of Bohemia, and when, during the long con- 
 test about investitures, the rulers of Bohemia sided with the 
 German emperors, all relations between Rome and Bohemia 
 ceased for a considerable time. 
 
 The beginning of the thirteenth century is noteworthy as 
 being the moment when a great change took place. Henceforth 
 the power of the Roman Church incessantly increases. In 
 A Bohemia, as elsewhere, that church endeavoured to introduce 
 obligatory celibacy among the clergy, and this demand appeared 
 particularly arbitrary to the Bohemians who had first received 
 Christianity from the Eastern Church. Their priests had 
 hitherto almost all been married men, who were attached by 
 family ties to the other members of the community. Thus 
 Cosmas the chronicler, 3 the earliest of Bohemian historians, 
 though a canon of Prague, dedicated his great historical work 
 to the memory of his wife, Bozetecha. In Bohemia, as else- 
 where, it became part of the papal policy to establish — by 
 enforcing the celibacy of the clergy — a caste apart from the 
 
 1 The lands of the Bohemian crown are Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia, 
 though Lusatia was for a time also considered a land of the Bohemian crown. 
 
 * The interesting question of the relations of the Bohemian Church to Rome 
 in the pre-Hussite period was formerly very obscure. Recently (1904 and 
 1906) Dr. Krofta has in the Cesky Casopis Historicky {Bohemian Historical 
 Review) published a valuable series of articles on this subject. I have here 
 largely used these studies. 
 
 s For Cosmas, see my History of Bohemian Literature, pp. 42-46, and particu- 
 larly Lectures on the Historians of Bohemia, pp. 6-14. 
 
EUROPE AND BOHEMIA 13 
 
 laity, and subject only to the will of Rome. These attempts 
 met with strong opposition on the part of the Bohemian priests. 
 Thus we read * that in 1197 the papal legate, Peter of Capua, 
 who demanded that those who were to be ordained should 
 take the vow of chastity, was nearly killed by the indignant 
 priests. In the course of the thirteenth century, however, 
 celibacy gradually became general among the Bohemian clergy. 
 Henceforth it may be also stated that the Roman pontiffs 
 interfered more frequently in the internal organisation of the 
 Bohemian Church. " Letters of immunity," which released 
 monasteries from the jurisdiction of the bishops, are very often 
 met with, and they greatly strengthened the Roman influence 
 in the country. Gradually and cautiously the popes also intro- 
 duced into Bohemia the practice of granting " provisions " 
 on bishoprics and abbeys, thus rendering illusory the right of 
 the chapters to elect the bishops and abbots. These " pro- 
 visions " became very frequent during the rule of the avaricious 
 Pope John XXII., and still more so during that of Clement 
 VI., who appointed two of his nephews, William and Nicholas 
 Roget, to canonries at the Cathedral of Prague. As Dr. Krofta 
 writes in his study, to which I have already referred, the 
 Cathedral of Prague was so charged with papal " provisions " 
 that it had become almost impossible to obtain a benefice 
 there except by virtue of such a provision. The discontent 
 which such an abuse naturally caused was aggravated by the 
 fact that its profits fell almost exclusively into the hands of 
 foreigners — friends either of the papal see or of the Bohemian 
 court. That court at a period when the Bohemian kings were 
 often German or Roman emperors frequently had an anti- 
 national character. Of the native priests, also, generally those 
 
 1 " Anno Dominicae Incarnationis mcxcvii dominus Petrus diaconus 
 cardinalis ad Sanctam Mariam a Via Lata venit in Bohemiam . . . et ordines 
 clericorum per manum domini Engelberti Olomucensis episcopi fieri precepit. 
 In quibus ipse cardinalis a sacerdotibus plebanis ob votum castitatis quod 
 ab ordinandis exigebatur versis in seditionem fere fuerat occisus." (Chronicle 
 of Jarloch Fontes Rerum Bohemicarum, ii. p. 512.) 
 
+ 
 
 i 4 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 who were supported by Rome or the Bohemian court succeeded 
 in obtaining benefices. 
 
 Of the Bohemian clergy as constituted in accordance with 
 this new system it is impossible to speak otherwise than in 
 terms of the severest reprobation. It was a general complaint 
 that the priests neglected the duties of their office ; many, indeed, 
 entirely absented themselves, though they continued to draw 
 the revenues of their benefices. Almost all the priests were 
 accused of avarice and simony — an offence that had become 
 so general that Hus devoted to it one of his best-known treatises. 
 The pious Ernest of Pardubice, first Archbishop of Prague, was 
 obliged to complain in one of his provincial statutes that many 
 priests refused to celebrate burial and marriage services, to 
 hear confessions, to administer the sacraments of communion 
 and extreme unction, and indeed to perform any ecclesiastical 
 functions except on payment of money. The regulations 
 certainly forbade such payments, and declared that the penalty 
 was to be deprivation of the benefice should the priest himself 
 commit the offence, or imprisonment if the culprit was the 
 vicar, or any other person acting for the priest. The enact- 
 ments of the pious archbishop unfortunately proved ineffectual, 
 and the abuses mentioned above continued and even increased 
 up to the time of Hus. Ineffectual also were the repeated 
 enactments which forbade priests to frequent taverns, to hunt, 
 to wear laymen's clothes, and to carry arms. The gravest and 
 most serious grievance, however, and the one to which Hus and 
 his forerunners constantly refer, was the appalling immorality 
 of the clergy. The Latin reports on the archdeaconal inspec- 
 tion held in Prague, in 1379 and 1380, present a most repulsive 
 picture. It is stated that of the thirty-two parish priests 
 of Prague sixteen were notorious because of their, evil life, 
 and much evidence of a most shocking character was produced 
 by other priests and by inhabitants of the streets adjoining 
 the parsonages. 1 This inspection did not include the higher 
 
 1 Though it is by no means pleasant to deal with these accusations, founded 
 
EUROPE AND BOHEMIA 15 
 
 dignitaries of the church, but we find numerous and unfavour- 
 able reports on their conduct in contemporary records. 1 A 
 ,large number of these dignitaries lived in open concubinage. 
 Thus we read that Stephen, canon of Prague, chief writer of 
 Bohemia, had several sons whom he openly recognised. One 
 of these, " John, son of master Stephen, chief writer of the 
 kingdom of Bohemia," was, under this designation, entered 
 in the register of the University of Prague. The canon of 
 Vysehrad, John Pecnik, a teacher (scholasticus) , had several 
 daughters whom he recognised, and one of whom he married 
 to a tailor. These cases seem to differ somewhat from those 
 mentioned previously, and it is difficult not to believe that the 
 celibacy of the clergy was in the pre-Hussite period less firmly 
 established in Bohemia than most writers have stated. It is 
 certain that after the death of Hus the marriages of priests 
 immediately became general and met with little or no opposi- 
 tion. Unfortunately, cases of gross and coarse immorality 
 were also frequent among the dignitaries of the Bohemian 
 Church. Thus the rector of the Church of St. John the Evan- 
 gelist at Prague complained that in the house of John of 
 Landstein, provost of Melnik, " the porter and portress gave 
 shelter to disorderly women, for the provost and his brothers, 
 
 though they are on official statements of the ecclesiastical authorities, it is 
 necessary to allude to them, as the intense hatred and contempt of the Roman 
 priests, which was general among the Bohemians of the time of Hus, would 
 otherwise appear inexplicable. Professor Tomek (in vol. iii. of his Dejepis 
 mesta Prahy — History of the Town of Prague) has quoted largely from the 
 report mentioned above. It should be stated that the late Professor Tomek 
 was a strong conservative and a firm adherent of the Church of Rome. No 
 one deserves less to be suspected of exaggeration. The report states (Tomek, 
 iii. p. 242) : " Item (Bartholomew, vicar of the Tyn church) dicit quod ipse 
 interdum sed raro habet unam publicam meretricem per noctem, sed occulte 
 et ipsam in crastino repellit." (Ibid. p. 243), " Item dicit (Prokop, vicar 
 of St. Leonard's church) quod plebanus S. Johannis in Vado est meretricator 
 et fornicator publicus." (Ibid. p. 247), " Andreas presbyter vicarius Ecclesiae 
 St. Stephen dicit quod monachi monasterii S. Mariae Carmelitae transeunt per 
 scolas publice in civitate Pragensi volentes scire experimenta, et quod dicunt 
 se esse medicos, et sic decipiunt muliercs, conjugatas et honestas ipsas im- 
 praegnando." I must refer the reader to Prof. Tomek's book for further 
 details on the report of the archdeaconal inspection. 
 1 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, pp. 245-246. 
 
16 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Vitek and Litold, and that monks, married men, and people 
 of all sorts were admitted there." 
 
 The impression produced on pious men by such conduct, 
 which appeared to them not only as a sin and scandal but also 
 as a sacrilege, cannot be exaggerated. Though the reading 
 of Scripture was discouraged, the Bible was in the hands of 
 many pious men. They felt certain that so sinful a world 
 would perish shortly. Thence sprang the constant reference 
 to the appearance of Antichrist, with which we meet not only 
 in the writings of Hus, but also in those of his forerunners 
 and successors. 
 
 There were thus many reasons why the general opposition 
 to papacy caused by the schism and the coarse and even 
 blasphemous polemics which accompanied it was stronger in 
 Bohemia than elsewhere, and had in that country more per- 
 manent and more weighty results. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 
 
 Before referring to the writers and preachers whom almost 
 all historians, both Catholic and Protestant, have described as 
 the forerunners of Hus, it is necessary to notice a theory con- 
 cerning the origin of Hussitism that has recently found great 
 favour, particularly in Germany. The great rancour and dis- 
 paragement with which recent German authors, both Protestant 
 and Catholic, have written of Hus, is founded on the fact that 
 a part, and a very important part, of his career has only recently 
 become widely known. I allude to the fact that Hus was, 
 during his whole life, a firm defender and leader of the 
 Bohemians in their struggle for national independence, and 
 therefore a consistent opponent of the Germans who, at the 
 time of Hus, had obtained almost exclusive possession of all, 
 and particularly of the ecclesiastical, offices in Bohemia. As 
 the racial struggle rages in Bohemia at the present day with 
 the same fury as it did five centuries ago, and as the evil 
 habit of using the events of the past as examples and argu- 
 ments applicable to the political events of the present is 
 very prevalent there, Hus has been hated by many recent 
 writers, not because he was a church-reformer, but because 
 he was an ardent Bohemian patriot. 
 
 It has constantly been affirmed by the writers of this school 
 that Hus was an uneducated peasant-priest, a national fanatic, 
 a mere copier of the writings of Wycliffe. These views are 
 maintained by many writers whose ephemeral works, intended 
 for the purpose of flattering the vanity of the Germans, require 
 no notice. But one of the most eminent German scholars of 
 the present day, Professor Loserth, has also expressed similar 
 
 17 B 
 
18 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 opinions, and they have not remained without echo in recent 
 English works. In his important work, Hus und Wiclif, 
 Professor Loserth has strongly insisted on the indebtedness of 
 Hus to Wycliffe. He has undoubtedly proved this indebted- 
 ness, which has indeed at all times been known to those who 
 have studied the writings both of Wycliffe and of Hus. Thus 
 the treatise of Hus, De Ecclesia, is to a large extent founded on 
 Wycliffe's work of the same name, and Professor Loserth has, 
 in his work mentioned above, printed in parallel columns con- 
 siderable passages from the two works that are almost identical. 
 With all deference to so eminent a scholar as is Professor 
 Loserth, it must be admitted that he has everywhere attempted 
 to minimise the importance and independence of Hus and the 
 Hussite movement. Thus Loserth— as did Hofler before him 
 — lays great stress on the fact that the Hussites were frequently 
 called Wyclimtes by their enemies. He does not, however, 
 mention that as the strength of the Bohemian movement in 
 favour of church-reform was largely based on its connection 
 with the national movement, it was an obvious stratagem 
 of the Romanist party to exaggerate the dependence of the 
 reform movement on foreign influences. We frequently meet 
 with this tendency. Thus one of the manuscripts of a work 
 of Matthew of Janov, one of the forerunners of Hus, formerly 
 bore the inscription : Tractatus Johannis Wikleff heretici. This 
 inscription was afterwards erased and the name of the true 
 author, Matthew of Janov, substituted. 1 Professor Loserth has 
 also placed Wycliffe on a higher pedestal than most of the 
 English reformers' countrymen have done, 2 and he has certainly 
 
 1 Dr. Kybal's edition of Janov's Regulae Veteris et Novi Testamenti, vol. i. 
 p. I. 
 
 1 It is interesting to compare with Loserth's appreciation the words of the 
 late Canon Bigg, who writes: " Wycliffe was a college don, the most famous 
 teacher of his time at Oxford, though not of the first rank. His philosophy 
 is not original and he appeals invariably to the head; there is no sentiment 
 or pathos or unction about him, not a grain of amusement is to be extracted 
 from his books, and we may reckon this a serious defect — not a grain of poetry, 
 and this is more serious still. He had none of the qualities of a great preacher, 
 or a great leader of the people, and as far as we can see, he never attempted 
 

 THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 19 
 
 greatly underrated the learning of Hus. The comparison 
 between an enthusiast such as was Hus, impelled by fiery in- 
 dignation to denounce the iniquities of the clergy of Bohemia 
 and the oppression of his countrymen, and a learned, though 
 somewhat arid scholar such as was Wycliffe, is indeed altogether 
 meaningless. Hus believed that a thorough reform of the alien, I 
 immoral, and simoniac clergy of Bohemia was necessary; and' 
 there being no hope of obtaining the assent to such a reform 
 from the corrupt popes of his time, he inevitably and, it may 
 be added, reluctantly became an opponent of the Church of 
 Rome. In the controversy which followed, Hus used as weapons 
 many of the writings of divines anterior to his time. Among 
 these writings the works of Wycliffe, often themselves founded 
 on earlier theologians, occur very frequently. Often also Hus 
 and Wycliffe have drawn from the same source. It is a great 
 merit of Mr. Workman that he pointed out, in the introduction 
 to his edition of the Letters of Hus, that the Bohemian reformer 
 is indebted to Gratian's Decretum almost as greatly as to the 
 writings of Wycliffe. Both Hus and Wycliffe also depend 
 largely on the teaching of St. Augustine, and one of the 
 principal theories of both church-reformers, which describes 
 the church as the community of all who believe in Christ, 
 laymen as well as priests, is derived from the Defensor Pacis 
 of Marsiglio of Padua. 
 
 It may be stated generally that the extreme importance of 
 verbal exactitude in scholastic definitions — where even the 
 slightest deviation from the accepted wording might have 
 exposed the writer to the suspicion of heresy — rendered it 
 customary among the theologians of the Middle Ages to copy 
 word by word the statements of previous writers. It was 
 equally customary with the theologians of that time to incor- 
 
 to be either one or the other. (Canon Bigg, Wayside Sketches in Ecclesiastical 
 History, p. 1 18). I may here mention that though I have given a short notice 
 of the early French and German opposition to Rome, I have done nothing 
 similar as regards England. The reason is very simple. Many English 
 writers far more competent than I am have dealt with this subject. 
 
20 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 porate in their works without acknowledgment long passages 
 and even entire treatises contained in the books of previous 
 writers. Thus Gerson without acknowledgment included in 
 his works a considerable part of the Declaratio compendiosa 
 defectuum virorum ecclesiasticorum of Henry of Langenstein. 1 
 Thus also Peter of Ailly incorporated a considerable portion 
 of Occam's Dialogus in one of his early works without mention- 
 ing his source. 2 Many other similar cases could be mentioned. 
 
 The great authority of so eminent a scholar as Professor 
 Loserth has induced other recent German writers, who possessed 
 less learning though more racial hatred than he does, to vilify 
 Hus and to exaggerate the importance attached to Wycliffe 
 in Bohemia. 3 These writers have particularly laid great stress 
 on the supposed ignorance of Hus. This supposition can 
 already be considered as obsolete in consequence of the recent 
 studies of Bohemian writers, particularly of that talented and 
 enthusiastic scholar, Professor Flajshaus. The learned pro- 
 fessor published recently an almost unknown work of Hus 
 entitled Super IV. Sententiarum, a commentary on the sentences 
 of Peter Lombard. The work, larger than any other book of 
 Hus that is known, has great value and bears witness to the 
 deep and extensive learning of the writer. In referring to this 
 recent and important publication, Professor Loserth writes : 4 
 " It can now be considered as certain that the former opinion 
 of the literary work of Hus will be changed in many respects, 
 and that it will be esteemed more highly than before." 
 
 It has already been mentioned that the exaggeration of the 
 undeniable influence of Wycliffe's writings on those of Hus 
 
 1 Schwab., Johannes Gerson, p. 121. 
 
 * Tschackert, Peter von Ailly, p. 43. 
 
 3 Professor Loserth is not himself free from this tendency. Thus, when 
 referring to a passage of Hus's De Ecclesia in which the Bohemian reformer 
 refers to Bishop Grosseteste, Loserth mentions that the Prague libraries 
 possessed many MSS. of the writings of the Bishop of Lincoln, adding " that 
 they were probably obtained because Wycliffe frequently mentioned him," 
 a conjecture for which Loserth does not give a tittle of evidence. Grosseteste's 
 writings were much read and studied quite independently of Wycliffe. 
 
 * Mittheilungen des Institats fur oesterreichische Geschiischreibung, No. 26. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 21 
 
 is no new matter. Hus himself frequently protested against 
 the suggestion that he was responsible for all the statements 
 made by Wycliffe, and shortly after the death of the Bohemian 
 church-reformer a controversy on this subject arose. In a 
 work attacking the extreme church-reformers or Taborites, 
 John of Pribram, a Hussite divine who was probably a pupil 
 of Janov, and who was an intimate friend of Hus wrote: 1 
 It is well known to many that, when preaching, Master John 
 Hus said that he would not defend any error of Wycliffe or of 
 anyone else! He also preached: ' If Wycliffe is in heaven, 
 may he pray to God for us; if he is in purgatory, may God 
 help him; if he is in hell, the Lord be blessed.' Also in Con- 
 stance before his death, he (Hus) said openly before all: ' Why 
 do you blame me because of Wycliffe? What concern is it 
 of mine? For neither was Wycliffe a Bohemian, nor was he 
 my father; he was an Englishman ; therefore, if he wrote errors, 
 let the English answer for them.' And you can see by this 
 speech that Master John Hus, as it were, rejected Wycliffe." 
 In this passage, too long to quote in its entirety, Master Pribram 
 energetically protests against the description of the Hussites 
 as Wycliffites. It is obvious from the statement of Master 
 John of Pribram that the attitude of Hus and the Hussites 
 with respect to the teaching of Wycliffe was by no means one 
 of inept and unreasoning assent as has been stated by some 
 recent German writers. As recent Bohemian scholars have 
 truly maintained, the question of the correlation of the teaching 
 of Wycliffe and that of Hus cannot be decided at present. 
 Besides examining what part of the writings of Hus is derived 
 from the writings of Wycliffe, it would be necessary to examine 
 also thoroughly what other sources Hus used, and also what 
 were the principal sources of the teaching of Wycliffe, which 
 was by no means original. It is however questionable whether 
 
 1 In his Zivot Knezi Toborskych (Life of the priests of Tabor). The work 
 is still unprinted. I quote from the extract published in 4 the Vybor z. 
 Lileraiury ceske (Selections from Bohemian Literature), part ii. 
 
22 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 such a pedantic enterprise would be worth the great amount 
 of research which it would require. No two men were more 
 entirely different in all respects than were Wycliffe and Hus. 
 Here, if ever, the time-worn saying that comparisons are odious 
 may be considered as true. 
 
 It has been necessary to refer here to the influence of Wycliffe 
 on Hus, as some writers have endeavoured to prove that the 
 Bohemian movement in favour of church-reform was an arti- 
 ficial one imported from foreign countries, and that there was 
 in Bohemia, at the end of the fourteenth century, no genuine 
 national feeling opposed to the Church of Rome. 
 
 The reign of Charles I. of Bohemia — better known as the 
 Emperor Charles IV. — raised Bohemia to a previously unknown 
 degree of prosperity. The necessary consequence had been that 
 the inhabitants of Bohemia, and particularly the citizens of 
 Prague, had adopted a luxurious manner of life that had been 
 quite unknown to their ancestors. The clergy greatly favoured 
 by the king had acquired great riches, and, as mentioned pre- 
 viously, immorality, simony, and avarice prevailed among its 
 members. Charles, a truly pious and enlightened Christian, 
 by no means the bigot described by some historians, was deeply 
 distressed by the state of the Bohemian clergy; and with the 
 aid of his trusted councillor, Ernest of Pardubice, Archbishop of 
 Prague, he endeavoured to stem the current of immorality and 
 to bring about the much-needed reformation of the Bohemian 
 clergy. But the deaths of the archbishop, in 1364, and of 
 Charles himself, in 1378, put a stop to their good work. Though 
 the king had reached the age of sixty-two, there is little doubt 
 that his life was shortened by the apprehension that the evil 
 life of the priesthood would finally cause a revolution, and by 
 the beginning of the schism which took place shortly before 
 his death, and with which he rightly thought that his son, 
 Venceslas, would be unable to cope. 
 
 The Bohemian movement in favour of church-reform became 
 in its later and better known period so entirely a national one 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 23 
 
 that it is interesting to note that the first prominent church- 
 reformer in Bohemia was a German. It did not escape the 
 vigilance of Charles, ever mindful of the welfare of his Bohemian 
 subjects, that Prague was very deficient in able preachers. The 
 fame of Conrad Waldhauser, an Augustine monk who was 
 preacher at the court of the Austrian dukes at Vienna, reached 
 Charles, and he determined to secure his services for the city 
 of Prague. After having previously obtained the permission 
 of the Archbishop of Prague, Conrad proceeded to that city 
 in the year 1358; he had received holy orders fourteen years 
 previously, and was then in the prime of life. He was appointed 
 preacher at the Church of St. Giles, and to ensure his livelihood 
 a parson's living at Litomerice (Leitmeritz) was also given to 
 him. At that time — as at the present day — many of the more 
 educated citizens of Prague were acquainted with the German 
 language, and the eloquent sermons of Conrad produced a deep 
 impression on the people. We read x that, during the first 
 year of his activity, wondrous and sudden conversions took 
 place. Thus Hanek, son of the rich merchant Jacob Bavorov, 
 an alderman of the " old town," 2 one of the most notorious 
 gallants who, even in church, pursued women, disturbing their 
 devotions, was suddenly converted. He now devoutly attended 
 Conrad's sermons, and even obtained the friendship of the 
 pious preacher. One of the most notorious usurers of Prague, 
 after hearing the sermons of Conrad, returned to his victims 
 all his ill-earned gains; and the women of Prague, struck by 
 the Austrian monk's denunciations of luxury, discarded their 
 fine clothing and jewellery, and adopted a plainer and more 
 modest dress. Many Jews flocked to Conrad's sermons and 
 were, by his orders, allowed to be present, though some of the 
 citizens endeavoured to exclude them. The Church of St. 
 Giles, where Conrad preached, though one of the largest in 
 
 1 Tomek, Dejepis mesta Prahy (History of the Town of Prague), vol. iii. 
 
 * The community of Prague at this period consisted of three cities : the 
 old town, the new town, and the " small quarter on the left bank of the Vltava 
 (Moldar^. See my Prague, Mediaeval Town Series. 
 
 >^ 
 
24 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Prague, soon became too small for the audience, and he was 
 often obliged to preach in the open air outside the church. 
 The state of Prague became as that of a modern town during 
 a revival meeting, and we here meet for the first time with one 
 of those outbreaks of religious enthusiasm that are henceforth 
 so frequent in the annals of Prague. Like so many other 
 church reformers, Conrad soon came into conflict with the 
 mendicant friars. 1 He had in his sermons vigorously attacked 
 these friars, whose dishonesty, avarice, and immorality caused 
 great scandal in Bohemia. They were, no doubt, particularly 
 incensed against Conrad because he had — as they complained 
 — admonished his congregation to give alms rather to the poor 
 than to strong and well-fed monks. 2 The monks and nuns 
 of the mendicant orders had been in the habit of demanding 
 a sum of money from young boys and girls who wished to enter 
 their orders. Informed of this practice, which he considered 
 simonical according to canon law, Conrad complained to the 
 Archbishop Ernest of Padrubice, who, however, declined to 
 interfere, declaring that these orders, both male and female, 
 were subject only to their own regulations. This fact witnesses 
 to the difficulty that confronted even the best of bishops, if 
 he attempted to remedy the evil customs of the church of that 
 time. The mendicant friars were not long in seeking for 
 vengeance. When, at the end of the year 1358, a French 
 
 1 The animosity of the mendicant friars against all church reformers was 
 great at this period. In a letter addressed to Conrad by Adalbert Ranco, 
 one of the most learned Bohemians of the time and sometime rector of the 
 University of Paris, known as a friend of Conrad, Milic, and Janov, he writes 
 from Avignon: " Dicatis Milicio quod Parisiis publice dicitur et quasi super 
 certa per mendicantes praedicatur quod ego sum simplex Armachanus (a 
 reference to Richard Fitz Ralph, Archbishop of Armagh). Casopis Musea 
 Krdlovstri Ceskeho (Journal of the Bohemian Musem), 1880, p. 561. 
 
 3 The mendicant friars declared: " Item dixit (Conrad): Vos non vultis 
 dare pauperibus et datis monachis qui sunt fortes et qui plus habent quam 
 habere debent. Nolite talibus fortibus dare quia modicum meritum ex hoc 
 habebitis quia videlicet in quolibet collegio esset nee unus qui mereretur 
 illud stipendium quod omnes devorant in guttura sua. (Hofler, Geschichte 
 der hussitischen Bewegung JUdhmen, vol. ii. pp. 17-50, contains previously un- 
 published documents concerning the conflicts of Conrad, Milic, Janov, and 
 Ranco with the ecclesiastical authorities and with the mendicant friars.) 
 
2 
 
 THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 25 
 
 ominican arrived as papal legate in Prague, they immediately 
 brought their complaints against Conrad before him. The 
 preacher was summoned to appear before the legate, and he 
 proceeded to the archiepiscopal court accompanied by several 
 aldermen of the old town and the town-writer, Master Werner, 
 who is described as a learned and worthy man. Archbishop 
 Ernest was then at Vratislav (Breslau) at the court of King 
 Charles, and the legate did not give audience to Conrad, but 
 appointed several dominican monks who were to receive him. 
 One of these monks engaged in a dispute with Werner, who 
 told him that his master, the legate, had more wisdom in one 
 foot than Master Werner in his whole body. Thus provoked, 
 Werner answered, " You are all simonists, and your master 
 also." In the absence of the legate no decision was taken, 
 and the matter appears to have remained in abeyance. Ten 
 days later, on December 28th, Conrad Waldhauser was again 
 summoned to appear at the archiepiscopal court. Preaching 
 early on that morning he, from the pulpit, begged the aldermen 
 to appoint two of their number who were to accompany him. 
 They readily consented, and Werner, the writer, also again 
 joined them. Meanwhile, the rumour was circulated in the 
 city that the monks were menacing Conrad, and a large crowd 
 of men and women followed the venerated preacher, determined 
 to protect him if necessary. When the crowd passed the 
 dominican monastery of St. Clement, some of the monks ap- 
 peared at the windows. They had to hear evil words, were 
 told that they were heretics who deserved to be burnt, and the 
 people spat out before them. Conrad and Master Werner 
 endeavoured as far as possible to calm the people. 1 Of what 
 befell at the archbishop's palace we have no certain information. 
 It appears, however, that all parties agreed to leave matters 
 in suspense till Archbishop Ernest should have returned to 
 Prague. Early in 1359, the papal legate summoned Conrad 
 to a disputation probably at the monastery of St. Clements. 
 
 1 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, vol. iii. 
 
26 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Waldhauser declined, stating that he was certain that the monks 
 of that community, who were among the strongest opponents 
 of church-reform, would stone him should he appear there. 
 He added that he would, however, justify himself before 
 the archbishop. On the return of Ernest, the mendicant friars 
 presented to him their complaints against Conrad, formulated 
 in twenty-four articles. Their contents were very futile, and 
 to those who read the articles it will appear that the accusations 
 of laziness, immorality, avarice, and gluttony levelled against 
 the friars were thoroughly justified. Other accusations, such 
 as that Conrad had said that the monks and nuns who received 
 children for a pecuniary remuneration were " Arian heretics," 
 are too absurd to deserve belief. Conrad's dignified answer, in 
 which he did not deny having spoken strongly against the vices 
 of the friars, but complained that words he had never spoken 
 had been attributed to him, seems to have satisfied the arch- 
 bishop. He caused an inscription to be placed on the doorways 
 of all the monasteries of the mendicant friars, summoning all 
 who might have any accusation to bring against Conrad, to 
 appear on a certain day at the archbishop's court. No one 
 appeared. The friars, however, continued secretly to attack 
 the pious preacher. Thus when Duke Leopold of Austria 
 visited Prague, the mendicant friars brought many mendacious 
 accusations against Conrad before him. 1 The duke appears to 
 have disbelieved these accusations, as he invited Conrad to 
 return with him to Vienna. The conscientious preacher none 
 the less considered it his duty to draw up a statement defending 
 his conduct and to send it to Vienna. Of the later years of 
 Conrad but little is known. He, however, always retained the 
 favour of King Charles, who conferred on him the rectorship 
 of the Tyn Church — next to the Cathedral-Church of St. 
 Vitus, the most important one in Prague. It is a proof of the 
 great independence of mind of King Charles, who has often 
 
 1 The friars accused Conrad of having said that: " Prius quam homo filiam 
 suam Simoniace traderet religioni, eligibilius esset earn meretricem fieri." 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 27 
 
 been judged very falsely by superficial writers, that he ventured 
 to do this in face of the continued opposition to Conrad on the 
 part of the mendicant friars. That opposition, indeed, only 
 ceased with the death of Conrad in 1369. He left several 
 Latin writings, among them are the Apologia that has already 
 been mentioned, and an extensive Postilla studentum sanctae 
 universitatis Prageusis super evangelia dominica, written on the 
 request and for the benefit of the young students of the univer- 
 sity. Conrad Waldhauser's writings have only been preserved 
 in MSS. 
 
 Among those who listened to Conrad's sermons was a young 
 priest, who was destined to become his successor on the arduous 
 path of church-reform. I refer to John Milie' of Kromerize 
 (in German, Kremsier), whose truly Christ-like nature caused 
 him to be revered as a saint even during his lifetime. 1 Milic 
 was born at Kromerize probably in the early part of the four- 
 teenth century, 2 but all tales concerning his earliest years 
 must be considered as legendary. It is certain that he was 
 of humble origin, and was from childhood destined for the 
 church. He appears even in early youth to have taken his 
 life-work more seriously than was then usual with young 
 clerics. He read widely and showed early in life that great 
 capacity for work and study that never left him throughout 
 life. It is specially noted that he devoted much time to the 
 study of Scripture, and the same has been stated of his successor 
 Matthew of Janov. This devotion to the Bible may, indeed, 
 be considered as generally characteristic of the Bohemian 
 church-reformers. Though symptoms of exceptional earnest- 
 ness are from the first evident in the career of Milic, he did not, 
 and perhaps under the circumstances could not, seek prefer- 
 ment otherwise than in the manner then usual among young 
 priests. Milic early in life found employment in the chancery 
 
 1 Matthew of Janov writes: "Ipse vero Milicius filius et imago domini 
 Jesu Christi, apostolorumque ipsius similitudo prope expressa et ostensa." 
 1 Dr. Novotny, Jan Milic z. Kromerize. 
 
 a 
 
28 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 of the Emperor Charles. The head of that chancery was then 
 John of Streda, Bishop of Litomysl. Through the influence 
 of Streda, Milic obtained in 1361— even before he had been 
 ordained a priest — from Pope Innocent VI. a papal provision, 
 bestowing on him a benefice in the archdiocese of Prague. He 
 became a canon of St. Vitus in that city, and it appears that 
 somewhat later the rank of archdeacon was also conferred on 
 him. But his enthusiastic, pious, and conscientious nature 
 induced him in 1363 already to abandon all his honours. 
 
 It has often been stated that the impression produced on 
 Milic by the preaching of Conrad Waldhauser was the cause 
 of this determination. It was at any rate not the only cause. 1 
 The work of Milic as archdeacon had given him a terrible 
 insight into the depravation of the clergy, and he could not 
 fail to perceive that the system of papal provisions by which 
 he had himself benefited, contributed largely to the general 
 demoralisation. Milic therefore considered it his duty to 
 renounce all worldly goods, and to devote himself entirely 
 to preaching. Being of the Bohemian nationality, he was able 
 to preach to the people in their own language, a thing that had 
 been impossible to Waldhauser. In the autumn of the year 
 1363 he began preaching at Prague, first at the Church of St. 
 Nicholas in the " small quarter " and then at that of St. Giles 
 in the old town. As had been the case with Waldhauser 
 previously, Milic also was almost immediately confronted by 
 the enmity of the mendicant friars. A man of an enthusiastic 
 and even visionary nature, he carried out to the full the prin- 
 ciple of apostolic poverty which he had imposed upon himself. 
 He had given everything to the poor, and depended for his 
 nourishment entirely on the gifts of pious women, and would 
 accept only what was absolutely necessary to sustain life. His 
 clothing was of the meanest description, and when he walked 
 from one church to another — he often preached in different 
 churches on one day in Latin, Bohemian, and German — the 
 
 1 Novotny, Jan Milic, 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 29 
 
 poverty of his appearance attracted attention. But when a 
 new garment was offered to him, he answered in the words of 
 Christ: " If one has two cloaks, let him give one to him who 
 has none." Similarly, " When Thomas the nobleman " — the 
 person referred to is probably Thomas of Stitny — " said to one 
 of the disciples of Milic: ' I see that master Milic keepeth 
 nothing for himself ; if he would but keep it for himself I would 
 gladly give to him a good fur coat of fox skin.' " Milic refused 
 to accept the gift under this condition, and continued to walk 
 through the streets of Prague in mean attire, even during the 
 terrible cold of the Bohemian winters. 1 Many other tales, 
 often recalling St. Francis of Assisi, are told of Milic, whom the 
 people soon began to revere as a saint. He acquired great 
 influence over the more pious among the young priests, and it 
 was no doubt for them that the Latin sermons mentioned above 
 were preached. 
 
 The privations and fatigues which Milic underwent, not 
 unnaturally produced a strong effect on an imaginative and 
 somewhat visionary nature, such as was that of Milic. He 
 believed that an inward spirit directed all his actions, and on the 
 advice of this mysterious spirit, he for a time gave up preaching 
 and resolved to become himself a mendicant friar, perhaps 
 hoping thus to obtain greater influence over the other friars. 
 On the advice of his friends he soon abandoned this idea. His 
 profound and constant study of Scripture led Milic, in his state 
 of exaltation, on strange paths. He was impressed by the evils 
 of his time, the corruption of the clergy, the dissolution of all 
 social order in Germany and Italy. Anarchy caused by bands 
 of freebooters, who pillaged Italy and afterwards Germany, 
 produced so great and terrifying an impression on the public 
 mind, that even the insane idea that the Emperor Charles 
 encouraged these bands to continue their depredations found 
 adherents. So hopelessly evil a state appeared to Milic to 
 portend the approaching end of the world — an idea with which 
 
 1 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, vol. ill. 
 
3 o THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 we meet frequently in the writings of all Bohemian reformers— 
 Hus himself not excepted. The inward spirit which guided 
 Milic drew his attention to the passage in St. Matthew's 
 evangel which refers to Daniel's prophecy. 1 Milic now began 
 to study these prophecies with great attention, and obtained 
 from them the conviction that the time when Antichrist would 
 appear had already arrived. 2 While under the influence of 
 these studies, Milic, when preaching in the presence of the 
 Emperor, pointed at him denouncing him as Antichrist. 
 Though here also Charles showed that special forbearance to 
 the Bohemian church-reformers which has been overlooked by 
 those who have described him as a bigot; it was impossible 
 that so public an affront should pass unnoticed. Archbishop 
 Vlasim who had, in 1364, succeeded to Ernest of Pardubice, 
 caused Milic to be imprisoned, and he ordered Dean William 
 of Lestkov, and " the learned Master Adalbert (the person 
 referred to is in all probability Ranco) to examine the ortho- 
 j/ doxy of the teaching of Milic. They declared that they found 
 nothing heretical in it, and Master Adalbert in particular 
 stated that he could not examine the truth of that which had 
 evidently been said under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 Probably in consequence of this favourable decision, Milic 
 was soon released from prison. He resolved now to carry 
 out a plan he had previously formed to visit Rome. Pope 
 Urban V. was then expected there from Avignon. On Milic's 
 arrival in Rome in the spring of the year 1367, the pope had not 
 yet come there, and Milic, after waiting a month, decided to 
 proceed to Avignon, hoping to meet him there. But before he 
 started on his new journey, the inward spirit willed him to 
 announce in a sermon the approaching appearance of Anti- 
 christ. Of this sermon, he affixed a copy on the gates of St. 
 Peter's Church. He was arrested by order of the inquisition 
 
 1 Chap. xxiv. 1 5 . 
 
 'Novotny, Jan Milic. Dr. Novotny gives a curious account of the 
 calculations — based on Daniel, chap. xii. v. 10-12 — which led Milic to this 
 conclusion. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 31 
 
 while praying within that church, and imprisoned in the 
 monastery of Ara Coeli in the capital. It is probable that the 
 mendicant friars in Bohemia had already denounced him in 
 Rome, and when the news of his imprisonment reached Prague, 
 they joyfully declared in their sermons that Milic would soon 
 be burnt. 1 While in prison, Milic employed his time in formu- 
 lating his views on the appearance of Antichrist — a subject in 
 which he was then entirely absorbed. It was at this time that 
 he wrote his Profthecia et Revelatio de Antichristo . 2 It was also 
 while he was in prison that he wrote a long letter to Pope 
 Urban V. The order of ideas in both writings is very similar; 
 in both he denounces in burning and apocalyptic language the 
 terrible depravity of the prelates, the monks, the nuns of his 
 time. In both he also enlarges on the, to him, ever-present 
 subject of the advent of Antichrist. Incidentally he also, in 
 the Prophecia, explains the reasons that induced him to visit 
 Rome. He writes that the inward spirit that guided him 
 said, " Go and tell the supreme pontiff to bring back the 
 church to the state of salvation." 3 In his letter to the pope 
 
 1 The author of the Life of Milic, published in the works of Balbinus, writes 
 of the return of Milic and his companion to Prague: " Cum vero Pragam 
 pervenissent quasi nova lux omnibus Christi fidelibus orta fuisset, ita gaude- 
 bant quia per Viros Religiosos mendicantes saepe in eorum praedicationibus 
 undubant ubi dicebatur : Charissimi ecce jam Militius cremabitur. {Miscellanea 
 Historica Regni Bohemiae, liber, iv.) 
 
 J This book must not be confounded with the treatise, De Anatomia Anti- 
 christi — printed in the Nuremberg edition of the works of Hus — which is not 
 by Milic. The book has also been ascribed to Matthew of Janov. Recent 
 research proves that it was written after the siege of Prague in 1420 by a 
 Hussite who used the writings of Janov. (See Dr. Kybal, Matey z. Janova, 
 and the same writer's study in the Cesky Casopis Historicity (Bohemian 
 Historical Yearbook), vol. xi.) 
 
 3 " Postremo incepi attendere, quomodo esset de statu et salute Christian- 
 orum. Et stans in hoc stupefactus audivi spiritum in me sic loquentem in 
 corde. Vade et die summo pontifici, qui ab hoc Spiritu sancto electus est,' ut 
 reducat ecclesiam in statum salutis, ut mittat angelos sive praedicatores 
 cum tuba praedicationis et voce magna, ut tollant praedicta scandala de 
 regno Dei sive de ecclesia, ut quia messis, id est consummatio saeculi venit 
 jam eradicent zizania, id est haereticos et pseudoprophetas, ypocritas, beg- 
 hardos et beginas et scismaticos, qui omnes per Gog et Magog significantur 
 detegant. . . ." (Vestnik Kr. c. Spolecnosti Nauk (Journal of the Bohemian 
 Learned Society), 1890. Mr. Mencik has here published for the first time 
 Milic's prophecy and his letter to Pope Urban V.) 
 
32 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 he also strongly insists on the necessity of assembling a general 
 council of the church in Rome. 
 
 On the arrival of Pope Urban in Rome, Milic was released 
 from prison after he had had an interview with the Cardinal 
 of Albano, and discussed his views with him. The cardinal 
 appears to have acquired considerable influence over Milic. 
 Thenceforth we find that the Bohemian preacher laid less 
 stress on his views concerning the impending advent of Anti- 
 christ. The Cardinal of Albano treated him with great honour, 
 received him in his house, and ordered those who had maligned 
 him to beg his pardon. Milic then returned to Prague " with- 
 out hindrance, comforted, and appeased." On his return to 
 his country, he was as zealous for the welfare of his fellow- 
 men as before, but in his sermons as far as possible avoided 
 to touch on matters of dogma. Like all Bohemian church- 
 reformers, he strove rather to denounce the immorality, avarice, 
 luxury, haughtiness of the Bohemian people, and ecclesiastics 
 in particular, to inculcate the study of Scripture, to help the 
 poor, humble, and oppressed, than to excel in scholastic defini- 
 tions and theological sophistry. Milic, indeed, after his return 
 from Rome became even more stringent in his ascetism and 
 more enthusiastic in his attempts to aid the poor and suffering. 
 He now abstained entirely from the use of meat and wine, 
 allowed himself but a limited time for sleep, slept on a hard 
 couch, and frequently used the rod for the chastisement of his 
 body. The fame of the sanctity of Milic soon spread through 
 Prague, though the mendicant friars and most of the parish- 
 priests, who considered his saintly bearing a tacit condemnation 
 of their evil lives, continued his bitter enemies. A certain 
 number of friends now gathered round him, who sympathised 
 with his labours and admired the sanctity of his life. Such 
 men were Conrad Waldhauser, Adalbert Ranco, Thomas of 
 Stitny, Matthew of Janov. Of these men formerly little was 
 known but their names, and our present knowledge is almost 
 entirely founded on researches made within the last twenty 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 33 
 
 or thirty years. It is indeed probable that, even now, much 
 information concerning the forerunners of Hus exists in 
 unpublished MSS. 
 
 During the later years of his life, Milic lived almost entirely 
 in Prague, though he again proceeded to Rome in 1369. Of 
 the cause of this journey little is known, but we read that it 
 was of short duration. His return was hastened by the news 
 of the death of his old friend, Conrad Waldhauser. Kindly 
 as ever, Milic considered it his duty to take on himself the 
 liabilities of his friend that his creditors might not surfer. 
 After this short absence, Milic began again to devote himself 
 to works of charity and piety. He was indeed able to do this 
 on a larger scale than before, as he became Conrad Waldhauser's 
 successor as rector of the Tyn Church. He still refused to 
 possess money or any but the most necessary worldly goods, 
 and devoted all his revenues to pious works. Like many 
 saintly men, he was deeply impressed by the pity of the fate 
 of fallen women. His eloquent sermons had caused some of 
 these women to repent, and Milic endeavoured to rescue them 
 permanently. Enthusiast though he was, he was not devoid 
 of capacity for business when it was the welfare of others, not 
 his own, that was at stake. Aided by a few friends, he bought 
 a house near the Church of St. Giles, and placed there the women 
 whom he had rescued from the worst of slaveries. They were 
 under the supervision of " Margaret of Moravia," a worthy and 
 intelligent woman, who instructed them in needlework and 
 household duties. Some then, under Milic's auspices, went 
 into domestic service, others were sent home to their families, 
 and a few married. 1 By permission of the archbishop, a small 
 chapel was erected where mass was said and where Milic 
 preached twice daily, once in Bohemian and once in German ; 
 for though he had originally spoken his own language only, 
 he later acquired a thorough knowledge of German. The 
 
 1 Xovotny, Jan Milic. 
 
34 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 accounts of Milic's " mission," as we may call it, have a very 
 modern character, and are so interesting that I regret being 
 unable to quote from them more extensively. 
 
 Milic's foundation soon became too small for the many who 
 begged to be admitted to it. The Emperor Charles, however, 
 whose favour Milic had never lost, came to his aid. It is 
 impossible not to express here admiration for a sovereign who 
 continued to protect a preacher who had offered him what, to 
 the pious mind of Charles, must have appeared the most deadly 
 of insults— one that many a ruler of the fourteenth century 
 would have requited by the most terrible tortures. Charles 
 ordered the buildings on an ill-famed spot at Prague, known 
 as Benatky (Venice), to be destroyed, and presented the ground 
 to Milic. On September 19, 1372, the foundation-stone of the 
 new buildings was laid. They consisted of a church consecrated 
 to the " sinning saints Mary Magdalene, Afra, and the Egyptain 
 Mary," a large building occupied by the female penitents, and 
 a smaller one in which Milic and his disciples dwelt. Alluding 
 to a passage in the Revelation, 1 a book that was always in 
 his mind, Milic gave the name of Jerusalem to this new 
 foundation. The new buildings in time, however, again became 
 too small, but aided by pious benefactors Milic was soon able 
 to enlarge them by buying several neighbouring houses. The 
 community soon acquired a somewhat monastic character. 
 Milic enjoined all its members to attend mass daily, to receive 
 communion frequently, and to devote all their time to deeds of 
 penitence. It was frequently stated that the members of the 
 community were distinguished by a peculiar dress, but this is 
 expressly denied by the author of the biography of Milic, 
 which is included in the works of Balbinus. 
 
 At this period Milic also suffered greatly from the hostility 
 of the parish priests of Prague, who now allied themselves with 
 the mendicant friars, his old enemies. The details of the 
 dispute are not very clear. Here also it may be hoped that 
 
 1 Revelation, chap. xxi. 10-27. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 35 
 
 further archival research will add to our information. 1 As 
 already mentioned, many priests in Prague were irritated by the 
 example set them by the saintly life of Milic. As a pretext for 
 an attack on him, they used the foundation of " Jerusalem," 
 which, they said, interfered with their jurisdiction. At a 
 general meeting of the parochial clergy of Prague, it was decided 
 to bring their complaints against Milic before the archiepiscopal 
 vicar; only a few of the poorer priests expressed dissent, but 
 the other said, " You favourers of Milic, go hence." Both 
 Milic and his opponents appeared at the archiepiscopal court 
 and the priests violently attacked him saying, " Since thou hast 
 begun to preach we have no peace, but rather constantly much 
 vexation." Milic answered, " As it was in the beginning and 
 now and for ever. Amen." They then, enraged at his being 
 so different from them, called him a hypocrite and a beghard, 
 and said other vile words. 
 
 Formal proceedings against Milic were subsequently taken 
 at the archiepiscopal court, John Pecnik, canon of the Vysehrad, 
 who has already been mentioned 2 acting as spokesman for the 
 priests. The proceedings were very protracted, but it is evident 
 that Archbishop Ocko, though he acted with great caution, 
 was in favour of Milic. The priests, therefore, decided to appeal 
 to the pope, and drew up a lengthy document formulating their 
 complaints. They insisted principally on Milic's views con- 
 cerning Antichrist, though he had long abandoned these views. 
 They also stated that he had encouraged the inmates of " Jeru- 
 salem " to receive communion very frequently. This was 
 undoubtedly true, and we meet with this complaint very often 
 in the records of the Hussite movement. The document also 
 gave a distorted account of the preaching of Milic, and en- 
 
 1 The account of Milic by Matthew of Janov, printed by Hofier, Geschichte 
 der Hussitischen Bewegung, ii. p. 40, from the library of the Bohemian Museum, 
 is very short. I have already quoted Janov's description of the nature of 
 Milic. Of the persecutions he endured Janov only writes: " Cum Mylicius 
 carissimus . . . bona opera ... in Praga perfecit, nihil aliud nisi obprobria 
 vituperia et persecutiones continuas ab antichristianis in Praga eadem 
 reportavit." • See p. 15. 
 
36 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 deavoured, probably on the trumped-up evidence of some 
 women who had run away from " Jerusalem," to attack his 
 moral character. This document was entrusted to one Master 
 Klenkot, who was to carry it to Avignon. Early in the year 
 1374, Archbishop Ocko received a bull from Pope Gregory XI. 
 declaring that he had been informed that Milic had spread 
 certain heretical and schismatic doctrines in Bohemia, and that 
 he was surprised at the negligence of the archbishop and the 
 other bishops; the pope ordered that the matter should be 
 investigated and proceedings taken against Milic according to 
 the ecclesiastical regulations, and, if necessary, with the aid 
 of the secular arm. This message deeply afflicted the arch- 
 bishop, and it was Milic himself who comforted him, saying that 
 by the help of God he would prove that he had only spoken 
 the truth. Though Ocko still believed in the innocence of 
 Milic, the papal bull forced him to order a new investigation 
 of the accusations. Milic, however, preferred to appeal to the 
 pope, and having obtained financial aid from some of his friends, 
 he started for Avignon in March 1374. The papal see was very 
 suspicious of heresies at that moment when the whole Catholic 
 world was in a disturbed state, and the dignitaries of Avignon 
 appear to have to a certain extent believed the accusations of 
 Klenkot. Matters changed with the arrival of Milic, and the 
 more worthy among the churchmen did not fail to perceive 
 the saintliness of the man. Milic again found a friend in his 
 former protector the Cardinal of Albano. The accuser Klenkot 
 was called on to substantiate his accusations against Milic, but 
 entirely failed to do so. When he fell ill, shortly afterwards, 
 Milic offered prayers for his recovery, and this truly Christ-like 
 act contributed to convincing the prelates of the saintliness 
 of the Bohemian preacher. Milic was declared to be entirely 
 innocent, was authorised to preach before the assembled 
 cardinals, and was invited to dine with the Cardinal of Albano 
 after the sermon. The triumph of his good cause, not the 
 honours bestowed on him, we are told, gave him great joy. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 37 
 
 But Milic's earthly career was now drawing to an end, and 
 he was soon to enjoy that peace which he had so nobly earned. 
 The privations and persecutions which he had endured had 
 entirely exhausted him. He fell dangerously ill, and died at 
 j& Avignon, probably at the end of the year 1374. The author 
 of the biography of Milic, 1 gives a touching account of his 
 last hours. He left a letter addressed to the Cardinal of Albano, 
 who burst into tears when he received it, saying that Milic 
 deserved to be canonised. In Prague a reactionary movement 
 had meanwhile broken out, and several of Milic's disciples 
 were imprisoned. The " Jerusalem " foundation also was sup- 
 pressed in the year of the death of its founder; but that the 
 results of the labours of the saintly man should not entirely 
 perish, the emperor decreed that the foundation of " the worthy 
 Milic of good memory, our pious and beloved one " — to quote 
 the words of Charles — should be given over to Cistercian 
 monks. To satisfy the rancour of the enemies of Milic, it was, 
 however, decreed that the foundation should in future bear 
 the name of St. Bernard. These measures did not alienate 
 from Milic the affection of the people of Prague, who continued 
 to venerate him as a saint. 
 
 Before ending this brief account of the career of Milic, it 
 is necessary to point out that he never incurred the reproach 
 of expressing heretical views. His statement that Antichrist 
 would shortly appear was an attack, not against the popes 
 whom indeed Milic revered, but against the Emperor Charles 
 who wisely overlooked this temporary aberration in considera- 
 tion of the great merits of the saintly man. The question of 
 frequent communion was, at the time of Milic, only just 
 beginning to become a subject of controversy. The careers 
 of Waldhauser and Milic, however, prove that at that period 
 in Bohemia every priest who lauded poverty and denounced 
 
 1 This biography is printed with the works of Balbinus, a learned Bohemian 
 Jesuit of the seventeenth century, who, however, is not the author of the 
 biography. 
 
38 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 simony and immorality incurred the almost diabolical hatred 
 of the more vicious and luxurious among the higher members 
 of the Bohemian Church — and this quite independently of 
 dogmatical controversies. We shall meet with this hatred 
 again when dealing with Hus, and it has not been sufficiently 
 noted by writers who, though thoroughly versed in theology, 
 did not devote much time to the study of Bohemian history. 
 The literary work of Milic appears to have been considerable, 
 but only a few Latin writings of inconsiderable size — to which 
 I have already alluded — have been preserved and printed, 
 while none of his Bohemian works, which are said to have been 
 numerous, have escaped destruction. 
 
 The next of the little band of Bohemian church-reformers 
 whom I shall mention was Thomas of Stitny x (b. 1331 ; d. 1401). 
 He differed in many respects from the others. He never 
 obtained or sought ecclesiastical offices, nor even took holy 
 orders. Though one of the earliest students of the University 
 of Prague, he afterwards retired to his ancestral home, where 
 he spent the greatest part of his life. There is, however, no 
 doubt that he frequently returned to Prague, as his writings 
 contain many allusions to his personal relations with Wald- 
 hauser, Milic, Ranco, and Janov. In contrast to the other 
 reformers — to whom only a few writings in the national 
 language are attributed, sometimes on doubtful evidence — 
 Stitny wrote in Bohemian only. He appears to have generally 
 leacl a retired life, nor do his writings seem to have attracted 
 much attention at the time. The learned masters of the 
 university strongly disapproved of the use of the national 
 language for the purpose of philosophical or theological con- 
 troversy, and indeed thought it unseemly that laymen, who had 
 taken no degree, should express their opinion on such matters. 
 It might, therefore, appear that the writings of Stitny were 
 devoid of importance; yet nothing is less true. The ideas 
 and theories developed by Stitny penetrated widely among 
 
 1 For Stitny, see my History of Bohemian Literature, 2nd edition, pp. 63-79- 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 39 
 
 the nobility and the smaller landowners of Bohemia, men who 
 afterwards took so prominent a part in the Hussite wars. 
 Stitny's works also bear witness to the high degree of culture 
 which Bohemia had already reached, as well to the great 
 interest in matters of religion which at most periods of history 
 we find among the people of Bohemia. I have elsewhere 
 written extensively on the works of Stitny. It will here only 
 be necessary to refer to his writings as far as they are connected 
 with the cause of church-reform in Bohemia. 
 
 Thomas of Stitny, who belonged to the smaller nobility 
 of Bohemia, was born at the castle — or " tower," to use the 
 Bohemian designation — of Stitny, in Southern Bohemia. As 
 already mentioned, he visited the University of Prague shortly 
 after its foundation, and being of a studious nature soon fell 
 under the influence of the preaching of Waldhauser and Milic. 1 
 He viewed with great indignation the persecution on the part 
 of the mendicant friars which these pious preachers then 
 suffered. In the chapter of his work, Of General Christian 
 Matters, 2 which treats of monkery, Stitny writes, obviously 
 alluding to these persecutions: " They (the monks) quarrel, 
 hate one another, revile one another . . . and, what is most 
 terrible, every worthy preacher, every good man displeases 
 them, for he sees their errors; gladly would they declare such 
 a man a heretic that they might more freely practise their 
 wiles." Stitny writes yet more clearly in one of his yet un- 
 published works 3 " Thus within my memory the devil incited 
 them (the monks) against Conrad, a noble preacher of God's 
 truth, and they said that he was an apostate, because he ex- 
 posed the wiles of false priesthood and taught that which is 
 truth; thus also were they hostile to the good Milic; and the 
 evil spoke evilly of him, but it was false. There are some also 
 
 1 See Erben's Introduction to his edition of Stitny's O obecnych vecech 
 krestanskych (Of general Christian matters). 
 
 2 Book iv. p. 1 36 of Erben's edition. 
 
 3 Quoted by Erben in his Introduction to the book, Of General Christian 
 Matters, p. viii. 
 
4 o THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 who would be glad if that which I write were drowned, because 
 they wish that they alone should appear wise." Somewhat 
 later, in the same manuscript, Stitny again refers to " the 
 priest Conrad and the priest Milic who were in Prague, faithful 
 and brave preachers of God's word, one to the Germans, the 
 other to the Bohemians ; because they spoke against this, that 
 men in holy orders live in an unholy fashion, many thundered 
 at them with insolent and untruthful speeches, and even now 
 these speak evilly of them who say of evil that it is not evil, 
 and of these good men that they were not good." 
 
 It has already been frequently pointed out that we find much 
 in common in the views of the Bohemian reformers. Common 
 to all is an intense devotion to the Holy Bible. I have already 
 alluded to it, and shall have to do so again when writing of 
 Matthew of Janov. In Stitny, this feeling is very strong; he 
 writes: * " This also mark carefully, beloved brethren, that the 
 Holy Scriptures are truly like letters that are sent to us from 
 our home; for our home is heaven, and our friends are the 
 patriarchs and prophets, the apostles and martyrs, and our 
 fellow-citizens are the angels with whom we shall be, and our 
 king is Christ." Similarly as regards eschatological matters 
 and the supposed advent of Antichrist — a subject that then 
 was in the minds of all, particularly in Bohemia — the views 
 of Stitny recall those of Milic. Thus referring to a passage in 
 the Revelation, 2 Stitny writes : 3 " The movement of the earth 
 is the movement of the people who are withdrawing from the 
 truth. The sun signifies the papal throne and the moon the 
 imperial one, and the falling stars signify those of both estates 
 who fall from heavenly desires to earthly ones, and from order 
 to disorder. Another matter in which the Bohemian reformers 
 incurred the enmity of the more numerous and less worthy 
 
 1 Second preface to the work, Of General Christian Matters, p. 5 of Erben's 
 edition. 
 
 2 Chapter vi. 12-13. 
 
 3 MS. quoted in Erben's Introduction to the book. Of General Christian 
 Matters, p. x. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 41 
 
 members of the Bohemian clergy, was their recommendation 
 of the frequent communion of laymen. This was very dis- 
 tasteful to many priests whose pride induced them to extend 
 as far as possible the lines that divided them from the laity. 
 It is also probable, as Professor Tomak has shrewdly con- 
 jectured, 1 that they thought that constant administration of 
 the sacrament of the altar took up too much of their time, 
 while the remuneration was very scant. The question of 
 frequent communion together with that of communion in the 
 two kinds, plays a very large part in the Hussite movement. 
 The claim of laymen to receive communion as frequently and 
 in the same form as ecclesiastics, was an outcome of the 
 Bohemian view, that all worthy Christians are equally members 
 of God's church. As has happened not infrequently, the less 
 worthy the clergy became, the greater became its claims to a 
 superior and exclusive position. At this period we often meet 
 in Bohemia with the theory that even the worst priest is better 
 than the best layman. On the subject of frequent communion 
 Stitny expresses himself clearly. He writes: 2 " I wonder at 
 those many wise people who have strenuously opposed the 
 wishes of those who desire to receive frequently the body of 
 God. How much better would it be if such men would rather 
 diligently "teach goodness to instruct those who wish frequently 
 to receive the body of God ; and with what rage do they blame 
 without reflection all who, not being priests, frequently receive 
 the body of God. Haply also Milic was offensive to them, he 
 who taught the people God's will in truth and in the unity of 
 God's faith differing nowise from the Holy Scripture." 
 
 Though we thus find in Stitny much that is common to all 
 Bohemian reformers, he differed from them particularly in the 
 later years of his life, by displaying more caution and greater 
 subserviency to the Church of Rome. He frequently asserts 
 
 1 History of the Town of Prague, vol. iii. 
 
 *MS. printed by Erben in his Introduction to the book, Of General 
 Christian Matters, p. ix. 
 
42 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 that he does not intend to write anything contrary to the teach- 
 ing of that church, and declares, " Should I have written any- 
 thing unwisely, I wish to state that I do not intend to hold any 
 views except those held by the Christian community, and the 
 University of Prague." This passage is interesting as fore- 
 shadowing the great authority on theological matters which 
 the University of Prague acquired during the Hussite wars. 
 As regards the question of the veneration of pictures, Stitny 
 writes in a very moderate manner, declaring, perhaps in not 
 unintentional opposition to Matthew of Janov, who had very 
 strong views on this subject: " I am not one of those who 
 think that there should be no images among Chrstians. I 
 think they exaggerate; for we may have pictures instead of 
 writings as a memorial of such (holy) things, but not that such 
 a picture be as a likeness of God." x With great humility, 
 Stitny deferred to those whom he believed to possess pro- 
 founder learning than he himself could claim. In a letter 
 addressed to Adalbert Ranco, " that master of stupenduous 
 intellect and wondrous memory, who first of the Bohemians 
 obtained the mastership of Holy Scripture at the University 
 of Paris," Stitny, while sending him his book Of General 
 Christian Matters, begs him to correct his writings should they 
 contain anything contrary to Scripture. 
 
 Stitny's writings were very numerous, and he constantly 
 re-wrote them, sometimes altering their names. He did not 
 begin writing early in life; and of his two greatest works the 
 first, the book Of General Christian Matters (0 obecnych vecech 
 Krestanskych) 3 was only finished in 1376. It deals mainly 
 with theological matters, but the book, written for the instruc- 
 tion of Stitny's children, contains much excellent advice on 
 matters of daily life. More pretentious is Stitny's other great 
 work, entitled Besedni Recif which may be translated by 
 
 1 Erben, Introduction to his edition of the book, Of General Christian 
 Matters. 2 Ibid. 
 
 * Edition by Erben, 1852. « Edited by Professor Hattala, 1897. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 43 
 
 Learned Entertainments. The book is an attempt to define, 
 according to the scholastic system, the personality of God and 
 His attributes. It is in strict accordance with the doctrine 
 of Rome, as far as that doctrine had been developed at 
 the time of Stitny. As already noted, Stitny, towards the 
 end of his life, became much more moderate in his denunciations 
 of the iniquities of his time, and the later manuscripts of his 
 works are far more obsequious to the Roman Church than the 
 earlier ones had been. While the reform movement continu- 
 ously assumed a more advanced character, Stitny's caution 
 became ever greater, and he was at the end of his life no longer 
 in touch with the leaders of a movement to the development 
 of which he had largely contributed. Stitny's merits as a 
 Bohemian writer are very great; he was the first to employ 
 the national language as a medium for the discussion of theo- 
 logical and philosophical questions. He was in this also a 
 true forerunner of Hus, whose great merits for the development 
 of the language of his country have only lately been recognised. 
 In the last vears of his life, Stitny returned to Prague, and lived 
 there up to his death in 1401. At this period his constant 
 companion was his daughter, Anna, or Anezka, as he called 
 her. After his death she occupied part of a house near the 
 Bethlehem chapel where Hus was shortly to begin to preach. 
 It is known that several pious ladies lived in community in a 
 house near Hus's chapel. If, as is probable, Anezka of Stitny 
 was one of these ladies, the fact forms an interesting link 
 between Stitny and his greater successor. 
 
 In connection with Stitny and the other reformers pre- 
 viously mentioned, the name of Adolbert Ranco (known also 
 as Ranconis, or Rankuv) cannot be omitted. The details of 
 his life are very obscure, 1 though we meet with his name 
 
 1 I have mainly based this brief account of the career of Ranco on an 
 article by Dr. Tadra, entitled "Mistr Vojtech Rankuv," which appeared in 
 the Casopis Musea Kralovstvi Ceskeho (Journal of the Bohemian Museum) 
 for i8 7 q Previously Dr. Loserth had published an outline of the career of 
 Ranco in his Beitrdge zur Geschichte der Hussitischen Bewegutig, n. Dr. 
 Loserth's study shows great animus against Ranco. 
 
44 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 constantly in the writings of the Bohemian reformers, and he 
 was famed as the most learned Bohemian of his time. It is 
 permissible to include him among the Bohemian reformers, 
 not only because of his constant relations with these men, 
 which I have frequently mentioned, but also because he, as 
 he has stated in a letter to which I have already alluded, 
 complained of the hostility of the mendicant friars who accused 
 him of being an " Armachanus." The year of the birth of 
 Ranco is uncertain, but we find him a student at the University 
 of Paris in 1348. He there belonged to the " English " nation, 
 which, besides English, included also Scotchmen and Germans 
 as well as the few students from Slavic countries. Ranco 
 soon obtained the reputation of being a very profound theo- 
 logian, and the university conferred great honours on him — 
 a fact to which Stitny alluded in a passage that I have quoted 
 above. In 1355, Ranco became rector of the University of 
 Paris, and he appears to have remained in France for a con- 
 siderable time. He must, however, have returned to his country 
 some time before the year 1364, as we read that he was in that 
 year one of the canons of the cathedral of Prague, who were 
 appointed to report on the orthodoxy of the views of Milic. 
 Ranco, as already stated, declared that Milic had spoken under 
 the direct inspiration of the Holy Ghost. From the somewhat 
 scanty statements concerning Ranco which have reached us, 
 it appears that he was not a man of a conciliatory nature, and 
 he was frequently involved in the sometimes turbulent theo- 
 logical controversies that then raged at the university. The 
 fact that Ranco, at a time when the university was still largely 
 German, openly declared himself a Bohemian, and defended 
 the interests of his countrymen, drew on him the hatred of 
 many of the German scholars. Probably, in consequence of this 
 ill-will, Ranco again left Bohemia and proceeded to Avignon. 
 He appears at this time also to have lost the favour of the 
 emperor; but Charles, always lenient to truly pious and zealous 
 churchmen, soon allowed him to return to his country. On 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 45 
 
 the death of the empeior in 1378, Ranco was awarded the 
 honour of pronouncing a funereal oration. 1 Ranco died in 
 1388, after having made a will which instituted a foundation 
 for the benefit of poor students of the Bohemian nationality 
 who might wish to study theology or the free arts at the 
 Universities of Oxford or Paris. By this will, Ranco incurred 
 the hostility, not only of the German writers of his time, but 
 also of those of the present day. 
 
 Ranco's fame as a preacher was very great in his time, and 
 the scanty remains of his sermons that have been preserved 
 lead us to believe that this fame was justified. Ranco's sermon 
 on the death of the Emperor Charles has already been men- 
 tioned. The " synodal oration," delivered by Ranco in 1385, 
 is also very interesting. He here inveighs against the simony, 
 avarice, and immorality of the clergy in a manner that recalls 
 Waldhauser and Milic. 2 
 
 As regards Ranco's theological controversies, some rise little 
 above the level of scholastic disputes, and require no notice 
 here. Two of these controversies are, however, of interest, 
 as they concern views that are characteristic of all Bohemian 
 reformers. It has already been noted and will have again to 
 be stated later, that these reformers laid great stress on the 
 merits of the frequent communion of laymen. On this subject 
 Ranco addressed a letter to the rector of St. Martin's Church 
 in the "old town" Albert Martin. This letter, which is dis- 
 tinguished by great broadness of mind and moderation, 
 attracted great attention at the time it appeared. It has been 
 
 1 Printed in the Fontes Rerum Bohemicarum, vol. iii. pp. 433-441. 
 
 8 Thus Ranco writes : "... Videamus et consideremus diligenter, qualibus 
 nunc ecclesia spousa Christi commissa paranymphis et dico quod in primitiva 
 ecclesia sanctos et perfectos suae puritatis custodes . . . nunc autem ista 
 versa propter aliquos majores clericos in oppositam qualitatem dura videmus 
 aliquos ad earn venire per pecunian allatam vel post solutam et datam peius 
 quam Simon Magus. . . . Addo quod mille annis in clero non fuerit tarn 
 scurilis habitus ut nunc est, qui multum attestatur super inordinata cleri- 
 corum vita, nam mihi non est dubium quod tales clerici inordinatum habitum 
 exterius ferentes sint in mente inordinati, corrupti et viciati. ..." (MS. of 
 University Library, Prague, quoted by Tadra, Voytech Ranhuv.) 
 
46 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 preserved in several MSS., and Matthew of Janov quotes it in 
 his Regulae Veteris et Novi Testamenti." Ranco writes: "Were 
 I rector (farar) of a church, and laymen came to me, men or 
 women, desiring to receive daily the sacrament of the altar, 
 I would not permit this, except indeed if daily communion had 
 long been established as a general custom ; for a good prepara- 
 tion is required, which those who live among worldly people 
 cannot obtain. If, however, someone is declared by his con- 
 fessor — an honest and sensible man, not a flatterer — to be 
 sufficiently perfect, and this man has a true and ardent desire 
 to receive the sacrament frequently, then his rector or the 
 vicar, with the assent of the recort or his confessor, may admit 
 him to communion at intervals of eight days, unless the statutes 
 of the synods decree otherwise." 
 
 Another controversy of some importance in which Ranco 
 took part referred to the foundation of a new festival in honour 
 of the Virgin Mary. John of Jenzenstein, who succeeded his 
 uncle, Ocko of Vlasim, as archbishop of Prague, had a particular 
 devotion to the Madonna, and he founded in her honour a new 
 festival to which he gave the name of the Visitation (Festum 
 Visitationis S. Marice in Montanis). He informed the synod 
 of his decision, which had been taken without obtaining the 
 consent of the pope, announcing at the same time that the new 
 festival would be kept on July 2. The archiepiscopal vicar 
 then informed the assembled canons of the cathedral of Prague 
 of the archbishop's resolution, inviting them to express their 
 views on the subject. Adalbert Ranco then rose and spoke 
 strongly, not, indeed, against the new festival, but against the 
 action of the archbishop who had founded it without the per- 
 mission of the pope and the consent of the canons. As far as 
 can be judged, these arguments were but a pretext, as the 
 archbishop had not indeed consulted the pope, but had informed 
 him of the decree at the time he issued it. The attitude of 
 Adalbert was undoubtedly a protest against what he con- 
 sidered an exaggerated devotion to the Virgin Mary. There 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 47 
 
 is no doubt that Archbishop Jenzenstein viewed it in this light, 
 for he became greatly incensed against Ranco. Even when the 
 latter, having fallen ill, endeavoured to pacify Jenzenstein, the 
 archbishop replied most ungraciously, stating that Ranco no 
 doubt wished to amend himself because of his fear of approach- 
 ing death, and that it was for that reason also that he had begun 
 to fast, pray, and do good works. When Ranco was dying, 
 the archbishop sent to him the provost of Roudnice to tell him 
 to desist from calumniating the virgin, otherwise he would have 
 to fear her wrath. When Ranco died on August 15, the day of 
 the Assumption of Mary, Jenzenstein regarded this as a con- 
 firmation of the truth of his warning. 1 
 
 The last and greatest of the forerunners of Hus was Matthew /^ 
 of Janov. His career has up to recent times been very little 
 known, and only one incident in his life — an incident that is 
 not very creditable — appears to have attracted the attention 
 of his contemporaries. Of the writers of the nineteenth century 
 few have devoted much time and study to Janov. Foremost 
 among these is Palacky, the Pathfinder, who first penetrated 
 into the almost complete darkness which formerly surrounded 
 the forerunners of Hus. Palacky's Vorldufer des Hussiten- 
 thumes is a valuable work even seventy years after its appear- 
 ance. About the same time the Protestant divine, Neander, 
 also devoted considerable attention to the study of Janov. 
 Neander's statement that Matthew of Janov went further in 
 his opposition to Rome than Hus has been frequently challenged 
 both by German and by Bohemian writers. It contains, how- 
 ever, a great deal of truth. That the importance of Matthew 
 has been underrated both by the friends and foes of Rome 
 is undoubtedly due to his formal recantation of his opinions, 
 which became widely known. The Romanists, to whose teach- 
 ing he had conformed, had no wish to perpetuate the memory 
 of his former errors, as they considered them. The Hussites, 
 on the other hand, always bore in mind his submission — caused 
 
 1 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, vol. iii. 
 
48 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 by cowardice, or, as it is more charitable to suppose, by the 
 scepticism that is sometimes the result of profound study. 
 The Hussites rarely referred to Matthew of Janov, and some of 
 his works were even attributed to other writers. The enthu- 
 siastic partisans of church-reform could not fail to contrast his 
 attitude with the indomitable heroism and self-sacrifice of Hus. 
 
 It is only recently that a book has appeared dealing with 
 Matthew of Janov which can be considered as giving a thorough 
 account of the life and works of this great Bohemian reformer. 
 I refer to the work Matej z. Janova by Dr. Kybal, one of the 
 most promising of the younger historians of Bohemia. The 
 book is founded on sound archival research in Prague — no 
 slight merit, as the state of most of the archives at Prague is 
 still one of great disorder. Dr. Kybal has also begun to edit 
 the Regulae Veteris et Novi Testamenti, 1 the life-work of Matthew. 
 
 The events of the life of Matthew of Janov do not require a 
 detailed account. The year of his birth and his birthplace are 
 both uncertain. We have, however, evidence to prove that 
 he was born previously to the year 1355, and we know that he 
 belonged, like Stitny, to the smaller nobility of Bohemia. He 
 probably went to Prague early in life, and we have his own 
 authority for stating that he there came under the influence of 
 Milic of Kromerice, whose memory he cherished throughout 
 life. Whether Janov also knew Waldhauser at Prague is un- 
 certain. The teaching of Milic naturally tended to confirm in 
 Janov the special devotion to the Holy Scriptures which is 
 characteristic of all Bohemian church-reformers. He tells us: 2 
 " I have loved the Bible since my youth and called it my friend 
 and bride — verily the mother of beateous affection, and know- 
 ledge, and fear, and holy hope." 
 
 Though dates here also continue uncertain, we know that 
 Matthew pursued his studies at the University of Paris. He 
 
 1 Dr. Kybal's complete edition of the Regulae Veteris et Novi Testamenti 
 will consist of six volumes; the first appeared in 1908. 
 
 2 Regulae Veteris etNovi Testamenti, Proemium (p. 12 of Dr. Kybal's edition). 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 49 
 
 was probably there from 1373 to 1381. He became, like all 
 Bohemians, a member of the English " nation," and pursued 
 his studies with great diligence. He obtained many academic 
 honours, and soon became known as the Magister Parisiensis, 
 the name under which he is generally mentioned by contem- 
 porary writers. Among other academic honours Matthew 
 obtained that of licentiate of the free arts. Because of his 
 great poverty he was exempted from paying the fees customary 
 on such occasions. 1 In the same year — 1376 — he became 
 master of the free arts, but henceforth devoted himself mainly 
 to the study of theology. After having been ordained a priest 
 in 1378, Janov endeavoured to obtain a papal provision — 
 almost the only way in which, at that corrupt period of the 
 church, a poor man could obtain his livelihood within the 
 ecclesiastic state. For this purpose Matthew twice visited 
 Rome, and it is certain that the difficulties, humiliations, and 
 expenses, very large for a poor man, which he encountered 
 while submitting his petitions, greatly embittered his mind. 2 
 He was, however, finally successful in his mission, and on May 
 1, 1381, Pope Urban VI. conferred on him the expectancy on a 
 canonry of the cathedral of Prague. After again visiting Paris, 
 Janov returned to Bohemia, and presented the papal letters 
 which he had received. The rank of canon was conferred on 
 him, but there being then no vacant benefice he remained in 
 Prague, a pauper philosophans as he himself expresses it. He 
 was, however, befriended by Adalbert Ranco, who gave him 
 hospitality in a house belonging to the canons of Prague. 3 It 
 was probably also through the influence of Ranco that Matthew 
 obtained at the end of the year 1381, the office of penitentiary 
 to the archbishop. His duties consisted mainly in taking the 
 
 1 Kybal, Matej z. Janova. 
 
 * He himself writes feelingly on this subject: "Pro quibus (provisions) 
 oportel adire sedes praelatorum et tremebunde coram ipsis pro talibus 
 supplicare et impetrare difficulter non sine impensis magnis et expensis, 
 saltern scriptoribus ipsorum pro Uteris super impetrato confectis et formatis. 
 (Regulae Veteris et Novi Testamanti, lib. hi., tract 4, quoted by Kybal). 
 
 ^* Tadra, Mistr Voftech Rankuv. 
 
 D 
 
5 o THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 place of the archbishop at the confessional. About the same 
 time he was also appointed preacher at the Cathedral Church of 
 St. Vitus. To these new dignities, however, no remuneration 
 appears to have been attached; but finally Janov obtained 
 the office of parish-priest at Velika Ves (Michelsdorf). Though 
 deriving his income from this office, he continued to reside at 
 Prague. An indefatigable worker, he found time, in spite 
 of his numerous occupations, to continue at the University 
 of Prague the studies which he had begun in Paris, and in addi- 
 tion to his Latin sermons at St. Vitus, he also preached in Latin 
 in the Church of St. Nicholas in the old town. In these 
 Bohemian sermons, -Ranco expressed views similar to those 
 with which we meet in his writings. He spoke very strongly 
 against the then prevalent practice of venerating the pictures 
 and statues of saints. He declared that the pictures of Christ 
 and the saints give opportunities for idolatry; therefore should 
 they be burnt or destroyed, not invoked and honoured by the 
 bending of knees and the lighting of tapers before them. He 
 further stated that it should not be believed that God, through 
 these images, works miracles for the benefit of those who 
 venerate them. Janov farther stated that it was not true 
 that the saints in heaven and their remains (such as their 
 bodies, bones, clothing, jewels, etc.) should be honoured here 
 on earth, nor that these saints could by their merits and in- 
 tercession be more helpful to men than those saints who still 
 live upon earth. Another tenet which Matthew expressed and 
 maintained in his Bohemian sermons was that of daily com- 
 munion, which he warmly commended to those who assisted 
 at his sermons at St. Nicholas' Church. 1 
 
 These opinions were undoubtedly contrary to the teaching 
 of Rome, and perhaps approached more closely to what after- 
 wards became known as a Protestant standpoint than did 
 any assertions of Hus. The archiepiscopal consistory found 
 in these sermons a welcome reason for taking proceedings 
 
 1 Kybal, Matej z. Janova. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 51 
 
 against Matthew, who had previously already incurred their 
 distrust and dislike. His life of study, untouched by even 
 the slightest taint of immorality, contrasted in a very vivid 
 manner with that of most of the priests of Prague, whose 
 time was spent in hunting, dicing, feasting, and other even 
 less edifying occupations. In October 1388, a decree of the 
 synod of Prague declared that no layman should be admitted 
 to communion oftener than once a month, and shortly after- 
 wards it was decreed that the laymen should be enjoined to 
 address their prayers to pictures, and believe in their mira- 
 culous powers. A year later, Janov was summoned to appear 
 before the archiepiscopal court, and he was obliged to retract 
 his views at a solemn meeting of the synod on October 19, 
 1398. * As a punishment Matthew was forbidden to celebrate 
 mass, preach, or administer the sacrament anywhere except 
 in his parish church at Velika-Ves. 
 
 " Matthew's recantation," as Dr. Kybal writes, " was 
 made unwillingly and insincerely." He refers to the incident 
 frequently in the Regulae, where he speaks of those " who 
 honour to the highest degree the saints in heaven while they 
 persecute the saintly Christians who are near to them and are 
 their contemporaries; those who rob the saints who live at 
 their time, while they clothe the bones of the dead saints in 
 gold and silver; who sanctify the apostles and other preachers 
 who are dead, while they condemn and insult the faithful 
 preachers and priests who live at their own time." 2 
 
 As Matthew considered that the judgment against him 
 was entirely unjust, the result of the wickedness of worldly- 
 minded men, he continued to preach and write in the same 
 spirit as before; he continued to enjoin the faithful to receive 
 
 1 The retractation is published by Palacky, Documenta mag. Joannis 
 Hus, pp. 699 and 700. The statements retracted are exactly those mentioned 
 above. As regards the important question of the veneration of images, 
 Janov declared: " Dico . . . quod secundum institutionem et consuetudinem 
 sanctae matris ecclesiae debent imagines ad honorem illorum quos designant, 
 adorari et venerari. . ." 
 
 * Quoted by Kybal from a MS. of Janov. 
 
52 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 communion frequently, and his language with regard to the 
 worship of images became even stronger than before. He 
 writes * that " the simple-minded are seduced in a damnable 
 manner, for they confer, as it were, a divine power on a 
 wooden or stony image, and regard it with amazement, rever- 
 ence, and affection, forgetting that it is but a senseless and 
 lifeless block of wood, neither blessed nor consecrated by the 
 word of God. Verily, any gallows is more acceptable and 
 more useful in a city than some much-honoured picture or 
 statue in a church, for by means of the gallows God's justice 
 is accomplished and indicated, and the wickedness of the 
 people is diminished. ..." 
 
 If we recall the superstitious terror and abhorrence which 
 the " gallows-tree " inspired in mediaeval days, we will see the 
 force and the temerity of Janov's comparison. 
 
 As was inevitable, the authorities of the church again 
 began to take proceedings against him. In 1392, Matthew 
 was ordered to deliver up to the vicar of the archbishop for 
 inspection two works which he was known to have written. 
 We have, however, no account of the result of this examina- 
 tion. It was a more serious matter when, in the autumn of 
 the same year, Janov was again summoned to appear at the 
 archiepiscopal law court. It appears probable that Arch- 
 bishop Jenzenstein had, in consequence of the contents of the 
 books mentioned above, again forbidden him to officiate as a 
 priest at Prague, and particularly to administer the sacrament 
 daily to laymen. On the formal promise of Matthew that he 
 would henceforth obey all orders of his ecclesiastical superiors, 
 he was now reinstated in all his dignities as a priest and 
 preacher at Prague. 
 
 Probably, previous to his second appearance at the archi- 
 episcopal court, Matthew's mind had undergone a profound 
 change, of which he has given us an account that has great 
 
 1 This eloquent passage (in Regulae, Book V.) is too long for quotation 
 in its entirety. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 53 
 
 psychological interest. It has already been mentioned that 
 he had, like most priests of his time, unhesitatingly availed 
 himself of the chance of gaining a livelihood by means of a 
 papal benefice, the only course often open to an impecunious 
 young priest. It did not even apparently appear to him 
 wrong to conform to a then established custom. On 
 Matthew's return to Prague, where he had, as already men- 
 tioned, at first obtained ecclesiastical dignities, but no regular 
 income, a great change came over him. He had hitherto 
 been very ambitious, and there is no doubt that as a subtle 
 theologian and profound philosopher he might, under other 
 circumstances, have ranked high among the writers of the 
 fourteenth century. 1 But he now cast from him all worldly 
 thoughts and ambitions. In his own words: 2 "As long as 
 the ' thick wall ' of desire for riches and worldly fame sur- 
 rounded me and obscured the atmosphere, up to that time as 
 a prisoner or a drunkard, I reposed softly. My only endeavour 
 was to dwell splendidly ' in painted tents,' and as one who 
 dwelleth in an inn, I reflected and thought of nothing but 
 that which attracts the eyes and rejoices the ears. This 
 lasted till it pleased the Lord Jesus to snatch me away from 
 these walls, as a burning brand plucked out of the fire. . . . 
 And the Lord led me to the dwelling of sorrow, adversity, 
 shame, and contempt. Now, only when I had become poor 
 and of a contrite spirit, and trembled at the word of the Lord, 3 
 I began to wonder at the truths of holy Scripture, and how 
 they have been necessarily, irrevocably and continually ful- 
 filled in the whole and in all parts. Then also I began at 
 last to wonder at the great artfulness of Satan, who with his 
 thick darkness has surrounded the bodies and covered up the 
 eyes even of great philosophers. 4 Then particularly the 
 
 1 It is beyond the purpose of this work to enter into this subject. I must 
 refer the reader to Dr. Kybal's brilliant study. 
 a Kybal, Mate] z. Janova, pp. 27-28. 
 • Isaiah, lxvi. 2. 
 « i.e., of the University of Paris (note of Dr. Kybal). 
 
54 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 dearest crucified Jesus opened my mind that I might under- 
 stand the passages of Scripture that were befitting to the 
 times, and He raised up my spirit that I might perceive how 
 the people were absorbed by vanity. . . . And reading, I 
 clearly and rightly understood the abomination of desolation 
 which penetrated the holy spot, strongly, broadly, and widely. 
 And I was much frightened, and I was seized with sobbing, 
 which continueth now and for ever. And I began to repeat 
 the complaint of Jeremiah, calling on all to lament over the 
 crimes of Jerusalem, the daughter of his nation. Then there 
 entered into my breast a certain fire, even bodily perceivable, 
 new, strong, strange, but very sweet. This fire endures 
 within me up to now, and the stronger it burns the more am 
 I in my prayers raised up to God and to the Lord Jesus the 
 Crucified; it (the fire) never disappears except when I forget 
 Jesus Christ, or speak vainly, or become lax in the discipline 
 of eating and drinking (i.e., in fasting). Then am I immedi- 
 ately obscured perceivably, and become useless for all good 
 works till I again turn to Jesus Christ with much groaning 
 and many lamentations. . . . When I tremble before the 
 judgment-seat of Christ, who so soon casts men into the hell 
 of condemnation and again leads them back into the state of 
 grace, then this fire returns to me and surrounds anew my 
 inner man, so that I am prepared for everything that is good. 
 And then I receive this suggestion which is written down and 
 runs thus: ' Son of man, pierce the wall.' And I obeyed the 
 voice of my God and I pierced the wall in a threefold fashion, 
 that is by preaching daily to the people, by constantly hearing 
 confessions and by writing this * (book) with much solicitude 
 both by day and by night." 
 
 It is obvious through this self-confession that it was by 
 means of the humiliations and tribulations of his troublous 
 life that Matthew was led to renounce the ambitions of his 
 youth, and even to denounce strongly the corrupt system of 
 
 1 i.e. the Regulae. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 55 
 
 the papal administration of that time. That a man who 
 believed himself to be acting under the immediate inspiration 
 of God should little heed the commands of his archbishop was 
 inevitable. Matthew continued both in word and in writing 
 to attack the immorality of the clergy and the idolatrous 
 worship of images. He also extolled the frequent com- 
 munion of laymen, as he had done before, and administered 
 the sacrament daily to all the faithful who desired it. Yet 
 we have no knowledge of any further conflict between the 
 archbishop and Janov after the one that took place in 1392. 
 Archbishop Jenzenstein was entirely engrossed in a violent 
 dispute with King Venceslas IV. of Bohemia, and in 1394 
 Matthew of Janov passed away from the jurisdiction of all 
 earthly judges; he died on November 30 of that year. 
 
 It has already been mentioned that Janov was a very 
 fertile writer. It will here, however, be sufficient to refer to 
 his Regidae Veteris et Novi Testamenti. The book was his 
 masterpiece and his life-work, and we meet in it with all 
 Matthew's predominant ideas and theories. The book, one 
 of the most precious documents of the Bohemian reformation, 
 long remained almost unknown, hidden away in various 
 manuscripts, not one of which contained its complete contents. 
 Dr. Kybal, the author of a valuable life of Matthew of Janov, 
 to which I have frequently referred, is now engaged in editing 
 and publishing the Regulae, and part of the work has already 
 appeared. Matthew himself is our authority with regard to 
 the origin of the Regulae. He had at first intended to treat 
 his subject in but one book, but then added two more, and 
 later on a fourth and fifth. 1 Here, as so frequently, Janov 
 
 1 " Ilium enim principaliter, id est solum ilium primum intendebam sub 
 brevitate scripsisse. Dehinc pius Jhesus michi dilatavit, et aperiens ostium 
 me implevit suis copiis, ut duos libros, puta secundum et tercium scripserim, 
 de indicio et discrecione verorum et falsorum christianorum et prisnum 
 pseudoprophetarum et doctorum. Dehinc alios duos libros, scilicet quartum 
 et quintum solum et simpliciter de communicacione in Christi Jhesu ecclesia 
 deinci et supertremendi veri corporis et sanguinis Jhesu." Regulae Proemium, 
 p. 16 of Dr. Kybal's edition. 
 
5 6 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 believed himself to be writing under the direct inspiration 
 of Jesus, by whose order he, as he tells us, extended his 
 work. In the introduction (proemium) quoted below, which 
 Matthew probably wrote after the completion of his work, he 
 indicates the two leading ideas which inspired his book and 
 to which he ever returns from the by-paths of scholastic 
 philosophy, whose redundancy and frequent repetitions 
 render the study of Matthew's work an arduous task. These 
 two " Leitmotive " are the definition of true Christianity in 
 distinction from false Christianity and"the theory of the utility 
 of the frequent communion of laymen. It had been customary 
 with writers anterior to Dr. Kybal to dwell mainly on the first 
 of these two points, and the Regulae were frequently described 
 as the book of true and false Christianity. Dr. Kybal first 
 pointed out the great importance which Janov attaches to 
 the veneration of the sacrament and the great stress which 
 he lays on the frequent communion of laymen. From this 
 theory indirectly, and by no means through the direct in- 
 fluence of Janov, the doctrine of utraquism sprang. 
 
 To notice briefly the contents of the Regulae, it may be 
 stated that the first book which follows on the introduction 
 deals of the distinction between true and false prophets accord- 
 ing to the Old Testament, and the veneration of the holy 
 sacrament. 1 Conformably to its twofold subject, the book 
 is divided into two tractatus (treatises). In the first of 
 these Matthew warns his readers against false prophets 
 (pseudoprophetae) , who, he states, are more numerous than 
 true prophets. 2 He then endeavours to instruct the faith- 
 ful as to the means by which they can distinguish them. 
 The second treatise, which deals of the sacrament of the altar 
 
 1 The titles of the different books and treatises are different in the various 
 manuscripts of the Regulae. In Dr. Kybal's edition the first book is entitled: 
 De Discrecione Spirituum in Doctoribus et Prophetis et de Venerabili Sacramento. 
 
 2 " Ex hoc contigit quod multi pseudoprophete exierunt in mundum, 
 similiter et prophete veraces, licet pauciores." Regulae, p. 21 of Dr. Kybal's 
 edition. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 57 
 
 and communion, is one of the most valuable parts of Janov's 
 great work. He has here expressed most fully and most 
 clearly his views on the all-important subject of the sacrament, 
 to which he refers very frequently in the Regulae. " In these 
 days," Janov writes, 1 " some dispute on the frequent receiv- 
 ing of the body and blood of Jesus Christ by laymen; among 
 these are preachers also and doctors who have expressed their 
 views, some in favour, others in opposition to this practice, 
 basing their opinions either on reasoning or on the Scriptures." 
 Janov then proceeds in the usual scholastic fashion, abounding 
 in " distinctions " and classifications, to place before his 
 readers, and then to refute, the arguments of those who were 
 opposed to frequent communion. He strongly blames the 
 priests who, from haughtiness, refused to administer the 
 sacrament frequently to laymen, though David called it the 
 " nourishment of the poor," meaning hereby the laymen in 
 distinction from the priesthood. Not only to men should 
 frequent communion be allowed, but also to women, whose 
 religious fervour Matthew greatly extolls. 2 The great part 
 played by women in the Hussite movement has not yet been 
 sufficiently noticed, and we only occasionally find — as here — 
 some mention of it in the scanty records of the period that 
 have been preserved. Later on the Bohemian women were 
 on Zizka's hill to seal with their blood their devotion to the 
 Hussite cause. 
 
 The second book of the Regulae also contained two treatises. 
 The first one is entitled, De Hypocrisi, and Matthew here 
 
 1 Regulae, p. 5 1 . 
 
 2 We meet with this praise of the religious fervour of women frequently 
 in this treatise: " Puta quod mulieres que sunt in Christo in hoc tempore 
 viros in virtutibus anticurrunt." ..." Nam cum sacerdotes stertunt et 
 nauseant vix debito et officio et alias raro missas sanctissimas dignati calebrare 
 mulieres summis desideriis et studiis festinant cottidie vel quanto eis saepius 
 potest fieri, corpus et sanguinem Jhesu Christi manducare et potare." . . . 
 " Istis temporibus surgunt mulieres virgines et vidue et apprehendunt 
 disciplinam, agunt strenue penitentiam properant ad divina sacramenta et 
 preripiunt viris regnum celorum circa vanitatem hujus seculi occupatis." 
 (Regulae, Lib. I., tr. 2, passim.) 
 
58 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 expresses himself strongly on the subject of hypocrites, par- 
 ticularly among the priesthood. He draws attention to the 
 insufficiency of the precautions taken by the church to guard 
 against such men, while it is always prepared to be watchful of 
 heretics. 1 The second treatise, which formed part of this book, 
 has not been preserved, though we are acquainted with its 
 name, De Distincta Veritate. 
 
 In the third book, which contains no less than six treatises, 
 Matthew can be said to have formulated his views most 
 clearly. The book shows evidence of the fact that the different 
 books of the Regulae were written separately and at different 
 times, though Janov afterwards united them into one entirety. 
 The third book, and indeed all parts of the Regulae, therefore, 
 teem with repetitions, and the writer who endeavours to 
 briefly delineate the contents of the work constantly runs the 
 risk of committing the same offence. In the first treatise 
 Matthew expounds a tenet which is the foundation of all his 
 teaching. Jesus Christ himself, he writes, is the primary 
 principle of truth, and the only sufficient guidance and law of 
 Christian life. The second treatise, De Testibus Veritates, 
 refers to the prophets and apostles as the witnesses of truth; 
 and in the third, Matthew again broaches his views concerning 
 the necessity of frequent communion. He quotes numerous 
 witnesses, beginning by Jesus Christ and ending by contem- 
 poraries such as Adalbert Ranco, in support of his favourite 
 doctrine. The fourth treatise, On the Unity and Universality 
 of the Church, criticises bitterly the depraved state of the 
 church at the time of Janov. The idea, outlined in this 
 treatise, that the evil state of the church foreshadows the end 
 of the world and the appearance of Antichrist, is fully de- 
 veloped in the fifth treatise, De Antichristo. As Matthew 
 
 1 " Competenter vigilatur contra hereticos et vigilatum est dudum copiose 
 per doctores; tamen contra nocentissimos ypocritas et luciformes (diabolical) 
 non puto esse satis attentos usque modo christianos dei neque satis vigilare. 
 (Regulae, p. 109.) 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 59 
 
 himself tells us, 1 it was the influence of Milic, who had dealt 
 with the same subject, that induced Matthew to write his 
 treatise. It differs little from the many other eschatological 
 works written in Bohemia at this period. This treatise, which 
 was long attributed to Hus and figures in the older editions of 
 his work, obtained more celebrity than any other work of 
 Janov, and was translated both into German and into 
 Bohemian. It contains, in numerous " distinctions," a 
 mystic description of Antichrist. The sixth and last treatise 
 has great interest with regard to the development of the 
 Hussite movement. It is entitled De Abominacione in Loco 
 Sancto, and, to borrow the words of Dr. Kybal, is full of general 
 and impassioned attacks on the ecclesiastical community of 
 his day, founded on the language of the Old Testament and 
 of the Revelation. Perhaps fearing that the vehemence of his 
 attacks might be attributed to personal motives, Matthew 
 here lays particular stress on the point that it was only his 
 love of Christ that induced him to write. 2 
 
 The fourth book of the Regulae contains but one treatise, 
 which is entitled A Question whether it is permissible to each 
 and all holy Christians to receive Communion daily, that is to 
 say, to partake of (manducare) the Body and Blood of Christ. 
 Matthew here again enters on a subject which obviously in- 
 terested him more than any other. This treatise takes the 
 form of an answer given by Matthew to a friend, a pious priest 
 who was troubled by the question of frequent communion 
 that then occupied all thoughtful minds in Bohemia. 
 Matthew here, as elsewhere, appears as a staunch upholder 
 of frequent communion. 3 He vigorously attacks those priests 
 
 1 Dr. Kybal, Matej z. Janova, p. 63, n. 3. 
 
 2 " Nam et ista scribens fateor quod nihil aliud me in illud perurget nisi 
 dileccio domini nostri Jesu Crucifixi cujus stigmata pro modulo mee infirmi- 
 tatis vilitatis in me ipso cupio deportare et quia igitur zelus domus sue 
 comedit et opprobria exprobancium Jesu crucifixo ceciderunt super me, ideo 
 ista loquor et scribo." {Regulae, quoted by Dr. Kybal, Matej z Janova.) 
 
 3 . . . " meipsum ad hoc obtuli et distinavi in Christo Jesu ut sim promotor 
 et propugnator crebre communionis corporis et sanguinis domini Jesu 
 Christi. . . ." (Kybal, Matej z. Janova, p. 72, n. 3.) 
 
60 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 who hold laymen in contempt, calling beasts and ribalds those 
 poor plebeians who wish to communicate frequently. 1 The 
 monks in particular, he writes, endeavour, impelled by spiritual 
 pride and hatred, to prevent laymen from receiving the sacra- 
 ment frequently. 
 
 Very similar to that of the fourth is the subject of the fifth 
 book of the Regulae, which is entitled De Corpore Christi. In this 
 treatise Matthew addresses a friend, a layman, who desired to 
 frequently receive the sacrament, and had in consequence often 
 been reproved by the priests. Matthew here repeats many 
 of his previous arguments in favour of frequent communion. 
 
 It is not easy to form a general opinion of the character 
 and the writings of Matthew of Janov. The brilliant work 
 of Dr. Kybal, who has for the first time given us a thorough 
 insight into the nature of Matthew, has, it can almost be said, 
 rendered him yet more enigmatical. Janov will never obtain 
 popular favour, as the silence of his contemporaries and im- 
 mediate successors proves. The man was soon forgotten, 
 though, as recent research has proved, his writings largely 
 influenced the Hussite movement. The sympathy and venera- 
 tion which the absolute simplicity, self-abnegation, enthu- 
 siasm, indomitable faith, tender kindness even to the most 
 venomous enemies that characterise Hus have obtained for 
 that great Bohemian, will never be awarded to Matthew of 
 Janov. All the writings of Janov are tainted with bitterness, 
 and they sometimes convey an impression of insincerity, 
 though this ceases to be the case when Matthew writes — accord- 
 ing to his belief, — under the mystical inspiration of Jesus Christ. 
 Matthew's repeated renunciations of opinions which he con- 
 tinued to hold strengthen this impression, and it is impossible, 
 
 1 " Hii sunt qui ferme quemlibet de plebe dedignantur, bestias et ribaldos 
 pauperes plebeios audacter nuncupando. . . . Habent de more quidem 
 hujusmodi stomachari ad frequenter sacramento communicantes: " Isti 
 Reghardi et Begynejam nituntur sacerdotibus simulari. Quis dyabolus ad 
 hoc eas consecravit (Kybal, Matej z. Janova, p. 224, n. 2). Here as every- 
 where I have used Janov's own spelling as transcribed by Dr. Kybal from 
 the manuscripts. 
 
THE FORERUNNERS OF HUS 61 
 
 when reading his eloquent denunciations of the grasping ex- 
 tortions of the papal see, not to remember that he also had 
 availed himself of the advantages which resulted from the 
 system of papal benefices. It must indeed be admitted that 
 this was no exceptional deed on the part of Matthew, and that 
 he was driven to it by sheer want of means. Perhaps " his 
 poverty but not his will consented." Both the life and the 
 writings of Janov teem with contradictions. As Dr. Kybal 
 has truly said of his works, we find in them entire sub- 
 mission to the church, and on the other hand haughty self- 
 confidence and audacious criticism of the ecclesiastical 
 system, sometimes timidity, sometimes the free expression of 
 extreme views, sometimes consciousness of the importance 
 of the hierarchy, of which Matthew himself formed part, and 
 conservative views, at other times openly expressed popular 
 and democratic opinions. Such a man could never be re- 
 vered by the people as were Milic and Hus. 
 
 Yet it would be very erroneous to underrate the importance 
 of Matthew in connection with the Hussite movement. He 
 was by far the most learned of the forerunners of Hus, and 
 as a thorough scholarly theologian he greatly influenced the 
 masters of the University of Prague, who by the vicissitudes 
 of civil war became, soon after the death of Hus, the supreme 
 arbitrators on religious matters in Bohemia. Chief among 
 the pupils of Janov was Master Jacobellus of Stribro, the 
 originator of utraquism. Jacobellus entirely adopted Janov's 
 views regarding the advent of Antichrist, and he has in his 
 work on that subject incorporated large parts of Janov's 
 treatise, though, as was then frequently done, he omitted to 
 mention the name of the writer from whom he borrowed. 1 It 
 was formerly also believed that Jacobellus derived from Janov 
 his doctrine of utraquism or communion in the two kinds. 
 
 1 Dr. Kybal has published an interesting article on the connection between 
 Matthew of Janov and Jacobellus of Stribro in the Cesky Casopis Historicky 
 {Bohemian Historical Review, vol. xi.). 
 
62 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 The utraquist archbishop of Prague, John of Rokycan, 
 maintained at the council of Basel that Matthew of Janov had 
 first taught in Bohemia the doctrine of utraquism whose 
 emblem, the chalice, became so distinctive a feature in the 
 Hussite wars. Recent research has proved to a certainty 
 that Janov never taught or preached utraquism. 1 He, how- 
 ever, always insisted on the right of laymen to receive 
 communion frequently, and maintained that through the 
 sacrament a mystical union is established between God and 
 the worthy communicant. This supreme favour and grace 
 should not, Matthew declared, be reserved to priests, but should 
 be granted to laymen also. Saintly laymen, he maintains, 
 have the right to receive communion as frequently as priests, 
 Dr. Kybal has first pointed out how close the connection is 
 between the principle of the frequent communion of laymen, 
 as maintained by Janov, and the utraquism of the Hussites 
 of the fifteenth century. Both claims were founded on a 
 democratic basis and were protests against the theory of the 
 inferiority of laymen which priests — and often the most 
 unworthy priests — were maintaining in Bohemia at this period. 
 
 1 This has been principally proved by Dr. Kalousik in his erudite treatise, 
 O Historii Kalicha v. dobach predhusitskych (On the history of the chalice in 
 pre-Hussite times). 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 THE YOUTH OF HUS 
 
 The German writers have of late years endeavoured to 
 establish a theory regarding the problems that confront the 
 historian when he attempts to define to what extent general 
 conditions and to what extent the acts of individuals should 
 be considered in history. In other words, the historian should 
 inquire to what extent events occurred in consequence of the 
 social condition, the geographical situation, and the political 
 position of a country, and to what extent the personality of 
 one great and representative man influenced the course of 
 history. If we attempt to solve this problem in connection 
 with Hus, we undoubtedly find that his individuality was 
 largely the cause of the momentous events which have 
 rendered his name famous. Before Hus's time Milic had been 
 a saintly enthusiast and a vigorous denouncer of the sins and 
 corruption of the times. Matthew of Janov, one of the most 
 learned theologians of the period, had energetically attacked 
 the evil rule of Rome which the schism had rendered yet more 
 scandalous, and he had spoken strongly against the idolatrous 
 veneration of pictures and statues. Hus alone possessed the''" 
 qualities of a great popular leader. His absolute self-renounce- 1 
 ment, the indomitable courage with which he met moral and 
 physical pain of every description for the cause which he 
 firmly believed to be that of God, his enthusiastic devotion 
 to the Slavic and particularly to the Bohemian race, his 
 striking and popular eloquence — all combined to make him 
 the idol of the Bohemian people, whose greatest representative 
 in the world's story he remains. 
 
 63 
 
r 
 
 64 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 If we endeavour to ascertain how great our knowledge of 
 the events of the life of Hus is, we meet with a great contrast. 
 While we have numerous and varied accounts of his later life 
 — the events during his imprisonment can be traced almost 
 day by day — very little is known of the early life of the great 
 Bohemian church-reformer. The almost entirely absent con- 
 temporary records are replaced by later legends which are 
 mostly attributable to members of the community of the 
 Bohemian brethren, who believed themselves to have most 
 purely preserved the teaching of Hus. Many of these legends 
 are touching and not devoid of historical value. We are 
 mainly indebted to the careful studies recently published by 
 Professor Flajshans, the greatest authority on Hus of the 
 present day, for whatever knowledge of the youth and early 
 education of Hus we possess. 
 
 We are unable to state positively in what year Hus was 
 born. The oldest traditions stated that he was born on July 
 6, 1373. More recently such great authorities as Palacky 
 and Tomek gave July 6, 1369, as the date of the birth of Hus. 
 According to the latest researches the exact year of his birth 
 cannot be affirmed, but it undoubtedly took place in the 
 period between 1373 and 1375. The day is quite uncertain. 
 The tradition that Hus was born on July 6 is merely founded 
 on a fanciful analogy with the day of his death, which 
 occurred on July 6. 
 
 John Hus, or, " of Husinec," was born in the village of 
 Husinec near the small town of Prachatice, which is not far 
 from the frontiers of Bavaria. This fact deserves notice, as 
 the racial strife which is the keynote of Bohemian history at 
 all periods has always raged most fiercely in those districts 
 where the domains of the Bohemian and German language 
 meet. Husinec and the surrounding district lie on the line of 
 delimitation of the two languages, the Sprachengrenze as it 
 is called in German. 
 
 Hus's father was called Michael, and as it then was 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 65 
 
 customary in Bohemia to describe men only by their Christian 
 name and that of their father, young Hus was first known as 
 John son of Michael (Jan Michaluv, in Bohemian). At Prague 
 he was inscribed in the books of the university in accordance 
 with the name of his native village as John of Husinec. Only 
 after the year 1398 we meet with the signature of " John 
 Hus " or sometimes " John Hus of Husinec." After the year 
 1400 the church-reformer always signs himself simply as 
 " John Hus," though he is in official documents often described 
 as " Magister Johannes, dictus Hus de Husinec." The parents 
 of Hus were peasants who possessed but scanty means, but 
 endeavoured as far as they were able to give a good education 
 to young John, who was his mother's favourite son. John 
 Hus had several brothers, of whom, however, nothing is 
 known. 1 
 
 It is probable that Hus received his first education at the 
 school of the town of Prachatice near Husinec, though here as 
 elsewhere great uncertainty prevails with regard to the earliest 
 events in the life of Hus. His mother is stated to have 
 generally accompanied him when he walked to Prachatice, 
 and an ancient legend tells us that when he was returning 
 from school one day a sudden storm obliged him to seek 
 refuge under a rock. His mother joined him there, and 
 almost immediately afterwards lightning struck a juniper 
 bush close by and set fire to it. Hus's mother said that they 
 must immediately return home, but young John answered, 
 " You will see that I also, like this bush, shall depart from 
 this world in flames." a 
 
 It would be very tempting to refer in more detail to the 
 picturesque legends that are connected with the youth of Hus, 
 but they would not, perhaps, have for English readers the same 
 
 1 The fact that John Hus had brothers is only proved by a passage in 
 one of his letters written from Constance to his disciple Martin, in which he 
 says: " Recommendo tibi fratres meos; carissime fac sicut scis ad illos." 
 (Palacky, Documenta Mag. Joannis Hus, p. 120.) 
 
 2 Flajshans, Misty Jan Hits. 
 
 E 
 
66 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 interest that they have for Hus's countrymen. At an early 
 age, probably about the year 1389, young Hus proceeded to 
 Prague to pursue his studies at the university there. That 
 university is henceforth closely connected with the life of Hus, 
 as it was indeed with the whole history of Bohemia at this 
 ; period. The Emperor Charles, King of Bohemia, founded 
 the University of Prague in 1348. As a contemporary 
 chronicler writes, 1 Charles, " inflamed by love of God and im- 
 pelled by his strong affection for his neighbours, wishing 
 to benefit the commonwealth and laudably to exalt his 
 Bohemian kingdom," obtained from the apostolic see the 
 permission to establish a university (studium) at Prague. 
 Charles, always a great admirer of France, where he had been 
 educated and where, according to an ancient tradition, he had 
 studied at the University of Paris, largely modelled the regula- 
 tions of his new university on those that were then in force in 
 Paris. As in Paris, the new university formed an independent 
 community which enjoyed complete autonomy both with 
 regard to civil and ecclesiastical matters. At the head of the 
 university was a rector chosen twice annually by the members 
 of the university, scholars as well as masters — a point that 
 deserves notice, as Prague herein differed from Paris. The 
 rector exercised very extensive powers over the members of 
 the university, whom he could sentence to fines, imprison- 
 ment, and corporal punishment. 
 
 At the foundation of the university Charles had erected no 
 special buildings for the purposes of study. The masters 
 generally lectured in their own dwelling-places or at the 
 monasteries to which they belonged. 2 Gradually, however, 
 colleges sprang up on lines not dissimilar from those of the 
 
 1 Chronicon Benessii de Weilmil, edited by Emler, p. 517. 
 
 * See Tomek, Deje University Prazske (History of the University of Prague) 
 and the same author's Dcjepis Mesta Prahy (History of the Town of Prague), 
 vol. hi., also Dr. S. Winter, O zivote na vysokych skolach Prazskych (Life at the 
 High Schools of Prague) , and the same author's Deje vysokych skol Prazskych 
 (History of the High Schools of Prague). 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 67 
 
 Sorbonne in Paris. Charles himself founded the Carolinum, 
 and shortly afterwards colleges, some intended only for the 
 masters, others for scholars, also were established. Charles's 
 son and successor, Venceslas, followed in the footsteps of his 
 father and founded a college in the Ovocny trh (fruit-market) 
 which bore his name and for a time counted Hus among its 
 inmates. 
 
 When founding the University of Prague Charles had dis- 
 tinctly stated that he had founded the new establishment 
 mainly for the purpose that the Bohemians might be able to 
 pursue higher studies in their own country without under- 
 taking journeys to distant cities such as Paris, Oxford, or 
 Bologna ; only as a secondary motive was the hope expressed 
 that in consequence of the new foundation many foreign 
 students would be attracted to Prague, which Charles had 
 just greatly enlarged by building the " new town." It was, 
 therefore, undoubtedly in accordance with the wishes of the 
 king that the new university had at first a national character. 
 Thus, among the earliest teachers there, we find the names of 
 John Moravec, Albert Bluduv, John of Dambach, Bohemians 
 by birth, who had been educated at foreign universities. We 
 do not find a single German name among these earliest 
 teachers. It can therefore be said that the University of 
 Prague was originally Bohemian, though Latin was the 
 language in which instruction was given. 1 During the reign 
 of Venceslas matters changed, and at the time of the arrival 
 of Hus at Prague the Germans had obtained almost complete 
 control over the university. 
 
 The University of Prague was, almost from its beginning, 
 divided into " nations," as was customary in Paris and 
 Bologna. The Bohemian nation included besides the students 
 from Bohemia and the county of Glatz — then part of the 
 country — those who belonged to Moravia, Hungary, and the 
 
 1 Tadra, Kultumi Styky Cechs cizinoti (Cultural Connection of Bohemia 
 with Foreign Countries), passim, particularly pp. 288-289. 
 
68 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 southern Slavic countries. The Bavarian nation comprised 
 the students from the Bavarian principalities as well as those 
 from Austria, Suabia, Franconia, and the Rhinelands. The 
 students from Saxony, Meissen, and Thuringia, with those 
 from Sweden and Denmark, formed the Saxon nation. The 
 Polish nation was composed of Poles, Russians, Lithuanians, 
 and Silesians. Since the foundation of the University of 
 Cracow in 1364, the majority of the members of this nation 
 was German. The division into nations — contrary to the 
 practice of Paris — at Prague extended to the masters also. 
 This, according to the views of a recent learned writer, 1 largely 
 contributed to envenom the national dissensions at the 
 university. 
 
 The new university — the first one founded in central 
 Europe — immediately attracted large crowds of students 
 from all parts of Europe. The contemporary chronicler, 
 Benes of Weitmil, writes: " The university became so great 
 that nothing equal to it existed in Germany, and students 
 came there from all parts of the world — from England, France. 
 Lombardy, and Poland, and all the surrounding countries, 
 sons of nobles and princes, and prelates of the church from 
 all parts of the world." The students were not all, as at the 
 present day, men in early youth. The " faculty " of the 
 jurists in particular, which for a time formed a separate body, 
 contained many men of maturer age. Many wealthy men, 
 often accompanied by numerous servants, also came to 
 Prague, more for the purpose of enjoying the pleasures of 
 the capital than for the purpose of study. This vast crowd 
 of students added greatly to the population of Prague, and 
 contributed greatly to enrich the citizens. The latter were 
 not, however, always pleased with this great immigration. 
 Among the students were many turbulent and riotous men, 
 Street brawls and even fights were frequent. Prague had 
 somewhat the appearance of Paris at the time of Villon. The 
 
 1 Denifle, quoted by Winter, Deje vysokych skol Prazskych. 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 6q 
 
 rector and beadles often proved unable to maintain order, 
 and in 1374 the authorities of the university came to an agree- 
 ment with those of the city, according to which the city- 
 guards were empowered to arrest and hand over to the custody 
 of the rector turbulent and riotous students. Other com- 
 plaints also were made against the members of the new univer- 
 sity. It was stated that they were followed everywhere by 
 numerous undesirable female companions. 1 It must, how- 
 ever, be stated in defence of the students that the example 
 given them by the clergy of Prague was not a very edifying 
 one. 
 
 ■■< i It was for this turbulent and sensuous capital that the / 
 youthful south Bohemian peasant John left the quiet of his 
 native Husinec. Of his early student-days we possess some- 
 what touching reminiscences, which are scattered through- 
 out his writings. It is a peculiarity of Hus that he always 
 writes of his actions with a truly saintly humility, exaggerat- 
 ing in an almost childlike fashion every little misdeed, or 
 what he considered as such. He, on the other hand, always 
 takes much trouble to conceal the strenuous work and bitter 
 self-renunciation which were the principal features of his 
 student-life at Prague. In a spirit that almost appears in- 
 spired by personal animosity, recent German writers have 
 laid great stress on Hus's very innocent confessions. The son 
 of poor parents, Hus endured the sufferings of poverty and 
 even of hunger, 2 and was often obliged to sleep on the bare 
 ground and even reduced to begging in the streets — not, it j 
 
 1 The parishioners of St. Nicholas in the old town declared : " Quod multae 
 domus sunt in parochia ipsorum et aliis, ubi studentes morantur, et rara 
 domus est in quibus morantur in qua non foverent meretrices publicas, de 
 quo multi homines scandalizantur." Quoted by Tomek, Dejepis Mesta 
 Prahy, vol. hi. p. 284, n. 
 
 * Hus refers in his quaint manner to this time when his only food con- 
 sisted of a scant pittance of bread and peas. " As I," he writes, " when I 
 was a hungry little student, made a spoon out of bread till I had eaten the 
 peas, and then I ate the spoon also." Vyklad desatera bozieho prikazanie 
 (Exposition of the Ten Commandments), chap, lxxvii. p. 278, of Erben's 
 edition. 
 
 ■h 
 
7 o THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 must be remembered, a very exceptional occurrence for a 
 medieval student at a time when the fame of the mendicant 
 orders was at its height. Hus also endeavoured, as he tells us, 
 to add to his scanty means by acting as singing boy and 
 ministrant at religious services. He appears to have taken 
 part in the rough games of his fellow-students, though at the 
 university he always bore an excellent character. Always a 
 severe judge of himself, he confessed at a later period that he 
 had been very fond of playing chess, and had even won money 
 at that game. The life of Hus became somewhat less hard 
 when he obtained admission to the college which King 
 Venceslas had recently founded in the fruit-market. Hus 
 had come to Prague to study theology, then almost the only 
 career for an impecunious, but intelligent and studious young 
 man. In his usual quaintly humorous manner he tells that he 
 rejoiced in the thought of becoming a priest, as he would then 
 have a good dwelling-place and clothing and be esteemed by 
 the people. It would be unnecessary to state — had not the 
 detractors of Hus expressed a contrary opinion — that this 
 casual remark by no means proves that Hus had not from his 
 youth a strong religious vocation and a strong inclination to 
 theological studies. That he soon became famed for his 
 piety in Prague is proved by a legend that is told of his 
 student-days. It was related that Hus had, when reading 
 the legend of St. Lawrence, asked himself whether he also 
 would be able to suffer such pain for the sake of Christ. He 
 immediately placed his hand on the fire in the coal-pan, and 
 firmly held it there till one of his companions drew it away. 
 Hus, we are told, then said: " Why dost thou fear so small a 
 matter? I only wished to test whether I should have suffi- 
 cient courage to bear but a small part of that pain which St. 
 Lawrence endured." 
 
 That Hus pursued his theological studies with energy and 
 perseverance is proved by his rapid progress at the university. 
 He would, there is little doubt, have become a theologian of 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 71 
 
 the highest rank had his life been longer and less troubled. 
 In his early university days Hus was not only a firm adherent 
 of the Catholic Church — he indeed always continued to con- 
 sider himself as such — but he even followed superstitious 
 practices of the Roman Church which he afterwards con- 
 demned. When, in 1393, a year of jubilee was announced at 
 Prague, and letters of indulgence remitting sins were publicly 
 sold at the Vysehrad, Hus was among those who availed them- 
 selves of this privilege and, as he himself tells us, spent his few 
 remaining coins in purchasing these supposed celestial favours. 
 Other men, however, who were older than Hus at this period, 
 already viewed with great displeasure this traffic in holy 
 things, and when, in 1412, indulgences were again sold at 
 Prague to defray the expenses of the war which Pope John 
 XXIII. was waging against the King of Naples, many were 
 mindful of the scandals caused by the sale of indulgences in 
 
 1393- 
 
 The University of Prague was at that time at the height of 
 its fame, and Hus had the privilege of hearing the sermons 
 and lectures of many eminent men. Among them was Adal- 
 bert Ranco, who has already been mentioned, and whose 
 strongly anti-papal views may not have been without in- 
 fluence on the young student. One of Hus's teachers also 
 was the famed preacher, John of Stekna, whose sermons in the 
 Bethlehem chapel induced Hus to seek indulgences at the 
 Vysehrad, and whom he, referring to his eloquence, compares to 
 a " sonorous trumpet." x We have on the whole but scanty ( 
 information concerning Hus during his stay at the college in \ 
 the fruit-market. Among his fellow-students were some men 
 with whom he was again associated later in life. Such men 
 were Jerome of Prague, a man somewhat younger than Hus, 
 and Jacob of Stribro, commonly known as Jacobellus, because 
 of his diminutive size, who was the real originator of utra- 
 quism. The fates were to be more gracious to Jacobellus 
 
 1 Hus, Opera (Nuremberg ed., 1715), vol. ii. p. 65. 
 
72 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 than to his companions, for while Hus and Jerome perished 
 in the flames, Jacobellus died peacefully at Prague in 1429 as 
 honoured leader of the utraquist or Hussite church. 
 
 The plan of studies pursued by young Hus at the university 
 was that usually followed by youthful students of theology at 
 mediaeval universities. Dr. Flajshans has in his valuable 
 work on Hus given an interesting account of these studies, 
 referring specially to the customs peculiar to the university of 
 Prague. Great importance was attached to theological dis- 
 putations, in which the subtlety of scholastic distinctions and 
 definitions found full play. Hus appears to have shown 
 great aptitude for the exercises, and this no doubt accounts 
 for the skill and acuteness which he afterwards displayed at 
 Constance, when confronted with the most learned and most 
 Subtle theologians of Europe. In 1393, at an unusually early 
 age, Hus obtained the first of academic honours, that of 
 bachelor of arts. Together with him, several companions, 
 among them Jacobellus, went through the ordeal of the pre- 
 vious examinations, which took place in the large hall of the 
 Carolinum, the college founded by Charles. Probably shortly 
 afterwards the Archbishop John of Jenzenstein conferred on 
 Hus the minor orders, though it appears that he was only 
 ordained as a priest considerably later. He continued mean- 
 while to pursue successfully his academic career. In 1394 he 
 became a bachelor of divinity, and in 1396 a master of arts. 
 In 1402 he became, at an unusually early age, for the first time 
 rector of the university. It was probably in 1400 that Hus 
 was ordained a priest, but as Dr. Lechler has noted, Hus, like 
 Melanchthon, who played so great a part in the German re- 
 formation, never obtained the degree of doctor of divinity. 
 Though Hus had from the first been noted for his piety, his 
 religious enthusiasm, as he has told us, and contemporary 
 writers confirm, became yet greater after he had been ordained. 
 Though Hus, whose home was in the frontier districts where 
 the struggle between Slav and Teuton is always fiercest, no 
 
 \ 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 73 
 
 doubt from his earliest youth was interested in this strife, it 
 was also about this time that he began to brood more seriously 
 over the wrongs of his country. In 1401 Bohemia was in- 
 vaded by the German troops of the Margrave of Meissen, the 
 ally of Rupert, Elector Palatine, whom the enemies of King 
 Venceslas had elected King of the Romans. These troops 
 ravaged Bohemia in a cruel manner — a fact to which Hus 
 alludes in one of his earliest sermons, preached probably in 
 1 401, in which he also incidentally expatiates on the inferior 
 position which his countrymen occupied in their own country. 
 " The Bohemians," he said, " are more wretched than dogs or 
 snakes; for a dog defends the couch on which he lies, and if 
 another dog tries to drive him away, he rights with him, and a 
 snake does the same. But us the Germans oppress, seizing 
 all the offices of state, while we are silent. Bohemians in the 
 kingdom of Bohemia, according to all laws, indeed also ac- 
 cording to the law of God and according to the natural order 
 of things, should be foremost in all offices in the Bohemian 
 kingdom; thus the French are so in the French kingdom, 
 and the Germans in the German lands. Therefore should a 
 Bohemian rule his own subordinates, and a German German 
 (subordinates). But of what use would it be if a Bohemian, 
 not knowing German, became a priest or a bishop in Germany ? 
 He assuredly would be as useful as a dumb dog who cannot 
 bark is to a herd! And equally useless to us Bohemians is a 
 German; and knowing that this (i.e. the rule of Germans over 
 Bohemians) is against God's law and the regulations, I declare 
 it to be illegal." 
 
 The great talents of Hus as a preacher appear to have been 
 from the beginning recognised by his countrymen. In 1401 
 we already find him preaching at the church of St. Michael by 
 permission of Bernard, a monk of the Zderaz monastery, who 
 was the parish priest of St. Michael's. Though the monk 
 Bernard was a strong opponent of church-reform, Hus was on 
 terms of friendship with him and often dined at the parsonage. 
 
74 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Hus, as was always his custom, expressed his opinions freely, 
 and many statements made by him here and at the house of 
 another friend, " Venceslas the cup-maker," were in a dis- 
 torted form brought forward as evidence against him many 
 years later. 1 As Hus was then and continued many years 
 afterwards to be on good terms with his ecclesiastical superiors, 
 this circumstance appears an evil example of the tendency to 
 eavesdropping and espionage of which the Bohemians are so 
 often accused by their enemies. 
 
 It was due to the great fame of Hus as a preacher that he 
 obtained in 1402 the important appointment of preacher at 
 the Bethlehem chapel. This foundation is so closely con- 
 nected with Hus and the Hussite movement that it deserves 
 notice here. The foundation was undoubtedly an offshoot 
 of Milic's reform movement, and it is, as Dr. Tomek writes, 
 somewhat strange that such a foundation should have been 
 permitted by the ecclesiastical authorities at a time when the 
 Archbishop of Prague was persecuting the followers of Milic. 
 The founder of Bethlehem was John or Hanus of Millheim, of 
 whom too little is known. We only read that he was one of 
 the favourite courtiers of King Venceslas IV. and that he 
 was, judging by his name, not a Bohemian by birth. He 
 appears to have been owner of considerable estates — among 
 others, of that of Pardubice in north-eastern Bohemia, as well 
 as of considerable house property in Prague. Through his 
 wife, Anna Zajic of Hasenburg, he was connected with the 
 ancient nobility of Bohemia. The year of his birth is uncer- 
 tain, but we have documentary evidence to prove that he 
 died before the year 1408. Associated with him in the founda- 
 tion was the tradesman Kriz, a rich and patriotic citizen of 
 Prague, who was very anxious to obtain for his fellow-citizens 
 the privilege of hearing sermons in their native language. It 
 was he who gave the building ground on the present Betlemske 
 Namesti (Bethlehem Square), and he hoped, as events proved 
 
 1 See Palacky, Documenta, passim, particularly pp. 174-185. 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 75 
 
 rightly, that his association with a powerful and influential 
 noble would enable him to overcome the resistance which, 
 during the period of reaction that followed the death of Milic, 
 an enterprise founded on the lines of that church-reformer 
 would necessarily encounter. The document drawn up by 
 Millheim which established the Bethlehem foundation (dated 
 May 24, 1391) indeed breathes entirely the spirit of Milic. 1 
 He states that, according to the teaching of the holy fathers, 
 the word of God should not be fettered, but should be 
 preached with the greatest freedom and in the manner most 
 useful to the church and its members. Regret is then ex- 
 pressed that there was not as yet at Prague a place specially 
 destined for preaching, and in particular none where sermons 
 could be preached in the national language. Bohemian 
 preachers were therefore generally obliged to seek shelter in 
 houses or hiding-places. To obviate such evils in future 
 Millheim decreed that the rector of the new foundation should 
 be a secular priest whose duty it was to be to preach in 
 Bohemian twice a day — in the morning and in the afternoon 
 — on all Sundays and feast days, except during Advent and 
 Lent, when he was only expected to preach in the morning. 
 Relying on the support of his influential ally, the pious Kriz 
 began building the Bethlehem chapel even before he had 
 received the royal sanction of the foundation. Near the 
 chapel Kriz built, also on the present Bethlehem Square, a 
 modest dwelling for the priest who was to officiate in the 
 chapel. The door of this modest house, sanctified to 
 Bohemians by the fact that it was for a time inhabited by 
 Hus, has been preserved, and is now indicated by an appro- 
 priate inscription. The Bethlehem chapel itself was entirely 
 demolished by the Emperor Joseph II. of Austria in 1786. 2 
 It appears to have been a somewhat extensive building, 
 
 1 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, vol. iii. pp. 426-427. 
 s Not by the Jesuits as has been frequently stated; they had been expelled 
 from the Austrian states several years previously. 
 
7 6 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 deserving rather the name of a church than that of a chapel 
 which it always retained. It is said to have been roomy 
 enough to contain over a thousand people. Many ancient 
 views of the famed Bethlehem chapel — Millheim had followed 
 Milic in giving a Biblical name to his foundation — have still 
 been preserved. The German historian Zacharias Theo- 
 baldus, who visited Prague in 1621, writes that he had at that 
 time already found little in the Bethlehem chapel that was of 
 historical interest. 1 He saw, however, a bench on which Hus 
 had frequently sat and the pulpit from which he had preached. 
 The latter had been greatly injured by the many pious 
 travellers who had cut off and carried away chips from it. 
 
 The Bethlehem chapel, specially instituted for the purpose 
 of preaching in the national language from its foundation, 
 attracted great interest; the preachers there were renowned 
 for their eloquence. The fame of the chapel, however, became 
 yet much greater when Hus began to preach there. As had 
 been the case with Milic, disciples now began to gather round 
 Hus and formed a considerable part of his congregation. His 
 following was not limited to men. Many pious Bohemian 
 ladies soon began to occupy rooms near the Bethlehem chapel 
 to be in the neighbourhood of the enthusiastic preacher. One 
 of the first to do this was Anezka of Stitny, who has already 
 been mentioned. Somewhat later, Cunegunda of Wartenberg, 
 who shared the apartments of Anezka, Catherine Kaplir of 
 Sulevic, and other noble Bohemian ladies found dwelling-places 
 near the Bethlehem chapel, where Queen Sophia, the wife of 
 King Venceslas, was also a frequent visitor. These ladies 
 devoted themselves wholly to religious exercises and works 
 of charity, forming an association similar to those of the 
 Beguines, though they were not fettered by any rules or 
 regulations. The important part played by women in the 
 
 1 " Doch habe ich kein Antiquitet so zu diesem meinem proposito (i.e., of 
 studying the history of Hus and the Hussite wars) gehoret finden konnen." 
 (Zacharias Theobaldus Hussitenkrieg, p. 28.) 
 
THE YOUTH OF Hi's 77 
 
 Hussite movement has, as I have already remarked, been 
 much overlooked by historians. 
 
 As so often occurs under similar circumstances, the mem- 
 bers of the Bethlehem community gradually and perhaps 
 unconsciously assumed an attitude of aloofness and apartness 
 which could not fail to cause displeasure in the narrow atmo- 
 sphere of a mediaeval city. The followers of Hus specially 
 incurred the dislike of the German inhabitants of Prague. 
 Some of these men had indeed at first welcomed the teaching 
 of Waldhauser and Milic, but at the beginning of the fifteenth 
 century racial discord became more intense in Prague. The 
 Bohemians were greatly irritated by the depredations and 
 cruelties which the German soldiers, sent into the country by 
 Venceslas's antagonist, Rupert of the Palatinate, committed. 
 Hus shared the general feeling of his countrymen, and in a 
 passage in one of his sermons that has already been quoted 
 spoke strongly against the Germans. Though Hus always 
 declared that he preferred a good German to a bad Bohemian, 
 he also expressed himself strongly with regard to the attitude 
 of the German members of the university who were suspected 
 of favouring Rupert of the Palatinate. ' The Germans," he 
 writes, 1 " who are in Bohemia should go to their king 
 (Venceslas) and swear that they will be faithful to him and 
 to the country, but this will only come to pass when a serpent 
 warms itself on the ice." 2 Another subject of national dis- 
 cord was the troublous state of affairs at the university. 
 Though the foundation of German universities such as that of 
 Vienna had considerably reduced the number of German 
 students, their preponderance, founded on the artificial system 
 of voting by " nations," still continued. It had indeed 
 become even more onerous, for since the foundation of the 
 University of Cracow the Germans had secured a majority in 
 
 1 Vyklad desatera bozieho prikazani (Exposition oi the Ten Commandments), 
 chap, xxxviii. p. ioo, of Erben's edition. 
 
 2 A proverbial locution. 
 
7 8 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 the Polish " nation " at Prague. A very vast amount of 
 ecclesiastical patronage was in the gift of the university, and 
 the youthful Bohemian students of theology, mostly penniless 
 young men, naturally feared that they would have little hope 
 of obtaining preferment from a university which was in the 
 hands of the Germans. The great intellectual advance of the 
 Bohemian nation at the beginning of the fifteenth century 
 rendered it yet more sensitive to the slight which consisted in 
 its exclusion from the most important offices of the church 
 and the university. There is no doubt that in this matter 
 also Hus was in sympathy with his countrymen. Certain 
 concessions were indeed made. Thus, after prolonged discus- 
 sion, an agreement was made in 1384, according to which, of the 
 twelve collegiate seats at the Carolinum college, ten should 
 always be conferred on Bohemians, while the other two should 
 be open to them as well as to the members of the three other 
 " nations." A similar rule was also established in the college 
 of King Venceslas. 1 These slight concessions, which changed 
 little in the general organisation of the university, may have 
 deferred, but did not prevent the conflict that broke out at the 
 time of Hus, and which will shortly be mentioned. 
 
 It is noteworthy that Hus was on good terms with his 
 ecclesiastical superiors during the first years of his priesthood. 
 His strong national feeling did not offend those members of 
 the clergy who belonged to the ancient Bohemian nobility. 
 The nobles of the country were, partly from a feeling of 
 opposition to the German townsmen, generally friendly to 
 |the Bohemian people. It is also an error to state, as has fre- 
 Jquently been done, that the acquaintance with the works of 
 jWycliffe suddenly turned Hus from a devoted servant of the 
 ; Church of Rome into a virulent enemy of that church. The 
 only undoubted change in the nature of Hus was that which 
 occurred at the time of his ordination as a priest. He aban- 
 
 1 Tomek, Deje University Prazske (History of the University of Prague), 
 p. 112. 
 
/ 
 
 THE YOUTH OF HUS 79 
 
 doned at that time the very harmless frivolities in which he 
 had previously indulged. Always a pious man, he now be- 
 came a very fervent Christian and a very diligent student of 
 theology. Hus's alienation from the Church of Rome was a 
 gradual one, founded on personal experiences as well as on 
 the study of books, Wycliffe's among others. The learned 
 Dr. Schwab, in his Johannes Gerson, in which he incidentally 
 gives an interesting account of the early studies of Hus, points 
 out that he devoted much time to the study of the sentences 
 of Peter Lombard 1 and of Gratian's Decretum. In the latter 
 work Hus found many statements, such as that the primate 
 had only been founded by the Emperor Constantine, and that 
 equality had formerly existed between priests and bishops, 
 which were entirely contrary to the teaching of the church in 
 his time. Of Wycliffe's works, also, Hus was an enthusiastic 
 student. The writings of the English divine had from their 
 first appearance attracted great attention at the University of 
 Prague. Hus studied them carefully and transferred to his 
 own writings many ideas contained in them, though, as already 
 mentioned, it is always necessary to inquire whether the views 
 expressed by both writers are not derived from a common 
 earlier source. It is a proof of the great interest in Wycliffe's 
 writings which Hus showed at this period that we find among 
 his earliest works a Bohemian translation of the Trialogus of 
 the English divine. \tf 
 
 It was also this interest in the works of Wycliffe which was I 
 the cause, or perhaps the pretext, of the first theological con- 
 troversy in which Hus became involved. It was, however, 
 as yet only the university and particularly its German 
 magisters, not the Church of Rome, that attacked him. A 
 German master of theology, John Hiibner, in 1403 brought 
 to the notice of the chapter of Prague — the archbishopric was 
 
 1 Dr. J. B. Schwab, Johannes Gerson. That Hus had written an extensive 
 commentary on the sentences of Peter Lombard — a fact that of course 
 confirms Dr. Schwab's statement — was not known at the time his book 
 appeared. 
 
80 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 then vacant — twenty-one " articles " derived from the works 
 of Wycliffe which he declared to be heretical. It should be 
 remarked that Hiibner's " articles " x contained many state- 
 ments that were not derived from Wycliffe, as will be obvious 
 to all who have even a slight acquaintance with the writings 
 of the English divine. None the less these articles, as well as 
 twenty-four others condemned by the synod of London, were 
 by John Kbel and Venceslas of Bechin, canons of the chapter 
 of Prague, brought to the notice of Walter Harasser, a German 
 of the Bavarian " nation " who had just succeeded Hus as rector 
 of the university. A general meeting of the members of the 
 university, presided over by the rector, Walter Harasser, took 
 place on May 28, 1403, in the great hall of the Carolinum 
 college. The debate was a stormy one. Some of the masters 
 who were acquainted with the writings of Wycliffe rightly 
 declared that the articles attributed to him statements that 
 he had never made. Master Nicholas of Litomysl addressed 
 Hiibner the informer in these words: " Thou hast falsely and 
 unjustly drawn from these books (i.e. Wycliffe's) statements 
 that are not contained in them." Hus exclaimed that the 
 falsifiers should be executed, as were those who falsified 
 victuals, alluding to the recent occurrence that two men had 
 suffered the death-penalty for that offence. Stephen Palec, 
 then an adherent of Hus, but one of those whom intimidation 
 and even meaner reasons afterwards brought over to the 
 Roman party, threw one of Wycliffe's books on the table and 
 said to the assembled masters: " Let who will stand up and 
 speak against any word contained in this book ! I will defend 
 it! " Several other masters spoke in the same sense. The 
 majority of the assembly, however, was of a contrary opinion. 
 A statement was drawn up and passed by majority declaring 
 that " no one should teach, repeat, or affirm these articles either 
 privately or publicly." To prevent the quarrel from becoming 
 
 1 They are printed by Palacky, Documenta, pp. 451-455. One of the 
 statements attributed to Wycliffe runs thus: " Deus debet obedire diabolo." 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 81 
 
 yet more envenomed, no decree declaring the articles to be 
 heretical was passed. Some years afterwards, at a meeting of 
 the members of the Bohemian nation, who were almost all 
 favourable to the cause of church -reform, the former judg- 
 ment was attenuated. On the proposal of Hus it was de- 
 clared that " no master or scholar of the Bohemian nation 
 should defend the articles in any false, erroneous, or heretical 
 sense." This restriction may be said to have rendered the 
 whole prohibition illusory. 
 
 These academical discussions appear at this time to have 
 attracted little attention beyond the precincts of the univer- 
 sity. Public opinion in Prague became calmer after the 
 election of a new archbishop. The choice fell on Zbynek 
 Zajic of Hasenburg, a member of one of the oldest families of 
 the Bohemian nobility. Though long nominally a priest, he 
 had hitherto devoted himself exclusively to politics and to 
 military matters. A very distinguished soldier, he did not 
 endeavour to conceal his distaste — it was really perhaps con- 
 tempt — for abstruse theological controversy. Zajic was on 
 the whole a well-meaning man, who did not claim to be a 
 scholar, but was far less illiterate than was stated by his 
 opponents when he was very reluctantly dragged into the 
 turmoil of theological controversy. Zajic, a man of common i 
 sense if not of learning, perceived that the real danger to the 
 Bohemian church lay in the terrible immorality and dishonesty 
 of the clergy. It also could not escape his notice that the 
 accusation of holding heretical opinions was often levelled 
 against virtuous and zealous priests by their less worthy col- 
 leagues. The exemplary life of Hus and the eloquence of which 
 he had given proof in his sermons at the Bethlehem chapel 
 attracted the attention of the new archbishop. Disregarding 
 the attacks of which Hus had been the subject, Zbynek showed 
 great favour to the pious and eloquent preacher. As Hus 
 afterwards recalled to the archbishop's memory, 1 he ordered 
 
 1 In a letter addressed by Hus to the archbishop in July 1408, he reminded 
 
 F 
 
82 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 him, " whenever he noticed any irregularity with regard to the 
 government of the church, to bring such irregularity to the 
 archbishop's knowledge either in person or in case of absence 
 by means of a letter." Honestly striving to improve the 
 moral conduct of the clergy of his archbishopric, Zbynek de- 
 termined on instituting frequent meetings or synods in which 
 all matters of discipline could be discussed. He appointed 
 Hus preacher to the synod. Some of his synodal sermons 
 have been preserved, and it cannot be denied that in them he 
 attacked the morals and general behaviour of the Bohemian 
 priesthood in a very strong though doubtlessly justifiable 
 manner. These attacks did not at this period deprive Hus of 
 the favour of the archbishop, as will be shown presently when 
 referring to the important mission that was entrusted to him. 
 At court, also, Hus was now in favour. Though we can hardly 
 believe that King Venceslas felt much interest in matters of 
 theology, he undoubtedly, probably through the influence of 
 his pious queen, Sophia, treated the eloquent preacher with 
 kindness. In later days, also, he extended his protection to 
 Hus even when by so doing he incurred the enmity of the 
 Church of Rome and of his treacherous younger brother Sigis- 
 mund. Queen Sophia had from the first shown favour to 
 the young priest, John of Husinec, and was often present at 
 his sermons in the Bethlehem chapel. Through her influence 
 Hus became court chaplain, and the queen also appointed 
 him her confessor. 
 
 In 1405 Archbishop Zbynek entrusted Hus — together 
 with two other priests — with a mission that had considerable 
 importance. At Wilsnack, a small town of Slavic origin, 
 situated in the present Prussian province of Brandenburg, 
 strange miracles were stated to have occurred. In a chapel 
 there three bleeding holy wafers had been found, and it was 
 
 him that " in principio vestri regiminis mihi pro regula Pat. Vra. instituerat 
 ut quotienscunque aliquem defectum erga regimen conspicerem, mox per- 
 sonaliter, aut in absentia per literam defectum hujusmodi nuntiarem." 
 (Palacky, Documenta, p. 3.) 
 

THE YOUTH OF HUS 83 
 
 affirmed that those who invoked these remnants of the body 
 and blood of Christ obtained miraculous results. A knight 
 named Henry, who was to fight a duel with one Frederick, 
 vowed before doing so that he would dedicate his armour 
 to the Holy Blood of Wilsnack: he killed his adversary. 
 One Peter, a robber and murderer, while confined in prison in 
 fetters, also made a vow to the Holy Blood of Wilsnack. The 
 result was that his fetters were miraculously broken and that 
 he escaped. These and other similar tales were circulated 
 widely all over Europe, and countless pilgrims from all coun- 
 tries — among them many Bohemians — flocked to Wilsnack. 
 Hus and his colleagues questioned very diligently at Prague 
 some of those who had visited the new place of pilgrimage. 
 The evidence they collected is very curious as bearing witness 
 not only to the superstition and credulity of the Middle Ages, 
 but also to the unscrupulous dishonesty of the clergy of the 
 period. Thus the evidence stated that a citizen of Prague, 
 Peter of Ach, one of whose hands was maimed, had undertaken 
 a pilgrimage to Wilsnack and dedicated a silver hand as an 
 offering to the Holy Blood. Peter, however, failed to find 
 relief. He remained three days at Wilsnack, wishing to hear 
 what the priests would say of this. He then saw a priest who 
 showed the silver hand from the pulpit, saying: " Listen, 
 children, to this miracle. The hand of our neighbour from 
 Prague has been healed by the Holy Blood, and he has offered 
 this silver hand as a thanksgiving." Peter then rose, showed 
 his maimed hand, and exclaimed: " Priest, thou liest; here is 
 my hand maimed as it always was! " The result of the in- 
 vestigation, in the course of which many similar frauds were 
 exposed, was that an archiepiscopal decree enjoined on all 
 preachers in Bohemia the duty of informing the laymen in 
 their sermons that pilgrimages to Wilsnack were prohibited. 
 This prohibition was to be repeated on one Sunday of every 
 month. 
 
 The deplorable result of this investigation, in which Hus 
 
8 4 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 took a prominent part, and the equally repulsive facts that 
 came to his knowledge in consequence of the supervision of 
 the clergy with which the archbishop had entrusted him, 
 rendered Hus yet more bitter when writing and speaking of the 
 Bohemian priests. He thus drew on himself the undying 
 hatred of many of the priests of Prague, particularly of those 
 whose life was not irreproachable. It was, indeed, mainly on 
 the testimony of such men that Hus was afterwards con- 
 demned at Constance. 
 
 Meanwhile the university and town of Prague had, partly 
 in consequence of the revelations of Wilsnack, again become 
 a hotbed of theological strife. The fact that the bleeding 
 wafers had been misused in an obviously fraudulent manner 
 led to a truly scholastic controversy on the substance of the 
 blood of Christ. Hus took part in this controversy by means 
 of two of his earliest Latin works, entitled respectively, De 
 Corpore Christi and De Sanguine Christi. The last-named 
 treatise refers directly to the investigation of the so-called 
 miracles of Wilsnack, and was written by order of the arch- 
 bishop. The older manuscripts mention that it was approved 
 by the archbishop and the University of Prague, while the 
 later ones, written after Hus had been cast off by the Roman 
 Church, state that the treatise had been rejected by the arch- 
 bishop and university. 1 
 
 As has been frequently pointed out, the question of the 
 sacrament was in Bohemia very closely connected with the 
 pretensions of the priests whose privilege it was to administer 
 it. Hus's attitude with regard to the pseudo-miracles of Wils- 
 nack no doubt irritated yet further the clergy of Prague, 
 already deeply offended by his outspokenness, and jealous of 
 his success as a preacher. The contemporary chroniclers all 
 attribute the troubles of Hus to the imprudence he showed in 
 
 1 Flajshans Liter ami Cinnost Mistra J ana Husi (Literary Activity of 
 Master John Hus), pp. 67-70. Both these treatises are printed in the Nurem- 
 berg edition of the Latin works of Hus. 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 85 
 
 attacking the powerful priesthood. One of these writers 
 states: 1 " It was commonly said that as long as he (Hus) 
 preached against the lords, knights, and squires, the citizens 
 and the artisans all praised him and felt kindly towards him. 
 But when he attacked the clergy, the pope, and others of the 
 ecclesiastical estate, then many deserted him." The Bohemian 
 chroniclers write with a great deal of prejudice, and their 
 statements must be received with caution. Yet this passage 
 probably reflects the popular feeling at Prague at the time 
 when the relations between Hus and the Roman Church began 
 to become strained. It is, at any rate, certain that the enemies 
 of Hus laid great stress on the losses that might befall the 
 Bohemian priests in consequence of his teaching. Such argu- 
 ments would also, it was hoped, detach from the cause of Hus 
 Archbishop Zbynek, who continued to show great distaste for 
 theological controversies. In 1408, shortly after the second 
 discussion of the works of Wycliffe at the university which, as 
 already mentioned, had ended by a compromise suggested by 
 Hus, the clergy of Prague brought forward new accusations 
 against him based rather on questions of conduct than of 
 dogma. In a document 2 which they forwarded to the arch- 
 bishop, they, after briefly referring to the previous discussion 
 on the works of Wycliffe, declared that Hus had preached 
 odious and scandalous sermons which had lacerated the 
 minds of the pious, extinguished charity, and rendered the 
 clergy odious to the people. It was further stated that Hus 
 had in the Bethlehem chapel declared before a large congrega- 
 tion consisting both of men and women, " contrary to the 
 regulations of the holy church and the teaching of the fathers," 
 that all priests who claimed money from their parishioners as 
 retribution for ecclesiastical functions, confession, communion, 
 baptism, and others, were heretics. It was further stated that 
 
 1 Start Letopisove ctssti (Ancient Bohemian Chronicles), edited by Palacky, 
 vol. iii. p. 7. 
 
 * This important document is printed — together with Hus's reply — in 
 Palacky, Documenta, pp. 154-163. 
 
86 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Hus, while officiating at the funeral of Canon Peter Vserub, 
 who had been a great pluralist, had declared that he would 
 not accept as gift the whole world on the condition of dying 
 possessed of so many benefices. Hus was lastly accused of 
 having in his sermons generally strongly attacked the priests 
 and lowered them in the estimation of the laymen. Hus 
 replied in a lengthy and spirited letter to the archbishop, 
 which is, unfortunately, not devoid of the scholastic hair- 
 splitting then fashionable at the universities. Yet there is 
 no doubt that Hus was entirely in the right, particularly when 
 he laid stress on the baseness of extorting money from the 
 poor as a condition of administering the sacraments to them. 
 As Professor Tomek has truly written, such conduct proves to 
 what a low level the clergy of Prague had sunk at this period. 
 The learned professor has also pointed out that the conduct of 
 the priests blamed by Hus was in direct contravention of the 
 article 65 of the statute of Ernest, Archbishop of Prague, 
 who had some time previously endeavoured to reform the 
 Bohemian Church. Nevertheless, Archbishop Zbynek hence- 
 forth showed less favour to Hus, and soon after the complaint 
 of the priests he deprived him of his office of preacher to the 
 synod. It must be admitted that the conduct of Hus at this 
 period was not conciliatory. Ever zealous for the reform of 
 the Bohemian Church — this, not a change in the doctrine of 
 the church, he considered the purpose of his life — Hus ad- 
 dressed to Archbishop Zbynek a letter which, as Dr. Lechler, 
 a Protestant divine, has truly written, reaches the extreme 
 limit of that which is permissible to a priest when writing to 
 his ecclesiastical superior. In this letter Hus interceded for 
 the priest Nicholas of Velenovic, surnamed Abraham. Abra- 
 ham had preached at Prague without permission, and had 
 been called to account by Canon John Kbel, one of the most 
 strenuous opponents of church-reform. When questioned, 
 Abraham did not deny the offence, but declared that he be- 
 lieved that not only priests, but laymen also, had the right to 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 87 
 
 preach. Thereupon Kbel called him a heretic, and caused 
 him to be imprisoned, and afterwards exiled. This occurrence 
 deeply affected Hus, particularly as Abraham was a man of 
 blameless character. It has already been noted that — 
 though there were many exceptions — it was generally among 
 the worthy, zealous, and pious priests that the friends of 
 church-reform were found. In interceding for Abraham, Hus 
 vividly contrasted his life with that of other priests of Prague. 1 
 He ended his letter by admonishing the archbishop " to love 
 the good, watch over those who are evil, not let the ostenta- 
 tious and avaricious flatter him, favour the humble and friends 
 of poverty, oblige the indolent to work and not hinder those 
 who labour steadfastly at the harvest of the Lord." Rela- 
 tions between the archbishop and Hus became more and more 
 strained, and a letter written at the end of the year 1408, 2 in 
 which Hus defended his conduct and expressed himself in 
 favour of neutrality between the rival pontiffs, closed the 
 correspondence. 
 
 The end of the year 1408 is one of the principal landmarks 
 in the life of Hus. The " academic " period, as Dr. Flajshans 
 has aptly named it, now ends. During this period Hus was 
 mainly occupied with university studies and lectures and, 
 still in agreement with his ecclesiastical superiors, enjoyed 
 a comparative degree of quiet such as was never again to be 
 his lot. 
 
 Before, however, dealing with the period of strife that now 
 awaited Hus and during which the events of his life become 
 
 1 The language of Hus is very forcible. He writes: "Qualiter hoc est 
 quod incestuosi et varie crirninosi absque rigo (sic) correctionis tamquam 
 tauri indomiti et equi emmissarii collis extentis incedunt libere, sacerdotes 
 autem humiles, spinas peccati evellentes officium vestri implentes regiminis 
 ex bono affectu, non sequentes avaritiam, sed gratis pro Deo se offerentes ad 
 evangelizationis laborem tamquam haeretici mancipantur carceribus et 
 exilium propter evangelizationem ipsius evangelii patiuntur." Palacky, 
 Documenta, pp. 1-2. The MS. copied and published by Palacky is somewhat 
 defective. It is in this letter that Hus — as mentioned above — refers to the 
 mandate given him by the archbishop to report on the conduct of the clergy 
 of Prague. 
 
 * Palacky, Documenta, pp. 5-7. 
 
88 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 involved in the whirlpool of the politics of his time, the early 
 writings of the Bohemian church-reformer should be briefly 
 noticed. They are more numerous than was formerly believed. 
 Earlier writers generally surmised that all, or almost all, his 
 works had been written during the last six troublous years of 
 his life (1409-1415). It is true that far fewer writings of Hus 
 were then known than is the case at present. Yet it is never- 
 theless a physical impossibility that Hus should, during those 
 troubled years of exile and imprisonment, have written all 
 the numerous Bohemian and Latin works with which we are 
 now acquainted. The bibliography of the works of Hus is 
 still incomplete, though the masterly work of Dr. Flajshans, 
 entitled Liter ami Cinnost Mistra J ana Husi (The Literary 
 Activity of Master John Hus), has thrown a vast amount of 
 light on a formerly very obscure subject. Even now almost 
 unknown manuscripts of Hus that were secreted in little- 
 known libraries continue to be re-discovered and published. 
 
 Very early Bohemian writings of Hus, perhaps his earliest, 
 are some sermons that have been recently discovered. Of 
 these some had been partially known previously, as Hus had, 
 as was his custom, incorporated them, though in a modified 
 form, in other works, particularly in his Postilla. The dis- 
 covery is due to that indefatigable scholar, Mr. Adolphus 
 Patera, formerly librarian of the Bohemian museum at Prague. 
 Mr. Patera found these manuscripts in the library of the 
 Cistercian monastery at Wilhering in Upper Austria, and 
 published them in the Journal of the Bohemian Society of 
 Sciences. Hus, or rather the copier, here still uses the ancient 
 system of writing Bohemian which, as will be mentioned 
 later, was so greatly ameliorated and altered by Hus himself- 
 He here also still intersperses his sentences with Latin words, 
 a proceeding of which Hus strongly disapproved when he 
 began to devote his attention to the language of his country. 
 On the other hand, we here already find Hus's holy hatred of 
 vice and immorality, and he here already propounds the theory 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 89 
 
 that sin is no more permissible to a priest than to a layman, \ 
 and indeed more blamable — a theory that appeared para- 
 doxical to most of Hus's contemporaries, particularly among 
 the priesthood. Thus when preaching on Zacchaeus (St. 
 Luke, chap, xix.) he says: " Those householders are manifest 
 sinners who allow immorality or dice-playing in their houses. 
 I say the same of dancing, by which they mock God on Sun- 
 days. As St. Bernard says, those who, particularly if they 
 are priests, allow in their houses dancing or diceing or im- 
 morality, commit a mortal sin, and the priests more so than 
 the laymen, for what is venial for a layman is mortal for a 
 priest." * A very early Bohemian work of^ Hus also is his [ 
 translation of the Trialogus of Wycliffe. It was probably 
 made between the years 1403 and 1407. If, as has been con- 
 jectured on the strength of statements made at the trial of 
 Jerome of Prague at Constance, Jerome assisted Hus in this 
 translation, this would be the only known instance of colla- 
 boration between him and Jerome. The translation has been 
 long, and probably irretrievably lost, and its existence is 
 known to us only through the testimony of numerous con- 
 temporary writers. Numerous manuscripts of it appear to 
 have existed, but were destroyed during the period of 
 Romanist reaction that followed the battle of the White 
 Mountain. The translation was dedicated to the Margrave 
 Jodocus of Moravia, a cousin of King Venceslas. It is prob- 
 able that the frequent quotations from this work of Wycliffe 
 which we find in the writings of the later Bohemian reformer, 
 Peter Chelcicky, were derived from this translation. 
 
 Among Hus's Latin works that belong to this early period 
 is one that, though formerly almost unknown, is the largest . 
 and may also be considered the greatest of his Latin works. 
 Though Hus here also conforms to the scholastic system 
 which required incessant quotations and " authorities," he 
 
 1 Vestnik Kralovske ceske spolecnosti nauk (Journal of the Rl. Bohemian 
 Society of Sciences) for 1890, p. 360. 
 
9 o THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 appears here as both a profounder and a more original scholar 
 than in books such as the treatise, De Ecclesia. I refer to 
 Hus's work, Super IV. Sententiarum," which has quite recently 
 been published by Dr. Flajshans. 1 The discovery of this 
 work has already changed, and will in future probably even 
 more change, the appreciation of Hus as a scholar. The book 
 is a vast commentary on the then world-famed work of Peter 
 Lombard entitled Sententiarum Libri quatuor. This book, 
 the work of Peter, born at Lumello in Lombardy — whence 
 his name of Lombardus — towards the end of the eleventh 
 century, was for many generations the recognised text-book of 
 theology. Peter's work consists in a vast collection of the 
 opinions of the fathers of the church on all matters of faith, 
 the writer generally refraining from stating his own views. 
 Though Peter's book was, of course, in strictest accordance 
 with the views of the Church of Rome as far as they had been 
 formulated in his time, yet it did not always escape suspicion. 
 The work, which is based on the fluctuating foundation of 
 patristic tradition, and places side by side contradictory 
 opinions, bears traces of a freedom that was afterwards lost. 2 
 The scholastic writers, indeed, contributed very little to the 
 development of dogma. Laying stress rather on those truths 
 that had been longest accepted, they endeavoured to steer 
 clear of dangerously contentious matters. Thus the sentences 
 of Peter contain no references to the papacy. In spite of these 
 circumstances the Libri Sententiarum was a generally recog- 
 nised authority, and innumerable commentaries on the work 
 soon began to appear. Most young theologians at the begin- 
 ning of their career lectured on Peter Lombard and then 
 published their lectures in the form of a commentary on his 
 work. Thus Hus's contemporary and great adversary, Peter 
 of Ailly, also wrote as his first work a commentary on the 
 
 1 Super IV. Sententiarum Heraurgegeben von Wenzel Flajshans und Dr. 
 Marie Kominkova, 1906. 
 
 2 Dr. Harnack, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte , vol. iii. p. 330. 
 
THE YOUTH OF HUS 91 
 
 Sententiarum Libri quatuor. 1 The advancement of his 
 academic career was, as Dr. Flajshans conjectures, an induce- 
 ment to Hus to undertake this great work, which he began 
 in 1407. Peter Lombard's book, founded largely on St. Augus- 
 tine, had, however, in itself great attraction for Hus. Hus's 
 book, Super IV. Sentcntiarum, proves that the writer was at 
 that time already a man of vast erudition. Hus followed the 
 argumentation and order of ideas of Lombard, whose work 
 was the subject of his commentary. He borrowed largely 
 from the earlier commentators, Bonaventura and St. Thomas 
 Aquinas. He also quotes extensively St. Augustine and the 
 Trialogus of Wycliffe. In some cases, when it was endea- 
 voured to establish a dependence of Hus on Wycliffe, more ^ 
 careful research has proved that both writers had— as was ( 
 then frequently the case — borrowed extensively and without 
 acknowledgment from the works of Peter Lombard. Of the 
 many other writers used by Hus we may mention St. Anselm, ^ 
 Duns Scotus, Occam, and Bradwardine. 2 It is interesting to 
 note as a proof of Hus's extensive learning that when he— in 
 Book II. distinction 8— treats of the truly scholastic question, 
 whether the angels have bodies naturally {naturaliter) joined 
 to them, he quotes to support his views the opinions, firstly, of 
 St. Augustine, secondly, of Plato— in the Timaeus— thirdly, of 
 Apulejus! It must be noticed that in this extensive work 
 Hus's teaching is entirely in accordance with that of the 
 Roman Church of his time. In one of his latest works, written 
 but a few months before his death, Hus lays stress on this 
 fact, and in answer to the accusation levelled against him of 
 having denied the validity of the sacrament when administered 
 by an unworthy priest, he quoted his early lectures on Peter 
 Lombard. 3 This is entirely in accordance with the truth. 
 
 1 Tschackert, Peter von A illy, p. n. 
 
 * Hus calls him " Bragwardin," p. 293 of Dr. Flajslians's edition of Super 
 IV. Sententiarum. 
 
 3 See p. xvii. of Dr. Flajshans's (German) introduction to Super IV. 
 
 Sententiarum. 
 
92 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Hus in his Super IV. Sententiarum has expressed on this diffi- 
 cult question views that are identical with those of Rome. 1 
 Even an unworthy priest can validly administer the sacra- 
 ment. It is sufficient that he who administers it should be a 
 priest, should speak the words of consecration, and should 
 have the intention of administering the sacrament, that is, of 
 doing what the church does. 
 
 It is obviously beyond the purpose of this book to give a 
 detailed account of this great work of Hus's, which can be 
 described as a commentary on the dogmatics as expounded in 
 the then universally recognised text-book of Peter Lombard. 
 The book, which has only been recently brought to public 
 knowledge, is far too little known, and well deserves to attract 
 attention, particularly among theologians. Of the other 
 Latin works of Hus that belong to this period two, the treatises 
 De Corpore Christi and De Sanguine Christi, have already been 
 mentioned. 
 
 1 " Distinccio ista 13a. . . . continet quod sacerdotes aliqui, licet sint 
 pravi, consecrant vere, quia non in merito consecrantis sed in verbo efficitur 
 creatoris." (Super IV. Sententiarum, Lib. IV. Distinccio XIII. pp. 582-588, 
 of Dr. Flajshans's edition.) 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 THE BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION TO THE 
 CHURCH OF ROME 
 
 It has already been noted that the end of the year 1408 is a 
 very important landmark in the life of Hus. He henceforth 
 appears an open enemy of Rome, though he continued to the 
 end of his life to consider himself a true and faithful member 
 of the Church of Christ. The history of Hus at this period 
 widens out and becomes more closely connected with the vast 
 stage of European politics on which Hus himself for a brief 
 moment appears as a prominent figure. The political situa- 
 tion of Europe at the beginning of the fifteenth century was 
 entirely, either directly or indirectly, influenced by the great 
 Western schism. The cardinals assembled in Rome in 1378 
 had elected as pope, Bartolomeo Prignano, Archbishop of Bari, 
 who assumed the name of Urban VI. Though the Roman 
 Church has in later days declared that Urban VI. and his 
 successors up to Gregory XII. were legitimate popes, Urban's 
 election was impugned almost immediately, as having been 
 obtained by violence and by intimidation on the part of the 
 populace of Rome. A few months after the election of Urban 
 a certain number of — mostly French — cardinals elected as 
 pope, Robert, Cardinal of Geneva, who took the name of 
 Clement VII. The following period, during which two, and 
 for some time three, popes claimed to be the successors of St. 
 Peter, is one of the darkest in the history of the church. The 
 struggle, however, here requires notice only as far as it con- 
 cerned Bohemia and the fate of Hus in particular. Verbal 
 warfare between the contending popes was waged in the 
 coarsely vituperative manner customary among mediaeval 
 theologians. The formidable power of excommunication 
 
 93 
 
94 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 which the popes possessed was misused for the purpose of 
 crushing political enemies. To equip armed forces against 
 their adversaries, the contending popes raised money by 
 taxing the faithful, selling absolutions and benefices, and 
 other simoniacal means. Each pope being only able to 
 claim a certain number of countries as belonging to his 
 " obedience," as it was called, the papal agents became ever 
 more extortionate. It is only by taking these facts into 
 account that we can explain the spirit of intense hatred and 
 scorn with which contemporary, even moderate writers, some 
 of whom had been papal officials, speak of the Roman Church. 
 It was natural that at such a period pious and unworldly men, 
 when contrasting the events of their times with their own 
 ideals, should feel an intense longing for the true Church of 
 Christ as they conceived it. 
 
 When Pope Urban VI. died in 1389, the cardinals of his 
 obedience, fearing that the termination of the schism might 
 prove disadvantageous to them, immediately chose as Urban's 
 successor the Neapolitan cardinal, Piero Tomacelli, who took 
 the title of Boniface IX. Similarly, after the death of Clement 
 VII. in 1394, the Spaniard, Peter de Luna, who took the 
 name of Benedict XIII., was elected pope by the cardinals of 
 Clement's obedience. The cardinals of both obediences, with 
 characteristic insincerity and falseness, continued meanwhile 
 to maintain that their greatest wish was to terminate the 
 schism. This, however, for the time appeared impossible, nor 
 did the deaths of Boniface IX. in 1404, and of his successor 
 Innocent VII. in 1406, change the situation. Pope Gregory 
 XII. was immediately chosen as the successor of Innocent, and 
 though he conformed to the custom of his predecessors by 
 stating that he wished to re-establish the unity of the church, 
 it was thoroughly understood that, to each of the two popes and 
 to his adherents, unity of the church meant the recognition of 
 the pope of their obedience and the division of the benefices of 
 the church among his principal partisans. 
 
BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION 95 
 
 In the year 1408 the principal dignitaries of the Roman 
 Church, with the weighty moral support of the universities of 
 Paris and Bologna, made a determined attempt to terminate 
 the schism. After difficult and prolonged negotiations, car- 
 dinals of both obediences, together with many other digni- 
 taries, met at Pisa on March 25, 1409. The debates were 
 stormy and at times threatened to be resultless, but finally 
 the council deprived both popes, Benedict and Gregory, of 
 the papal rank and all other dignities, declaring them to be 
 heretics and schismatics. The faithful were released from 
 their oath of fidelity to both popes, and all decrees and nomi- 
 nations that they might publish were declared void. It 
 remained to elect a new pope. Mainly through the influence 
 of the cardinal-legate of Bologna, Baldassare Cossa, who was 
 the leading spirit of the council of Pisa, Peter Philargi, 
 Cardinal of Milan, was chosen as pope. He assumed the name 
 of Alexander V. His reign was short. Through the influence 
 of Cossa, his principal councillor, he was induced, though 
 already a man of over seventy years, to travel in the middle 
 of winter across the Apennines from Pisa to Bologna. Though 
 he became ill in consequence of the hardships of his journey, 
 his life was not at first despaired of; but he died at Bologna 
 on May 11, 1410, poisoned, as appears almost certain, by 
 Cardinal Cossa, aided by Cossa's doctor, Master Daniele di 
 Santa Sofia. 1 Baldassare Cossa now openly assumed the 
 authority which he had practically already wielded. On May t 
 17, Cossa was by the cardinals then present at Bologna 
 elected pope, " unfortunately for himself and many others," 
 as Niem writes. Though his enemies from the first declared 
 that his election was due to intimidation, Cossa was a few 
 days later crowned pope under the name of John XXIII. in 
 the cathedral church of St. Petronius. 
 
 1 Of the many crimes of which Baldassare Cossa was rightly or wrongly 
 accused, this appears one of the most authenticated. See Giovanni Gozzadini, 
 Nanne Gozzadini e Baldassare Cossa, pp. 367 and 368, where a list of contem- 
 porary authorities on this subject is given. Mr. Gozzadini's book contains 
 much authenticated information on the early life of Pope John XXIII. 
 
96 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 While the popes and cardinals previously mentioned enter 
 but little into the life of Hus, this is not the case as regards 
 Baldassare Cossa. We meet with Pope John XXIII. in some 
 of the most important moments of the life of Hus. It was 
 this pope who summoned Hus to Rome. It was the attempt 
 of Cossa to raise funds in Bohemia for the continuation of 
 his war against Naples that caused the troubles in Prague 
 which forced Hus to exile himself. It was Pope John XXIII. 
 who appears as Hus's principal antagonist during the earlier 
 part of his stay at Constance. It was Baldassare Cossa 
 through whose influence Hus was imprisoned shortly after 
 his arrival at Constance — though the pope repudiated the 
 responsibility for this act whenever he found it convenient to 
 do so. It is therefore interesting to glance briefly at the early 
 life of this pontiff. Baldassare Cossa was born at Naples about 
 the year 1360 and took orders at a very early age. He, how- 
 ever, early in life, felt the vocation of a soldier, and took part 
 in the struggle for the Neapolitan throne between Ladislas of 
 Hungary and Louis of Anjou. Military discipline, however, 
 soon became irksome to Cossa, who is stated to have behaved 
 rather as a brigand than as a soldier. Bishop Creighton, 
 writing with his usual moderation, states that his life exceeded 
 the bounds of military licence." 1 It has often been stated 2 
 that he for a time became a pirate, but this tale probably only 
 indicates that he took part in naval warfare during the struggle 
 between the competitors for the Neapolitan crown. Though 
 no one could be less worthy of the papal tiara than Cossa, he 
 was undoubtedly, particularly in his younger days, a man of 
 exceptional talent and reckless determination, endowed with 
 an absolute contempt for the distinction of good and evil, 
 
 1 History of Papacy, vol. i. p. 268. 
 
 2 " Dum autem simplex clericus ac in adolescentia consti tutus existeret 
 cum quibusdam fratribus suis piraticam in mari Neopolitano, ut fertur 
 exercuit." (Theodoric de Niem, De Vita Papae Joannis XXIII.) Except 
 the members of the council of Constance, no one writes of Baldassare Cossa 
 with greater animosity than this grey -grown servitor of the popes. 
 
• yb&m ■ ft//'//?///// '/. 
 
 //■?////<////■///// 
 
 ///ft/'/// / '■// 
 
 I ■/■//.,/// ///// //.I' ' /'//ft///, 
 
 ,A; ,'//,,>,//. 
 
BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION 97 
 
 jenscits des Gutcn und Bosen, to use Nietsche's now almost 
 proverbial expression. If he played a somewhat pitiable part 
 at Constance, we may assume that the excesses of his earlier 
 days had impaired his formerly brilliant mental power. Find- 
 ing that a military career was not at that moment likely to 
 lead to rapid advancement, Cossa took to study and visited 
 the famed University of Bologna. He here obtained the 
 degree of laureate both of civil and of canon law " in conse- 
 quence of his talents," though he was said to have been more 
 assiduous in debauchery than in study. The accusations 
 afterwards brought forward against Cossa at Constance are 
 terrible. Even if we distrust some of Niem's hideously- 
 grotesque tales, and believe that some of the evidence produced 
 at Constance may have been spurious, Cossa's record remains 
 very black. Almost all contemporary writers assert that he 
 was tainted with unnatural vice. Cossa soon ingratiated 
 himself with his countryman, Pope Boniface IX., who ap- 
 pointed him archdeacon of Bologna, an important office, the 
 holder of which acted as rector of the university. To be 
 nearer to the pontiff Cossa proceeded to Rome, and by pay- 
 ing large sums to the pope, whose avarice was insatiable, he 
 became Bishop of Ischia, and cardinal in 1402. He then 
 obtained other ecclesiastical dignities, and was finally sent as 
 papal legate to Bologna, Ferrara Ravenna, and Rimini. These 
 cities, which, during the then prevailing anarchy, had thrown off 
 the papal rule, were subdued by Cossa. Not less greedy for 
 money than his patron Pope Boniface, the new legate suc- 
 ceeded in extorting vast sums from these cities, particularly 
 from Bologna, where even the churches and monasteries were 
 not secure from his greed. Cossa for a time became absolute 
 ruler of Bologna, hardly caring to keep up the pretence that 
 he was acting as a papal legate. His reign of terror, which 
 obtained for him the name of " diavolo cardinale," l scarcely 
 suffered any interruption, when a conflict broke out between 
 
 1 Mr. Gozzadini, quoting from the archives of the Gozzadini family. 
 
 G 
 
98 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 him and Pope Gregory XII., the second successor of his 
 former patron. Pope Gregory had appointed his nephew to 
 the wealthy bishopric of Bologna, the revenues of which 
 Cardinal Cossa refused to renounce. Deadly enmity sprang 
 up between the cardinal and the pope, who excommunicated 
 him, stating " that notorious facts proved that the disciple 
 (alumnus) of perdition, Baldassare Cossa, formerly cardinal 
 deacon of St. Eustachius, formerly apostolic legate, had with 
 other sons of iniquity revolted against the pope and the 
 mother-church of God, that he had treated with contempt 
 the worship of God, neglected the ceremonies of the Christian 
 religion, and seized the sword of Satan and that of tyrannical 
 power." * Cossa retaliated without delay. Carrying out a 
 plan he had perhaps previously conceived, he granted his pro- 
 tection to the council assembled at Pisa, which, in the disturbed 
 state in which Italy then was, could hardly have met had it not 
 been for the strong military force that was under Cossa's 
 command. Through his influence Pope Alexander was elected, 
 and, as already mentioned, Cossa shortly became his successor. 
 As Pope John XXIII. he resumed his former Italian policy, 
 endeavouring in a manner not dissimilar from that afterwards 
 employed by Caesar Borgia to carve out a kingdom for himself 
 in that land. His most dangerous opponent was King Ladislas 
 of Naples. It was by attempting to raise money for the pur- 
 pose of a crusade against Naples that John XXIII. became 
 the cause of disturbances in the distant city of Prague. When, 
 on the repeated invitation of the Emperor Sigismund, Cossa 
 reluctantly proceeded to Constance, his former good fortune 
 seems to have forsaken him. A thorough Italian, he appears 
 out of his element in northern lands. 
 
 After noticing briefly the general state of European politics, 
 dominated as it was entirely by the schism, reference must 
 again be made to Hus. In Bohemia, as elsewhere, the schism 
 was the almost exclusive object of public interest. It has 
 
 1 Abridged from Raynaldus Annates Ecclesiasticae, vol. viii. p. 220. 
 
BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION 99 
 
 already been noted that the rival pontiffs always expressed 
 their desire that the schism should be brought to an end. 
 Pope Gregory XII., who had by the cardinals of the Roman 
 obedience been elected as successor to Boniface IX. and to 
 Innocent VII., soon after his accession informed the University 
 of Prague that he was ready to resign his dignity, should 
 his opponent Benedict do likewise. There is, however, no 
 evidence that either pope would have accepted any solution 
 except the abdication of his rival. When the cardinals as- 
 sembled at Pisa to choose a new pope, they addressed a petition 
 to Venceslas and all other Christian princes, begging them to 
 maintain neutrality, that is to say, to recognise henceforth 
 neither of the contending pontiffs, Gregory and Benedict. 
 Venceslas was inclined to view such a proposal favourably. 
 The French court, which was on traditional terms of friend- 
 ship with the house of Luxemburg, had decreed that, up to the 
 conclusion of the schism, the popes should not be allowed to 
 exercise the papal rights in France. They would thus become 
 unable to confer benefices, and it was hoped that they would 
 in consequence lose many of their supporters. This measure 
 rightly appeared to Venceslas as a first step towards a pacifi- 
 cation. He had, however, as was always the case, great 
 difficulty in coming to a decision. In 1408 he had already 
 entered into negotiations with the cardinals who had deserted 
 Gregory and Benedict. He first employed for this purpose 
 Magister Mauritius de Praga, 1 who was, as far as we can 
 conjecture from the very contradictory reports, a partisan of 
 Pope Gregory. At any rate he did nothing to further the 
 negotiations that had been entrusted to him. In October of 
 the same year Venceslas sent to Italy as his envoys two 
 members of the University of Prague, Magisters Stanislas of 
 Znoymo and Stephen Palec, who were known as members of 
 the party favourable to church-reform. The envoys were to 
 proceed to Pisa, but were on their journey arrested at Bologna 
 
 1 By Hus and his friends generally known as " Rvacka." 
 
ioo THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 by order of Cardinal Cossa. As Cossa was the guiding spirit 
 of the council and the envoys were representatives of a 
 sovereign supposed to be favourable to its plan of pacification, 
 this step of Cardinal Cossa has caused much controversy and 
 remains unexplained. Perhaps the fact that the envoys 
 carried with them a large sum of money and had numerous 
 horses in their convoy — they were deprived of both coins and 
 horses — affords some clue to this occurrence. It is also very 
 probable that some message had been sent to Bologna from 
 Prague, stating that the envoys were " Wyclifhtes." This 
 would give Cardinal Cossa a welcome pretext for his depreda- 
 tion. The envoys were very roughly treated by the mer- 
 cenaries of Cossa, and Stephen Palec is said never to have 
 recovered from the fright he felt at this time. Hus did not 
 hesitate to affirm that this was the reason why the opinions 
 of Palec changed suddenly after his mission to Italy. The 
 University of Prague determined to take steps to insure the 
 safety of its imprisoned members. On the suggestion of Hus, 
 Henning of Baltenhagen, then rector, addressed, on December 
 8, 1408, a complaint to the cardinals assembled at Pisa, 1 
 stating that those venerable men, Stanislas, of Znoymo, pro- 
 fessor of theology, and Stephen Palec, bachelor of theology, 
 " well - beloved sons of the university," had been deprived 
 of their possessions and imprisoned. After praising " the 
 vigorous wisdom, praiseworthy conversation, and solid doc- 
 trine " of these men, the letter begged that they might be 
 released. Cossa was on very good terms with the council, and 
 the prisoners were almost immediately liberated, though their 
 goods were not restored to them. 
 
 Very shortly after Stanislas and Stephen had started for 
 Italy, and probably before their arrestation had become known 
 in Bohemia, Venceslas decided to send another envoy to the 
 council. He had previously, in a letter forwarded to the 
 cardinals at Pisa on November 24, 1408, 2 declared his willing- 
 
 1 Palacky, Documenta, p. 345. * Ibid. p. 343. 
 
BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION 101 
 
 ness to send an envoy to Pisa on condition that such an envoy 
 should be considered as a representative not only of the King 
 of Bohemia but also of the King of the Romans. A few years, 
 previously some of the German electors had deposed Ven- 
 ceslas and elected in his stead as king Rupert, Count Palatine. 
 It was the invasion of Bohemia by German troops acting in the 
 cause of Rupert that was the occasion of the famed eloquent 
 sermon of Hus, which has already been mentioned. Venceslas 
 had never recognised his deposition, and the demand which 
 he addressed to the cardinals therefore appears justified. It 
 appears to have been accepted, but after considerable delay, 
 for it was only a year later that the king's new representative, 
 Master John " Kardinal," * of Reinstein, started for Italy. 
 While Stanislas and Stephen appear to have had only a semi- 
 private mission, Magister Reinstein acted as the king's official 
 representative. Reinstein was a firm adherent of the party 
 of church-reform and a warm personal friend of Hus up to the 
 end of his life. Venceslas's choice of an envoy is therefore 
 significative. 
 
 The attempt of the cardinals assembled at Pisa to induce 
 the principal European powers to accept the system of 
 neutrality, that is to say, to renounce the obedience of both 
 Gregory and Benedict, proved on the whole successful. 
 France, where the University of Paris used its great influence 
 in favour of a measure which would, as was believed, termi- 
 nate the schism, declared in favour of neutrality. In Germany 
 also John of Nassau, the powerful Archbishop of Maintz, used 
 his vast influence in favour of neutrality, though Rupert of 
 the Palatinate, Venceslas's rival as King of the Romans, a 
 firm supporter of Pope Gregory, strongly opposed it. 
 Bohemia would, according to the wishes of Venceslas, also 
 have immediately adhered to the system of neutrality. The 
 fact alone that Rupert of the Palatinate whom Gregory had 
 recognised as King of the Romans opposed that system, 
 1 This strange designation of Master John of Reinstein was a nickname. 
 
102 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 rendered it the obvious policy of Venceslas to adopt it. Yet 
 he found difficulties in his path. Archbishop Zbynek was 
 then and continued to a somewhat later period an adherent 
 of Gregory. At the university opinion was divided. The 
 German magisters, many of whom secretly sympathised with 
 Rupert in his conflict with their king, were loath to renounce 
 the obedience of Gregory. The Bohemian members of the 
 university, on the other hand, were unanimous in their desire 
 to comply with the wishes of King Venceslas. They were by 
 no means blind to the many failings of the king, but they 
 believed him to be on the whole a well-meaning sovereign not 
 unfavourable to the cause of church-reform. It should indeed 
 be noted that the very exaggerated unfavourable accounts of 
 the life of Wenceslas, which have been repeated by countless 
 historians, had their origin rather in the favour he for a time 
 accorded to Hus and his disciples than in the very real failings 
 of Venceslas, which he shared with many other princes of the 
 fifteenth century. The Bohemian members of the university 
 were also largely dependent on the king's favour for obtaining 
 the changes at the university favourable to their nation, which 
 they desired. Another motive may also have influenced 
 them. Many of the Bohemian masters may have read the 
 works of Wycliffe and other opponents of the extreme preten- 
 sions of the papal see. Such men would be less opposed to 
 the deposition of popes than others who upheld the unlimited 
 authority of papacy; for we meet already with such up- 
 holders at this period. 1 The differences of opinion caused by 
 the question of neutrality, as was inevitable, accentuated and 
 envenomed the national discord which already prevailed at 
 the university, where a Bohemian majority was oppressed and 
 deprived of its rights by a somewhat overbearing German 
 minority. At a meeting of the members of the university 
 
 1 Dr. Harnack writes [Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, vol. iii., pp. 398-399 n.) : 
 " The book de planctu ecclesiae of the Franciscan monk Alvarus Pelagius . . . 
 contains passages which prove that even in the nineteenth century the 
 glorification of papacy could not be carried to a greater extreme." 
 
BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION 103 
 
 held late in the year 1408, the rector Baltenhagen and all 
 the German members energetically maintained that Gregory 
 should continue to be recognised as pope. The Bohemians — 
 Hus acting as spokesman — expressed themselves strongly in 
 favour of neutrality up to the time when a new pope should 
 have been elected. The meeting broke up without a vote 
 having been taken, probably because Baltenhagen was afraid 
 of offending the king. Hus always maintained that it was 
 from this moment that he lost the favour of the archbishop. 
 It is certain that shortly after this meeting a decree signed by 
 Archbishop Zbynek declared that Hus, as a disobedient son of 
 the church, was forbidden the exercise of ecclesiastical func- 
 tions. Hus replied in an eloquent letter — to which reference 
 was made in the last chapter — and the correspondence then 
 ceased. 
 
 King Venceslas, who had for some time been residing in 
 Silesia, left that country about the end of the year 1408, and 
 returning to Bohemia, proceeded to Kutna Hora (Kutten- 
 berg), where he and his court remained for a considerable 
 time. Venceslas here awaited the visit of a French embassy, 
 the purpose of which, as was known, was to persuade the king 
 to follow the example of France by renouncing the obedience 
 of Gregory and Benedict. The opinion of the University of 
 Prague at this period was of great importance in all theo- 
 logical discussions. It was customary to consult it in such 
 cases, as had been done in Paris and Bologna. Venceslas 
 therefore summoned to Kutna Hora some of the most promi- 
 nent members of the university. Among them were the 
 rector Henning of Baltenhagen and several other Germans, as 
 well as four Bohemian masters, the most prominent of whom 
 were Hus, and Jerome who had just returned to Bohemia 
 from prolonged travels. The king first discussed matters 
 with the rector, who adroitly avoided entirely the question of 
 the schism, but complained bitterly of the " Wycliffite " 
 agitation, which, he said, endangered the peace of the city of 
 
104 BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION 
 
 Prague, as well as the fame of Bohemia as a country exempt 
 from all heresies. He thus referred to a matter which deeply 
 touched the king, as indeed all Bohemians. It is difficult at 
 the present day to realise what a sense of opprobrium the 
 word " heretic " conveyed even to men who openly by deed 
 and word opposed the Church of Rome. Bohemia had always 
 boasted that it was untainted by heresy. Hus in the moment 
 of death declared that he had never expressed heretical views. 
 As late as at the council of Basel the Hussite envoys protested 
 more energetically against the statement that they were 
 heretics than against any other accusation. The anger of 
 Venceslas, who was undoubtedly misled by the cunning 
 German, is therefore natural. The king also may have feared 
 that the popular excitement might cause riots in Prague. 
 Venceslas graciously dismissed Henning of Baltenhagen and 
 then addressed Hus and Jerome in very violent language. He 
 accused them of fomenting disorders in the land and threatened 
 them with death at the stake. 
 
 Other councils, however, soon prevailed with King Ven- 
 ceslas. His courtiers were almost all favourable to the party 
 of church-reform, and they frequently assisted at Hus's 
 sermons in the Bethlehem chapel. They were far too true 
 courtiers to interfere at a moment when the king was carried 
 away by fury, but they gradually guided his thoughts back 
 to the bias they had formerly had. They obtained powerful 
 aid from the members of the French embassy, which arrived 
 at Kutna Hora in January, 1409. The embassy was very 
 numerous, and as was then customary, particularly when eccle- 
 siastical matters were to be discussed, it included theologians 
 — members of the famed University of Paris. These men 
 employed all their eloquence in endeavouring to persuade 
 Venceslas to renounce the allegiance of Pope Gregory, and it 
 is very probable that, when the opposition of the German 
 members of the University of Prague was mentioned, the 
 French envoys may have pointed out that the Paris University 
 
BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION 105 
 
 granted no such great privileges to aliens. 1 The queen also 
 spoke strongly in favour of the party of Hus. Finally, Nicholas 
 of Lobkowitz, a favourite courtier of the king and one who, 
 as manager of the royal mines at Kutna Hora, had daily access 
 to his sovereign, prevailed on him to sign the famous decree 
 of Kutna Hora (January 18, 1409). In this decree, addressed 
 to the rector of the University of Prague, the king, after the 
 usual formal introductory remarks, proceeds to state that 
 whereas the Teutonic nation, possessing no rights of citizenship 
 in Bohemia, claims, as is truthfully reported, three votes in all 
 matters concerning the University of Prague, while the 
 Bohemian nation, the lawful heirs of this kingdom, possesses 
 and enjoys but one, (therefore) the king, considering it most 
 unjust and unbeseeming that foreigners and aliens should 
 largely enjoy the advantages that belong rightly to the resi- 
 dents, who consider themselves oppressed by this loss and 
 disadvantage, decrees that the university shall henceforth, 
 without all resistance, allow the Bohemian nation to have in 
 all assemblies, judgments, examinations, elections, and other 
 transactions three votes in the same manner as the French 
 nation has them in Paris, and in accordance with the regula- 
 tions of Lombardy and Italy. The decree ends by stating that 
 the rector, should he not act according to these instructions, 
 would incur the king's gravest displeasure. 2 
 
 This famous decree, which entirely altered the constitution 
 of the university, was naturally received with great enthu- 
 siasm by the national party. The principal leader of that 
 party was at this moment seriously ill. Hus, whose nature, 
 in spite of his indomitable physical courage, was a very sensi- 
 tive one, felt deeply the insulting speech of the king, for whom 
 he, as a loyal Bohemian, felt affection and respect. On his 
 
 1 Venceslas's decree changing the constitution of the university — which 
 will be mentioned presently — alludes to the regulations of the University 
 of Paris. 
 
 J Abridged from the Latin original, printed by Palacky (Documenta, 
 PP- 347-348). 
 
106 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 return to Prague he was seized by one of those violent attacks 
 of illness that were not infrequent during his troubled and 
 comparatively short life. It is stated that the good news 
 reached Master John on his sick-bed late on the night of 
 January 19. His friend Nicholas of Lobkowitz had sent a 
 messenger to him with a copy of the decree of Kutna Hora. 
 Hus, Dr. Flajshans writes, eagerly seized with his hands that 
 still trembled from fever this magna charta of the liberty of 
 the Bohemian nation in the university. Almost immediately 
 afterwards Hus was visited by two friends, who found him 
 still in a state of joyful excitement. " Would it be just," he 
 asked them, " if we had three votes ? " Standing near the bed 
 of Hus they both answered as with one voice, " Would that 
 God did but grant it ! We shall never attain to such a power." 
 Hus answered: " Here is a copy of the king's letter to the 
 university. Read! " Hus's visitors, ancient masters of the 
 Bohemian nation who had struggled for many years for the 
 rights of their country, were overwhelmed with surprise and 
 joy. Hus, pointing to his emaciated body, exhorted his 
 comrades to fortitude. " I am," he said, " nearly dying; if 
 then I die, defend, I beg you, the rights and the freedom of 
 our nation." 1 
 
 After the decisive step, the publication of the decree of 
 Kutna Hora, had been taken, events moved with great rapidity. 
 Only four days later a new decree of King Venceslas 2 stated 
 that the cardinals (i.e., those who had renounced the obediences 
 of Gregory and Benedict), his dearest friends, men who were 
 zealous for the unity of the church, had earnestly begged him 
 to refuse obedience to the two contending pontiffs, pointing 
 out that thus only could peace among the Christian people 
 and the amity of the church be secured. Venceslas then 
 threatened with severe penalties all who should obey any 
 orders of Pope Gregory — Pope Benedict had never been 
 
 1 Flajshans, Mistr Jan Hus, pp. 194-195. 
 2 Palacky, Documenta, pp. 348-349. 
 
BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION 107 
 
 recognised by any one in Bohemia — or his party, or favour 
 them in any way. 
 
 On January 26, the royal decree was read to the assembled 
 members of the university. The Germans openly expressed 
 their displeasure, and at a meeting which took place a few 
 days later all the German members of the university pledged 
 themselves, " under the fourfold penalty of perjury, excom- 
 munication, deprivation of honours, and a fine of threescore 
 hundred groschen," to leave the university and never again 
 pursue their studies there, rather than admit that the 
 Bohemians should have three votes at the deliberations of 
 the university and the other nations only one. Hus, though 
 he has often been falsely accused of wishing to expel the 
 German students from Prague, strongly blamed this decision 
 and advised them to " annul their foolish and illicit vow, 
 which the devil had inspired." ' Before leaving Prague, how- 
 ever, the German magisters determined to address a remon- 
 strance to Venceslas. This short letter, which cannot be 
 said to have been couched in a very respectful tone, was de- 
 livered to the king on February 6. It stated that under an 
 influence or influences known to God alone 2 the king had sent 
 to the university, his daughter, a letter which seriously decreed 
 that the Bohemian nation should in future have three votes at 
 the university and the other nations only one. The German 
 magisters then proceeded to point out the evil results which 
 they said this decree would certainly have. 
 
 The king, a few days later, sent a lengthy reply, 3 which 
 very clearly states his case and deserves a somewhat detailed 
 
 1 " Si quis vestrum juravit ut exiret de Bohemia nunquam reversurus hie 
 illicite juravit; rescindat juramentum stultum illicitum, a dyabolo et a suis 
 satellitibus inductum." (Super IV. Sententiarum, vol. vi. d. i. p. 503 of Dr. 
 Flajshans's edition). In his introduction to the work Super IV. Senten- 
 tiarum, Dr. Flajshans has very skilfully proved that this lecture on Peter 
 Lombard was delivered at the time when the German students were preparing 
 to leave Prague. 
 
 j 2 " Ex cujus vel quorum inductione Deus novit." Palacky, Documenta, 
 P- 351- 
 
 3 Ibid. pp. 355-363. 
 
108 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 notice. Venceslas began by stating that his royal prerogative 
 permitted him to make whatever changes he thought fit at the 
 university, and then pointed out that he had the right to 
 consider the three nations which had joined into one German 
 nation as a single unity. The letter then, with the abundance 
 of biblical quotations customary at that period, blamed the 
 disobedience of those who refused to obey the king, the ruler 
 of Bohemia. It was further stated that the inhabitants of 
 the kingdom of Bohemia, the true Bohemians (regnicolae regni 
 Bohemiae, veri Bohemi), were entitled to receive such privi- 
 leges as the king thought fit to bestow on them, and that he 
 had rightly given them such privileges with regard to judg- 
 ments, offices, elections, and other concerns of the university. 
 The foreign nations — the letter continued to say — or rather 
 the Teutonic nation, should humbly obey the decree of the 
 king, which conferred three votes on the Bohemian nation, 
 mindful of the words : "Friend, I do thee no wrong . . . take 
 that thine is and go thy way. ... Is it not lawful for me to 
 do what I will with mine own ? Is thine eye evil because I am 
 good?" 1 The letter then affirms, again bringing forward 
 scriptural quotations to support the affirmation, that the 
 Bohemian nation must be the ruler (rectrix) of the other 
 nations at the university, and that the Teutonic nation there- 
 fore, by claiming three votes, claims supremacy over the 
 Bohemian one — a claim that is contrary to the king's wishes 
 and undutiful to God. The Teutonic nation — the letter con- 
 tinues — would never admit that at Vienna or Heidelberg the 
 Bohemians should hold superior rank and rule over the in- 
 habitants. It is written: As ye would that men should do to 
 you, do ye also to them likewise. 2 If, therefore, the Teutons 
 wish that the Bohemians in Germany should not oppose their 
 supremacy, let them in Bohemia act similarly towards the 
 Bohemians. Both canon and civil law teach that the in- 
 
 1 Matthew xx. 13-15; only the passages given above are quoted in the 
 letter. » Luke vi. * 1 . 
 
BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION 109 
 
 habitants of a kingdom should hold supremacy over the 
 foreigners who visit their country. The letter then contains 
 a detailed refutation of the German statement that the 
 regulations favourable to them at the university were of long 
 standing. Denying this, the letter declares that Charles IV., 
 according to his charter of foundation, had wished it mainly 
 to benefit his Bohemian subjects. If the Bohemians were at 
 first inferior to the Germans in learning, and were indeed as 
 slaves, they now have, with God's help, become stronger and 
 superior to the Germans in all arts and sciences. Let, there- 
 fore, those who had formerly been advantaged at the expense 
 of the true owners of the land give way to them, and let these 
 true owners rule the university for all centuries. 
 
 The authorship of this very important document has often 
 been attributed to Hus, but it is more probable that it was the 
 work of his disciple, Master John of Jesenice. The question 
 is of little importance, as the document clearly and circum- 
 stantially expresses the views of the whole national party. 
 Important as this state-paper was in any case, it became yet 
 more so in consequence of the events that followed almost 
 immediately. 
 
 After the publication of the decree of Kutna Hora all work 
 at the university stopped. It became impossible to elect a 
 rector, and constant conflicts between Bohemians and Ger- 
 mans occurred. The stern command of the king to elect a 
 rector remained unheeded by the Germans, and when the 
 royal decree referred to above was brought to their knowledge, 
 they immediately determined to carry out their threats. 
 Some of the most important German masters had already 
 entered into negotiations with German princes, such as the 
 Landgrave of Thuringia and the Margrave of Meissen, with 
 regard to their eventual emigration to Germany. These 
 negotiations, however, took up some time, and it was only on 
 May 16 that a large number of German magisters and students 
 left Prague for Leipzig. Including servants and menials, they 
 
no THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 fare stated to have numbered about 2000 men. They arrived 
 at Leipzig about the end of May, and there founded a new 
 university, of which, according to some records, the former 
 rector of the University of Prague, Henning of Baltenhagen, 
 according to others, John of Miinsterberg, became the first 
 rector. The former German students of Prague never forgave 
 the injury which they had, according to their views, suffered. 
 They became bitter enemies of Bohemia and of church-reform, 
 and firm adherents of the Roman cause. The Polish students 
 did not take part in the exodus, but remained in Prague with 
 their comrades of the kindred Bohemian nationality. 
 
 The departure of the German students from Prague has 
 given rise to a very bitter and prolonged controversy that 
 even now can scarcely be considered as terminated. Writers 
 such as Hofler and Helfert, whose works appeared at a time 
 when the Austrian government was under the influence of 
 extreme ultramontane and Teutonic tendencies, naturally 
 sympathised with the German masters and students who held 
 similar views four centuries previously. Baron Helfert, a 
 distinguished conservative statesman, wrote with dignity and 
 moderation. As much cannot be said of Professor Hofler, 
 who everywhere, and here in particular, overwhelms Hus 
 and the Hussites with an incoherent torrent of vituperation. 
 Hofler repeats the ancient accusation against Hus of having 
 endeavoured to expel the Germans from the university. 
 Even before Hus's views had been shown more clearly by the 
 remarks contained in one of his recently re-discovered works, 1 
 it was obvious to all impartial minds that this was untrue. 2 
 Of the modern Bohemian writers Palacky was by the Austrian 
 authorities only allowed towards the close of his life to express 
 his real views 3 with regard to Hus and the Hussites and the 
 
 1 The Supra IV. Sententiarum. See above. 
 
 2 The matter is stated very clearly by Mr. Krummel in his Geschichte der 
 Bohmischen Reformation, p. 207. Mr. Krummel, though a German, writes of 
 Hus entirely without animus. 
 
 J See my Lectures on the Historians of Bohemia, pp. 95-96. 
 
BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION in 
 
 exodus of the German students in particular. Very important, 
 in connection with the departure of the German students from 
 Prague, is the account of that event given by Professor Tomek 
 in his monumental history of the town of Prague {Dejepis 
 mesta Prahy), a work that has unfortunately never been 
 translated. 
 
 To judge the question impartially it is necessary to con- 
 sider the circumstances under which Charles IV. founded the 
 University of Prague. I have given a brief account of them in 
 Chapter III. of this work. There is no doubt that Charles 
 founded the university mainly for the benefit of his Bohemian 
 subjects, that they might, as he expressly stated, find at home 
 the instruction which they had formerly been obliged to 
 seek abroad. It is not probable that the question of race 
 and nationality immediately became prominent. In a com- 
 munity, all whose members habitually used the Latin language, 
 there is indeed no reason why this should have been the case. 
 There is also no doubt, and the state-paper of Venceslas 
 admits this, that the Bohemians were at the time of the foun- 
 dation of the university somewhat backward and inferior in 
 learning to the Germans. This inferiority has, however, been 
 exaggerated by many writers. Thus, as mentioned previously, 
 a large number of the earliest teachers at the university were 
 Bohemians who had received their education at foreign univer- 
 sities. Other facts also, such as the contemporary writings of 
 Thomas of Stitny, tend to prove that the ignorance of the 
 Bohemians at this period has been exaggerated. In any case, I 
 enough is known of the character of Charles, a believer in 
 the solidarity of the Slavic countries, " panslavism," as it 
 has often been foolishly called, 1 to state with full assurance 
 that he had no intention of founding a Teutonic university. 
 Charles no doubt believed that many students from the 
 
 1 I am quite aware of the fact that many German writers have denied 
 that Charles had such a tendency. These writers have not, I think, disproved 
 the assertions of Palacky. 
 
H2 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 neighbouring kingdom of Poland would visit the new univer- 
 sity. These visits, however, almost ceased after the founda- 
 tion of the University of Cracow. Other changes also occurred. 
 Universities were founded in Germany, at Vienna, Heidelberg, 
 and Erfurt. The number of German students at Prague de- 
 creased largely in consequence, but their influence continued 
 as great as ever. This was due to the system of voting by 
 " nations," which was not indeed a fundamental law of the 
 university, but had been gradually and tacitly accepted. 
 While the Germans became fewer in number, the Bohemian 
 students became more numerous every year. The university 
 had many benefices in its gift, a matter of the highest im- 
 portance to the many penniless students of theology who 
 frequented it. These benefices were of course bestowed in 
 accordance with the system of vote by nations that prevailed 
 in all matters concerning the university. The Bohemians 
 were, therefore, generally excluded from livings situated in their 
 own country and often endowed by their countrymen. It 
 has often been stated that the analogy between the University 
 of Prague and that of Paris established by the decree of Ven- 
 ceslas is false, as in Paris the four nations were the French, 
 Normans, Picards, and English. On further reflection it, 
 however, appears that the analogy is strikingly true. Though 
 under different names the French, Norman, and Picard nations 
 together represented the national indigenous element which 
 possessed three votes, while the foreigners, that is to say the 
 members of the English nation, which included Germans, 
 Bohemians, and others, had one. 
 
 German writers have also enlarged on the material loss 
 which the town of Prague suffered from the departure of 
 German students. Such reflections prove an entire miscon- 
 ception of the feelings of the citizens of Prague at this stormy 
 period. The native population of the city was inflamed by 
 the most ardent religious and national enthusiasm, and was 
 prepared to suffer and venture everything for a cause which it 
 
BEGINNING OF HUS'S OPPOSITION 113 
 
 believed to be sacred. The citizens indeed proved this a few 
 years later by their splendid defence of the capital when it was 
 attacked by an army of so-called crusaders, gathered together 
 from all parts of Europe. It must also be stated that the 
 continued residence of German students in Prague would at 
 this period, in any case, have proved an impossibility. Over- 
 bearing as German students have shown themselves in that 
 city, not only in the fifteenth century, their presence would 
 have led to constant conflicts. Even the German citizens 
 were somewhat later obliged to leave Prague, as the Praguers 
 not unnaturally feared the presence of enemies in their camp. 
 There was at that period of excitement no room within the 
 walls of Prague for upholders of German supremacy and of the 
 extreme claims of the Roman hierarchy. 
 
 As regards the university, it cannot be truthfully said that 
 it lost its importance by becoming a national one. Indeed it 
 became, as will be mentioned later, after the death of Hus, 
 for a time the supreme authority in Bohemia on matters of 
 religion, as most of the higher members of the Bohemian clergy 
 were opposed to the cause of church-reform. The downfall 
 of the University of Prague belongs to a far later period, that 
 which followed the battle of the Bila Hora (White Mountain). 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 
 
 As soon as the German students had left Prague, the Bohe- 
 mians, together with the Polish students who had remained 
 in the city, hastened to obey King Venceslas's command. 
 They elected a new rector, and though Hus had already held 
 that office a few years previously, their choice naturally fell 
 on him who had played so great a part in the recent 
 events. Hus was now at the height of his political position. 
 Venceslas was undoubtedly grateful to the man to whose 
 action it was principally due that the University of Prague 
 had discarded Pope Gregory. The queen and the Bohemian 
 nobles treated him with greater favour than ever. He was 
 the recognised leader of the university, and his popularity 
 among the citizens of Prague was very great. His position 
 with respect to the ecclesiastical authorities continued to be 
 an undefined one, and indeed became constantly more diffi- 
 cult. An archiepiscopal decree had prohibited Hus from 
 exercising ecclesiastical functions, but he continued to preach 
 in the Bethlehem chapel. The congregation was very 
 numerous, and the queen and many of the courtiers were 
 frequently present. Present also were some less desirable 
 visitors. Some of the parish priests of Prague, men who re- 
 garded Hus's preaching as a reproach to their own unedifying 
 lives and were therefore his bitterest enemies, were often 
 present at the sermons in the Bethlehem chapel. They thus 
 hoped to gather materials for new accusations against him. 
 We are told that the parish priest of St. Clements, one Protiva, 
 was in the habit of assisting at Hus's sermons and taking notes 
 which were to be used against the preacher. This was one 
 
 "4 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 115 
 
 day brought to his notice by one of his friends. Hus had that 
 day been preaching on the difference between the law of God 
 and the command of men, comparing them to corn and chaff. 
 What, he said, is corn but the law of God, what chaff but the 
 command of men ? Therefore will we cling firmly to the laws 
 of God, but spurn the unlawful commands of men. Hus, who 
 was here defending his conduct in continuing to preach con- 
 trary to the injunction of the archbishop, addressed Protiva, 
 who was sitting immediately under the pulpit, in these words: 
 " Note that down, cowled monk (Kukliku), and carry it to the 
 other side," pointing to the Mala Strana, the part of Prague 
 situated on the opposite bank of the river Vltava, where stood 
 the archbishop's palace. Hus well knew that fresh attacks 
 awaited him on the part of the parish priests, offended not only 
 by his denunciations of vice and dishonesty, but perhaps yet 
 more by the absolute purity of his life, which lent itself to 
 comparisons unfavourable to their own way of living. Hus, 
 however, was safe for the moment; not only because he 
 enjoyed the favour of the king, but also because Archbishop 
 Zbynek had, by continuing to support Pope Gregory, incurred 
 the displeasure of the cardinals assembled at Pisa. As the 
 archbishop and a large part of the Bohemian clergy continued 
 to oppose their king's wishes in this matter, troubles broke out 
 in Prague, and some priests known as supporters of Pope 
 Gregory were attacked by the people. Popular demonstra- 
 tions also took place before the palace of the archbishop. 
 Zbynek, irritated both against the king and the national 
 reform-party, placed the city of Prague and the surrounding 
 country under interdict. Declaring that he was no longer 
 safe at Prague, he left the city and retired to his castle of 
 Roudnice, where he was followed by a large number of priests. 
 The king was very indignant at the attitude of Zbynek, and 
 also at the fact that he had taken away with him to Roudnice 
 the treasures belonging to the tomb of St. Venceslas in the 
 cathedral of St. Vitus. The citizens were animated by feelings 
 
n6 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 similar to those of their sovereign. Numerous attacks were 
 made on the dwelling-places of the parish priests, many of 
 whom were obliged to fly, generally (the chronicler states) 
 followed by female companions. We have here again evidence 
 of the almost universal immorality of the parochial clergy of 
 Prague. 
 
 Alexander V. had meanwhile been elected pope (June 
 26, 1409) by the cardinals assembled at Pisa. Archbishop 
 Zbynek still hesitated for some time, but he finally altered his 
 views, and on September 2 recognised Alexander V. as legiti- 
 mate pope. Zbynek's position in Bohemia had become un- 
 tenable. It was hopeless for him to oppose at the same time 
 the will of his sovereign, the wishes of the Bohemian people, 
 and the decision of what had now become the dominant party 
 in the Roman Church. Zbynek did not gain in popular 
 esteem by this sudden transfer of his allegiance. Yet for the 
 moment this step, which it was believed would put a stop to 
 all internal strife in Bohemia, was received with great enthu- 
 siasm. Te Deum and mass were celebrated in all the churches 
 of the capital. On the following day (September 3) the 
 citizens were summoned by the big bell of the town hall to 
 assemble near it under the clock-tower three times in the 
 course of the day for the purpose of rejoicing. The whole 
 city was illuminated in the evening, and the burgomaster, 
 Peter Habartovic of the White Lion, with the town councillors, 
 preceded by trumpeters, rode through the streets amid general 
 rejoicings. 1 
 
 This change of attitude on the part of the archbishop 
 necessarily greatly affected the fate of Hus. From the 
 moment of their rupture the archbishop, undoubtedly a good 
 hater, had endeavoured to harm Hus in every manner. His 
 principal weapon was of course the statement that Hus was a 
 " Wycliffite " — now, particularly in Bohemia and Moravia, a 
 general term of opprobrium, which was applied to all whom it 
 
 1 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, vol. iii. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 117 
 
 was desired to accuse of heresy. The partisans of Rome, 
 little acquainted with the works of Wycliffe, which, indeed, 
 they were forbidden to read, had transformed the English 
 divine into a monster of the infernal regions. Thus the 
 Carthusian monk, Stephen of Dolein, tells us in his Medulla 
 Tritici that when some one known to Stephen was one night 
 reading Wycliffe 's Trialogus, it appeared to him as if Wycliffe 
 had rushed into the room, gnashing his teeth, reproaching him 
 for not believing his statements and striking him heavily, 
 while many spectators appeared to be present. He retired 
 before the enraged fiend, but fortunately found on the floor a 
 dungfork. He seized it, and with it struck his adversary so 
 severe a blow that he fell to the ground. He then battered 
 in his brains and killed him. The spectators praised God, and 
 the victor, somewhat distressed by the manslaughter he had 
 committed, was comforted by the spectators with the words: 
 Fear not ! the murder of this man involves no guilt. 1 Hus, it 
 is almost needless to repeat, always admitted that he had 
 deeply studied the works of Wycliffe and felt in sympathy 
 
 1 This strange tale should be given in Stephen's own Latin words. He 
 writes: " Andiant itaque Jesu Christi fideles quod referam. Factum est hoc 
 tempore ante triduum ut certissime didici quod, dum quidam vir catholicus 
 nomine et condicione haec scribenti cognitus scripta nefaria legeret, et 
 relegeret in suo (Wycliffe's) Trialogo maxime de venerabili Sacramento 
 Dominici corporis et etiam per insomnes plurimas noctes pluribus suspiriis 
 et lachrymis molestissime ferret, et Divinam et Ecclesiae Sanctae tantam 
 injuriam deplangeret: Accidit sibi ut intempeste matutinae Vigiliae agens 
 idipsum paululum reclinato capite discretionis intuitu quievisset. Et ecce 
 Magister ille diversorium illius fremens et iratus nimium ingrediens, non 
 solum verbis durioribus perstrepens, sed et verberibus horribilibus circumcirca 
 consedentibus plurimis, irruit in eum quae praediximus. Qui dum quasi 
 infirmior non haberet unde vel quo sibi resisteret, irato cedens et retro, et 
 retro se aspiciens, quasi a Domino sibi praeparatam vidit tridentem, jacentem 
 furcam id est instrumentum quo fimus de stabulis et domibus solet purgari 
 et ejici. Conversusque hanc arreptam illi in faciem valido ictu et in caput 
 suum impegit, et dejecto eo usque ad cerebri effusionem concussit, manus 
 confregit et penitus interfecit. Ad cujus spectaculum facto multorum 
 ridelium laetabundo concursu, dicentibus et acclamantibus singulis, Bene- 
 dictus Deus qui tradidit impium: dictum est victori singularis certaminis, 
 perterrite de homicidio, ne timueris; ex nece enim hujus hominis irregu- 
 laritatem non incurres." (Stephanus Dolanensis, Medulla Tritici, Pez 
 Thesaurus Anccdotorum, vol. iv. 2, pp. 246-247.) 
 
n8 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 with many of the views expressed in them, but he also always 
 disclaimed the complete and exclusive dependence on Wycliffe 
 which his detractors have attributed to him both during his 
 lifetime and in more recent days. 
 
 The attempts of Archbishop Zbynek to enforce severer 
 measures against Hus were not at first successful. As long as 
 the archbishop opposed the cardinals assembled at Pisa, and 
 the newly-elected pope Alexander V., he could expect no aid 
 from the church. The adherents of Hus even brought com- 
 plaints against Zbynek before Pope Alexander, who had 
 indeed summoned Zbynek before his tribunal when the news 
 of the submission of the Archbishop of Prague arrived. An 
 immediate change took place. As Dr. Flajshans writes, the 
 pope preferred as an ally the mighty archbishop to the humble 
 preacher. The archbishop's officials now attacked Hus not 
 only as a defamer of the clergy of Prague, but also as an 
 adherent of Wycliffe. Wycliffe, as noted above, was to serve 
 as an arm against Hus; he and his friends were to be stig- 
 matised as favourers of the heretical views of the English 
 reformer, as restless and dangerous men; thus would a stain 
 cling to all their attempts to reform the church — attempts 
 which the archbishop himself had formerly favoured and 
 forwarded. 1 
 
 Zbynek opened his new campaign by again referring to 
 the accusations against Hus which the parish priest of Prague 
 had already brought forward in the preceding year (1408). 
 He demanded an explanation of the conduct of Hus, and 
 stated that new complaints against him had been brought to 
 his knowledge. The very curious document 2 which contains 
 these accusations throws a strong light on the vast system of 
 espionage which surrounded Hus long before he had been 
 declared an enemy of the church. The parochial clergy of 
 Prague were bent on the ruin of Hus at a time when he was 
 
 1 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, vol. iii. p. 475. 
 2 Palacky, Documenta, pp. 164-169. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION n 9 
 
 still in high favour with the archbishop. No one who has 
 taken the trouble to read this document will hesitate to attri- 
 bute mainly to the jealousy and animosity of the parish priests 
 of Prague the persecution from which Hus suffered from the 
 beginning of his preaching to the moment when he perished at 
 the stake. The document printed by Palacky contains mar- 
 ginal notes by Hus answering some of the accusations. They 
 are very valuable, as the proceedings at the archbishop's court 
 at which Hus appeared were secret, and they, therefore, are the 
 only clue we have to Hus's defence. He himself no doubt 
 attached great importance to them, and it is probable that the 
 notes were written out by him from memory in 1414 before 
 his departure for Constance, where he, as he knew, would have 
 to face the same calumnies and accusations. Here only some 
 of the accusations can be mentioned. It was stated that Hus 
 had publicly declared that a priest being in a state of mortal 
 sin could not administer validly the venerated sacrament of 
 the body of Christ, nor dispense the other sacraments of the 
 church. The note of Hus ran thus: " All those who attended 
 my sermons well know that I preached the exact contrary, 
 saying that a bad priest administers the sacrament in the 
 same fashion as a good one, for it is the divine goodness that 
 acts by means of a good or of an evil priest." Shortly after- 
 wards followed another accusation, also referring to the then 
 much discussed question of the validity of the sacraments 
 when administered by unworthy priests. Hus's teaching on 
 this vexed matter was always in accordance with that of the 
 Roman Church. The informer Protiva, author of most of the 
 statements concerning Hus, declared that he had made many 
 of the remarks that were incriminated while preaching at St. 
 Michael's Church. Hus replied that at the time mentioned he 
 had not yet been ordained a priest, and had not yet begun 
 preaching. Another accusation was, that when on the occa- 
 sion of the drowning of John of Pomuk — an event that oc- 
 curred ten years previously — the possibility was discussed in 
 
120 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 the house of Venceslas the cupmaker, that Prague might be 
 placed under interdict, Hus had said that there was no reason 
 why the religious services in the whole kingdom should cease 
 because of one man. The skill of the informer appears here. 
 Hus had actually stated that neither because of the imprison- 
 ment of murder of himself or of any other man was it fitting 
 that the whole kingdom of Bohemia should be deprived of the 
 spiritual consolation of the sacraments. Hus was well aware 
 of the terror which the word interdict inspired in the minds of 
 mediaeval citizens. He later left Prague voluntarily, to save 
 the citizens from the consequences of the interdict. 
 
 It would be wearisome and indeed somewhat sickening to 
 record the various other accusations, all of which, like those 
 already mentioned, were founded on distorted remarks of 
 Hus. One of the last points is, however, of interest. Hus 
 was accused of having by his preaching caused discord between 
 the Bohemians and the Germans. In reply he declared that 
 he denied this, unless Bohemians and Germans had sought 
 offence from an unjust cause; then it might be true. 
 " Christ," he continued, " was the stumbling-block for those 
 who believed not. He (Christ) knows that I love a good 
 German better than a bad Bohemian, even if he be my own 
 brother." Besides the principal denunciator Protiva, other 
 priests had taken part in the drawing up of these accusations ; 
 among them was Michael, surnamed " de causis," whom Pro- 
 fessor Tomek describes as a consummate liar. The denun- 
 ciators were, however, successful. Hus was summoned to 
 appear before the court of the archbishop. Though the pro- 
 ceedings were secret, we may safely conclude that his defence 
 was in accordance with the notes, mentioned above, which he 
 had made in answer to his accusers. When examined, he no 
 doubt, as in the notes, appealed to his congregation with regard 
 to what he had said on the then ever-recurring question of 
 the validity of the sacraments when administered by a priest 
 who was in a state of mortal sin. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 121 
 
 However convincing and eloquent Hus's defence may have 
 been, it remained unnoticed as well as unanswered by the 
 archbishop. Zbynek sent to Pope Alexander V. an embassy 
 furnished, as the chroniclers write, with many rich presents. 
 The envoys stated that at Prague, in the whole kingdom of 
 Bohemia, the margraviate of Moravia, and other neighbouring 
 lands, the hearts of many had been corrupted by the heretical 
 " articles " of John Wycliffe and particularly by his teaching 
 with regard to the sacrament. As the shortest and safest 
 remedy for these evils, it was suggested that in these countries 
 preaching should be forbidden everywhere except in cathedral, 
 collegiate, and parish churches, and in those belonging to 
 monasteries. This proposal, aimed principally at Hus's 
 Bethlehem chapel, was made by Dr. George Bor, a canon of 
 the cathedral of Prague, and a strong opponent of church- 
 reform. Matters had proceeded so rapidly that, when the 
 embassy appeared before Pope Alexander V., that pontiff had, 
 in consequence of the complaint of Hus's adherents previously 
 mentioned, summoned the archbishop before his tribunal. 
 However, Zbynek's submission to Pope Alexander had already 
 produced a complete change. A bull issued on December 20 j 
 1409, annulled the former summons of the archbishop, and 
 instructed him to seek the advice of a council which was to 
 consist of four magisters of theology and two doctors of canon 
 law. After hearing the opinions of these men, the archbishop 
 was to forbid all heretical preaching in virtue of the apostolical 
 powers which the pope conferred on him for that purpose. 
 He was further instructed to forbid preaching in all churches 
 not belonging to the four categories mentioned above and to 
 order all those who might possess copies of Wycliffe's writings 
 to deliver them up that they might be removed " from the 
 .sight of the faithful." 
 
 In consequence of the bad condition of the roads during 
 the wintry weather, the papal bull only reached Prague about 
 March 9, 1410. It gave the archbishop all necessary power, 
 
 
 ^S 
 
122 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 and he did not hesitate to use it. In accordance with the 
 papal bull he appointed six councillors. They were all men 
 strongly opposed to Wycliffe's doctrinal teaching and to 
 church-reform — totally different matters, which it was the 
 archbishop's policy to consider identical. In direct contra- 
 diction to the wording of the papal bull, Hus immediately 
 appealed to the pope, stating that he (the pope) had been 
 wrongly informed, as it had not yet been proved that any one 
 in Bohemia had obstinately (i.e., in opposition to the ecclesias- 
 tical authorities) defended the teaching of Wycliffe and, as 
 Archbishop Zbynek had himself declared in 1408, that 
 Bohemia was free from heresy. The councillors, undoubtedly 
 formally in the right, ignored this appeal. It soon became 
 known in Prague that their decision would be in accordance 
 with the papal bull, that they would express themselves in 
 favour of the destruction of Wycliffe's writings and of the 
 suppression of preaching in the Bethlehem chapel. The 
 university was, however, still on the side of Hus. At a general 
 meeting on June 15, under the presidency of John Sindler, 
 who had succeeded Hus as rector, the members of the univer- 
 sity protested against the intention of burning Wycliffe's 
 writings and appealed to the king, begging him to forbid this 
 destruction, which would give great offence both to the king- 
 dom and to the university. 
 
 Zbynek, now entirely in accordance with the papal see, 
 was not to be deterred by protests of scholars whom as a true 
 mediaeval warrior he probably held in great contempt. He 
 took immediate action. On June 16, the day after the meet- 
 ing of the university, the customary summer convocation of 
 the clergy took place at St. Vitus's cathedral. The papal bull, 
 as well as the result of the deliberations of the theologians 
 consulted by Zbynek, were read to the assembly. The decree 
 of the councillors stated that eighteen of Wycliffe's works, 
 among them the Dialogus and Trialogus, were heretical, and 
 that all who possessed copies of these works were to bring 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 123 
 
 them to the archbishop's palace within six days. Under 
 penalty of the loss of ecclesiastical benefices and of other 
 punishment it was forbidden to maintain or teach the heresies 
 of Wycliffe, particularly those referring to the sacrament of 
 the altar. The archbishop, in agreement with his councillors, 
 further declared that he would in case of need appeal to the 
 secular authority of King Venceslas, and finally reiterated 
 the injunction not to preach in churches other than those 
 belonging to the categories that have already been mentioned. 
 This step was a fateful one — one of which Zbynek assuredly 
 did not see the importance. All hope of a pacific reformation 
 of the Bohemian Church on the lines indicated by Waldhauser 
 and Milic ended here. The views expressed by Milic and 
 Matthew of Janov differed but little from those of Hus, but the 
 latter, inflamed with holy enthusiasm for the welfare of man- 
 kind and imbued with the spirit of self-sacrifice, was not a man 
 prepared to meekly retract words which he believed to have 
 uttered in accordance with a divine command. He rejected 
 blind obedience when it appeared to him that the authority of 
 the church was used in an unlawful manner, prejudicial to 
 the true interest of the church itself. It was not indeed the 
 defence of Wycliffe's doctrines that appeared to Hus to have 
 the greatest importance. What in Wycliffe's works could be 
 authoritatively declared heretical he was ready to reject, 
 though there was much in the teaching of the English divine 
 that attracted him. But the prohibition of preaching in 
 chapels involved a cessation of all attempts to reform the 
 terribly demoralised clergy of Prague. In chapels only and 
 in the Bethlehem chapel in particular free speech could be said 
 to exist. The prohibition also put a term to all attempts on 
 the part of Hus and his disciples to reach the lowly population 
 of the city bv preaching to them in a popular manner and in a 
 language understood by all. Hus considered the prohibition 
 as an indefensible attack on the freedom of God's word and as 
 a deed opposed to Christ's own law. This appeared to him a 
 
124 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 matter in which it was his duty to obey God rather than 
 
 man 
 
 It was in accordance with these views that Hus preached 
 at the Bethlehem chapel on June 22. Popular excitement 
 
 was at its height and the crowd was immense. He declared 
 that the recently deceased pope (the news of the death of 
 Alexander V. had just reached Prague) had stated that there 
 were in Bohemia many heretics, that is to say, men who obsti- 
 nately opposed the teaching of Christ as contained in Scripture. 
 This untruthful statement had been believed by the pope on 
 the authority of Bohemian priests. Hus then referred to the 
 intention of burning Wycliffe's works. These works, he con- 
 tended, did not contain heretical statements only, but also 
 much that was good. He further declared that he would 
 appeal to the new pope against the archbishop's decree, and 
 asked his congregation whether they would stand by him. 
 All present cried: " We will stand by you." Hus concluded 
 by declaring that he would not cease to preach even should he 
 be driven from the land or perish in prison. He entreated the 
 faithful to be steadfast, for the time might come when it 
 would be necessary, according to the words of Moses, to gird 
 on the sword and defend the word of God. 
 
 The effect of this sermon was very great, as may be 
 imagined. The popular excitement did not escape the obser- 
 vation of King Venceslas, whose natural shrewdness made 
 him a good judge of the feelings of the people of Prague, which 
 he knew so well. The king strongly urged the archbishop to 
 delay all further steps, and at last obtained his promise to do 
 so, at least up to the time when the king's cousin, Margrave 
 Jodocus of Moravia, should arrive in Prague. Jodocus had 
 the reputation of being a man of moderate and enlightened 
 views, and it was known that Hus had sent him a copy of his 
 translation of Wycliffe's Trialogus. It was hoped that he 
 would act as mediator. Hus employed this brief delay for the 
 
 1 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, vol. iii. p. 481. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 125 
 
 purpose of preparing the appeal which he now sent to Pope 
 John XXIII. He protested against the bull of Alexander 
 based on untrue statements made from personal motives by 
 Bohemian ecclesiastics. He also protested against the in- 
 tended burning of Wycliffe's works, many of which were 
 treatises on philosophy, logic, and other matters not connected 
 with theology. He also claimed for the university the right of 
 reading Wycliffe's other works, as they had, according to the 
 regulations, to read also the works of Aristotle, Averroes, and 
 other " heathens whose works teemed with heresies." Almost 
 at the same moment the archbishop addressed to the " diavolo 
 cardinale," now Pope John XXIII., a letter in which he de- 
 nounced Hus as the originator of all troubles in Bohemia and 
 as a defender of Wycliffe's. Zbynek then alluded to the 
 sermon of Hus at the Bethlehem chapel on June 22, and begged 
 the pope to order him to appear for judgment before the papal 
 court. 
 
 Meanwhile the archbishop, as Margrave Jodocus did not 
 arrive, determined to act without further delay. On July 16 
 he assembled the prelates and principal ecclesiastical digni- 
 taries in the court of his palace, which was barricaded and 
 guarded by a considerable armed force. A stake was erected 
 in the middle of the court, and Wycliffe's books were placed 
 on it. The archbishop then himself lighted the pile, and all 
 present sang the Te Deum while the books were burning. 
 
 King Venceslas was on that day absent from Prague; he 
 would otherwise undoubtedly have opposed by force the work 
 of the archbishop. Zbynek himself appears to have felt that 
 he had taken on himself a grave responsibility. Not feeling 
 safe in Prague, he left the city immediately after the burning 
 of the books, and retired to his castle of Roudnice. He there 
 pronounced the sentence of excommunication against Hus. 
 The fears of Zbynek were not altogether unfounded. There 
 had sprung up among the people of Prague an intense hatred 
 of the archbishop and the clergy — particularly the parish 
 
i 2 6 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 priests, whose evil life caused much unhappiness among the 
 citizens. The situation at Prague at this moment is quaintly 
 and Fstrikingly described by a contemporary chronicler. 1 
 After stating that in the year 1410 the books of Master John 
 Wycliffe the Englishman were burnt in the courtyard of the 
 archbishop's palace, the author writes: " Then a great storm 
 arose and much strife between the king's courtiers and the 
 canons and priests. Songs against the archbishop were sung 
 everywhere in Prague. There was at that time much discord 
 between TtheTcanons and Master John of Husinec. Some 
 said that many other books besides those of Wycliffe had 
 been burnt, and thus the people became enraged. Some 
 took the part of the canons and some that of Hus. Hence- 
 forth there was great discord among the people. The choir 
 boys who lived on the castle (the Hradcany) waylaid all passers- 
 by who adhered to Hus, and when they saw one they seized 
 him, dragged him into the common room, stripped him, and 
 whipped him unmercifully with birchrods." This passage is 
 curious also as showing that it was not only by the partisans 
 of Hus that excesses were committed — as has been frequently 
 stated. The latter were, however, generally stronger, and 
 they prevented in most churches the publication of the sen- 
 tence excommunicating Hus. As the chronicle quoted above 
 relates, songs on the events of the day, mostly abusive of the 
 archbishop, whose great ignorance was greatly exaggerated, 
 were sung everywhere. One of these songs seems to have been 
 very popular and obtained great popularity. It alluded to 
 Zbynek's want of learning and ran thus : 
 
 " Zbynek, bishop A. B. C. 
 Burnt the books, but ne'er knew he 
 What was in them written." * 
 
 1 Start Letopisove cesti (Ancient Bohemian Chroniclers), edited by Palacky, 
 hi. pp. 12-13. 
 
 * I quote this good though not literal translation from the late Rev. 
 A. H. Wratislaw's John Hus, p. 141. The words are in the Bohemian 
 original, " Zbynek, biskup Abeceda spalil knihy a neveda co jest v nich 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 127 
 
 Venceslas did his best to maintain order in his capital. 
 He severely prohibited rioting in the streets and the singing of 
 abusive songs. He also, with great fairness, requested the 
 archbishop to indemnify those whose books had been seized 
 and burnt. As a protest against the destruction of the writ- 
 ings of Wycliffe, Hus and his adherents, according to the 
 academic customs of the time, held a great disputation in the 
 large hall of the Carolinum college. The disputation, in which 
 various speakers were to defend works of Wycliffe, began on 
 July 27. Hus himself on that day spoke in defence of 
 Wycliffe's book, De Trinitate. Hus's treatise, De Libris 
 Haereticorum Legendis, written about this time, covers almost 
 exactly the same ground, and we find in it the contents of 
 Hus's speech. Hus in it strongly blamed the burning of 
 Wycliffe's writings. These works at any rate contained much 
 that was good, and their destruction had brought discord and 
 trouble into the country. Even should these books have 
 contained heretical opinions, they should not have been burnt. 
 Otherwise might they have burnt also the work of Peter Lom- 
 bard — to whom, as we know, Hus owed so much — or those of 
 Aristotle. If, he continued, the doctors said that none should 
 inquire but all should submit — a theory that has a strangely 
 modern aspect — then they were worse than Jews and Pharisees. 
 Christ conversed with the heretical Sadducees. Hus ended by 
 declaring that he would not submit to the prohibition of 
 preaching and that he would undauntedly face all dangers 
 which might result from such a course. On the following days, ' 
 
 napsano." Professor Hofler, who had a very slight acquaintance with the 
 Bohemian language, quoted the song from Cochlaeus's Latin history of the 
 Hussite wars, where some distorted and meaningless words are supposed to 
 render the Bohemian wording. These words Hofler thus translated into 
 German: " Der Saumagen hat das Schone verbrannt " — i.e., " The pig burnt 
 beautiful things." These words have not even the remotest resemblance to 
 the meaning of the song, and Hofler merely intended to impute coarse lan- 
 guage to the Bohemians. The matter is fully noticed by Dr. Nedoma in the 
 Journal of the Bohemian Learned Society (Vestnik spolecnosti nauk), February 
 23, 1891. I allude to the matter here, as even recent English writers do 
 not appear to have known how untrustworthy Hofler often was. 
 
128 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 up to the 31st, the disputations continued, and several of 
 Hus's principal adherents spoke in defence of various writings 
 of Wycliffe. 
 
 Preaching at the Bethlehem chapel continued meanwhile. 
 As the king had been informed that Hus had appealed to the 
 pope, he ignored the excommunication pronounced by the 
 archbishop and continued to extend his protection to Hus. 
 When shortly afterwards Antony de Monte Catino arrived at 
 Prague to announce officially the accession to the papal throne 
 of Pope John XXIII. , King Venceslas and Queen Sophia 
 availed themselves of this occasion to enter into communica- 
 tion with the pope concerning the state of affairs in Bohemia. 
 King Venceslas addressed one and Queen Sophia two letters 
 to the pope, and each of the royal consorts wrote also to the 
 college of the cardinals. 1 Queen Sophia undoubtedly had the 
 question of the freedom of preaching very much at heart. In 
 her first letter to the pope she strongly protested against the 
 decree " which, contrary to the precepts of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, forbids the preaching of the word of God, except in 
 monasteries and parish churches," and begged that " the 
 Bethlehem chapel, which we consider most useful to us and 
 the inhabitants of our kingdom for hearing the word of God, 
 may not be deprived of its privilege." In her letter to the 
 cardinals the queen again returns to the same subject, and 
 declares that the decree limiting preaching to monasteries and 
 parish churches, published under the influence of those who 
 were opposed to evangelical teaching, was contrary to Scrip- 
 ture, as it was well known " that the word of God must not be 
 fettered, but should be preached in hamlets, streets, houses, 
 and indeed everywhere where the necessity arises." The in- 
 fluence of Hus is very evident in the letter mentioned last, 
 and it gives a clue to the fact that shortly after the death of 
 Hus the council of Constance decided to accuse Queen Sophia 
 
 'The five letters, all dated September 12 or 16, 1410, are printed by 
 Palacky, Documenta, pp. 409-413. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 129 
 
 of heresy. 1 Venceslas on this occasion certainly acted in 
 accordance with the feelings of the Bohemian people, if we 
 except the baser part of the clergy, who believed that free 
 preaching was favourable to church-reform — the thing which 
 from selfish motives they detested more than all others. 
 Thus Lord Lacek of Kravar, a high court official, and Nicholas 
 of Potstyn, Lord of Zampach, wrote to Pope John protesting 
 strongly against all attempts to limit the liberty of preaching. 
 The town councils of the cities of Prague also added their 
 protest. The prohibition of preaching in the Bethlehem 
 chapel, they wrote, and the burning of Wycliffe's writings had 
 caused hatred, quarrels, incendiarism, and murder among the 
 citizens, who had with constant faith professed entirely the 
 Catholic creed. The citizens of the old town did not omit to 
 mention that they had vested interests in the matter, as the 
 appointment of one of the two preachers in the Bethlehem 
 chapel was in the gift of their town council. 2 
 
 It is difficult to imagine the impression which these letters 
 may have produced on Baldassare Cossa. He probably 
 thought that the men of the north took matters of slight im- 
 portance very seriously. Though no one who knows the 
 absolute recklessness with which the theologians of the period 
 of the schism levelled even the most monstrous accusations 
 against their opponents will believe all that was said against 
 the diavolo cardincde at Constance, yet it is not unfair to 
 believe that he held no very firm opinions on matters of 
 religion. The letters from Bohemia would, however, in any 
 case have remained resultless. Before receiving them the 
 pope, who was then residing at Bologna, had already entrusted 
 
 1 Referring to these letters of Queen Sophia and others that will be 
 mentioned later, Baron Helfert, a firm adherent of the Roman Church in his 
 " Hus und Hieronymus," violently attacks Queen Sophia and the interference 
 of women in politics generally. I have given a short account of this diatribe 
 in my Bohemia, a Historical Sketch, p. 129, n. Baron Helfert is undoubtedly- 
 right in stating that Hussitism owed much to women. 
 
 2 The letters of the nobles and citizens are printed by Palacky, Dociimenta 
 pp. 4I3-4I5- 
 
 I 
 
i 3 o THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 all the documents concerning the Bohemian controversy to 
 Cardinal Odone Colonna (afterwards Pope Martin V.) and 
 empowered him to decide the question. The cardinal, show- 
 ing evidence here already of that hatred of Bohemia which 
 was to be a prominent feature in his later life, immediately 
 gave his decision in a sense entirely favourable to Archbishop 
 Zbynek. A bull was forwarded to the archbishop, which in 
 its purport was identical with that formerly sent by Pope 
 Alexander. According to the wishes of the archbishop, Hus 
 was summoned to appear immediately before the papal 
 tribunal. 
 
 The Bohemian court was, not unnaturally, very indignant. 
 Both the king and the queen again addressed letters of remon- 
 strance to the pope and to the college of cardinals. 1 Though 
 the king writes here in a very manly manner, and his letters 
 convey a favourable impression, which is always the case 
 when he writes under the influence of Queen Sophia, yet the 
 queen's letters are more to the purpose, and, it may be added, 
 more peremptory. The queen, being a friend of Hus, grasped 
 more clearly than her husband what was the moral value of 
 the man for whom she was interceding, and what that of 
 Baldassare Cossa and his cardinals. In her letter to John 
 XXIII. the queen complained of the legal proceedings at the 
 papal courts which had caused disgust in the kingdom, of the 
 incessant excommunications, of the prohibition of the preach- 
 ing of the word of God. She specially interceded for the 
 Bethlehem chapel, " in which she had frequently heard God's 
 word," and begged that " John Hus, her faithful, devoted, 
 beloved chaplain might, because of his many enemies, be re- 
 lieved from the obligation of appearing in person before the 
 pope." In her letter to the college of cardinals the queen 
 begged the college " for the honour of God, for the salvation 
 and quiet of the people, and for her own pleasure " to main- 
 tain in the possession of the Bethlehem chapel " her devoted 
 
 1 The four letters are printed by Palacky, Documenta, pp. 422-425. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 131 
 
 and beloved chaplain, John Hus," and to relieve him from the 
 obligation of appearing at the papal court. Otherwise — here 
 the tone of the queen became somewhat menacing — her con- 
 sort, King Venceslas, in union with herself and the barons of 
 the kingdom, would take himself the necessary steps that all 
 disturbances caused by foreign intervention should cease. 
 
 The position of Hus became in consequence of the papal 
 summons a very difficult one. The dissuasion of his kind 
 friends and adherents would not certainly have prevented 
 him from proceeding to Italy had he believed it to be his duty 
 to do so. Hus, however, firmly believed that no advantage 
 would be obtained by the Bohemian Church and the party of' ; 
 church-reform should he appear before John XXIII. Ac- 
 quainted with the character of that pontiff, he well knew what 
 opinion he would form of one who had spoken so strongly 
 against the vices and the evil life of the priests of Prague. He 
 would, therefore, have to encounter the perils of the journey — 
 he would have to pass through the territory of the Bishop of 
 Passau, one of the most determined enemies of church-reform 
 — without any probability of a satisfactory result. He would 
 have to spend the money with which others were ready to 
 supply him for the journey, but which, as a conscientious man, 
 he believed should rather be given to the poor. He would 
 have for a time to desert his congregation at Bethlehem. 
 Jerome of Prague was then in the city, and Hus, though he 
 showed him the greatest kindness, well knew what dangers 
 the levity and thoughtlessness of Jerome might cause were he 
 left uncontrolled. 1 
 
 1 Hus has himself very clearly expressed the objections to his journey to 
 Italy. He writes: " Quis ergo color vel que ratio obedientiae ut persona 
 citata per CCC milliaria, Papae incognita ab inimicis delata, tarn anxie 
 vadat per inimicos judices et testes consumat bona pauperum sumptuose vel 
 non habeus sumptus vadat misere in siti et esurie et quis fructus compari- 
 tionis? Certe laboris a Deo injuncti negligentia, quoad propriam salutem et 
 aliorum. Et nee ibi docebitur bene credere, sed litigare, quod non licet servo 
 Dei. Ibi spoliabitur in consistoriis, in moribus Sanctis refrigejcit, ad im- 
 patientiam per oppressionem incitabitur et si non habuerit dare, condemna- 
 bitur, etiam habens justitiam. Et quod gravius est, compelletur Papain ut 
 Deum flexis genibus adorare." (De Ecclesia, capitulum xxi.) 
 
i 3 2 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Hus therefore decided not to travel to Italy, but through 
 the advice of his friends at the court of King Venceslas, and 
 perhaps in accordance with the wise councils of Queen Sophia, 
 he determined on sending representatives to the court of Pope 
 John XXIII. He chose for this purpose his friend Master 
 John of Jesenice, doctor of theology, who, according to some 
 accounts, was at that moment at Bologna. Two younger 
 theologians were to act as his assistants. Jesenice was at 
 first able to report good news. On the suggestion of Arch- 
 bishop Zbynek, who had also sent envoys to Bologna, John 
 XXIII. had requested the University of Bologna to deliberate 
 on the question whether the burning of Wycliffe's works had 
 been justified. At a meeting of the magisters, at which re- 
 presentatives of the universities of Paris and Oxford were 
 also present, it was decided almost unanimously that the burn- 
 ing was not justifiable. It was also declared that Wycliffe's 
 writings on logic, philosophy, morals, and theology contained 
 much that was true, good, and useful. This decision was un- 
 doubtedly a victory of Hus in his contest with the archbishop. 
 Jesenice, seeing it in that light, caused the public notary to 
 draw up an official document which, on the authority of the 
 dominican Thomas of Udine, dean of the theological faculty, 
 who had presided at the meeting, stated the decisions of the 
 assembly as they are recorded above. A copy of this docu- 
 ment x was forwarded to Prague. 
 
 Hus and his friends probably overrated the importance of 
 this decision. Pope John XXIII. , as previously mentioned, 
 had entrusted to Cardinal Colonna the entire control of the 
 investigations referring to the dissension between the arch- 
 \ bishop and Hus. The cardinal lost no time in coming to a 
 decision in a matter in which he believed the authority and 
 particularly the worldly power of the church to be at stake. 
 The rich gifts brought by the envoys of the archbishop no 
 doubt confirmed his views. When, in February 141 1, the term 
 
 1 Printed by Palacky, Documenta, pp. 426-428. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 133 
 
 fixed for the appearance of Hus at the papal court in Bologna 
 had elapsed, Cardinal Colonna, with the authorisation of the 
 pope, pronounced the penalty of excommunication agaiust 
 Hus because of his disobedience. The archbishop was im- 
 mediately informed of this decision, and he gave the order that 
 the papal decree should immediately be made known in all the 
 parish churches of Prague. This was carried out on March 15 
 in all the parish churches except in that of St. Nicholas in the 
 old town, where Master Stephen of Prachatice, an intimate 
 friend of Hus, was parish priest, and in that of St. Benedict. 
 
 The events in Bohemia had meanwhile begun to attract 
 greater attention in Europe than had been the case at first. 
 It has been mentioned that representatives of the universities 
 of Oxford and Paris had taken part in the deliberations at 
 Bologna. Latin then being the universal language of inter- 
 course between scholars of all countries, information as to 
 matters of interest to the learned found their way from one 
 country to another very rapidly. Great as is the distance 
 between England and Bohemia, it was in England that the 
 movement in favour of church-reform attracted more atten- ,' 
 tion than in countries nearer to Bohemia. The reason is not 
 far to seek. The movement which Hus had initiated in 
 Bohemia pursued in many respects objects similar to those 
 for which Wycliffe had formerly contended in England. In 
 both countries the evils caused by the demoralisation of the 
 clergy, its avarice and greed for worldly power, were equally 
 obvious. In England as in Bohemia the more serious men 
 wished the churches of their countries to be more independent 
 of Rome, and desired, if necessary by force, to oblige the rich 
 and luxurious clergy to lead a simpler life — one more similar 
 to that of the founder of Christianity. It has been stated 
 previously that attempts have often been made to exaggerate 
 the dependence of Bohemia on the earlier movement in Eng- 
 land. The strong and enthusiastic efforts of Milic and his 
 successors to reform the Bohemian Church suffice to prove 
 
134 THE LIFE 0F J° HN HUS 
 
 that the Bohemian movement was largely an indigenous one. 
 It may here be mentioned that one of the earliest writers who 
 attempted to prove the dependence of the Bohemian reform 
 movement was the notoriously mendacious historian Hajek 
 of Libocan. He stated that two otherwise unknown English- 
 men, " Jacob the bachelor " and " Conrad of Kandelburgk " 
 (Canterbury), first spread anti-Roman views in Bohemia, 1 
 " By greatly exaggerating the English influence on the foun- 
 dation of Hussitism and stigmatising it as a foreign movement, 
 Hajek, as he well knew, greatly injured the Hussites; for the 
 intense national feeling that has always animated the 
 Bohemians has produced among them an often exaggerated 
 distrust of foreign interference." 2 Though the influence of 
 England on Bohemia has been exaggerated, it is certain that 
 the Bohemian Church in its struggle against Rome found 
 sympathy in England at an early period. On September io, 
 141 o, Hus received a letter from an English adherent of 
 Wycliffe that caused great commotion among the little com- 
 munity of Bethlehem. It was long difficult to ascertain the 
 name of the writer of this letter which in different MSS. 
 appears as Richard Fitz, Richardus Vitze, and Richard Wiche- 
 witze. It has, however, now been ascertained that the writer 
 was Richard Wiche, a Lollard, mentioned by Foxe, 3 who was 
 executed in 1439, and whose memory became so popular that 
 a decree prohibiting pilgrimages to the spot where he had been 
 executed was published. Richard Wiche in his letter 4 states 
 that he greatly rejoiced at the news that they (the Bohemians) 
 also walked in the path of truth. He had heard that they also 
 had suffered tribulations, but — Wiche writes — " Let us seek 
 comfort in our Lord God and His immense kindness, believing 
 firmly that it will not allow us, God's workers, to be deprived 
 
 1 See my History of Bohemian Literature, pp. 304-309. 
 
 2 Ibid. p. 409. 
 
 3 The Acts and Monuments of John Fox, vol. iii. p. 702 (edition of 1837). 
 * Printed by Hofier, Geschichtschreiber der Hussitischen Bewegung in 
 
 Bohmen, vol. ii. p. 210. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 135 
 
 of goodness if we, as it is our duty, love God with our whole 
 hearts; for adversity would not prevail among us, did not 
 iniquity rule. Therefore, let no tribulation or suffering for 
 Christ's sake cast us down, for we know for certain that whom 
 the Lord God deigns to receive as His sons, those He chastises." 
 Later Wiche writes, addressing Hus: ' You, Hus, beloved 
 brother in Christ, are indeed unknown to me by face, but not 
 by faith and love, for the whole surface of the earth would not 
 suffice to separate those whom the love of Christ effectually 
 joins. Take comfort in the grace that has been given to thee. 
 Preach the truth by word and example and recall whom thou 
 canst to the path of truth, for it is not because of vain censures 
 and antichristian fulminations that the evangelical truth 
 should be concealed. ..." Wiche's letter gives evidence of 
 his surprising knowledge of the state of affairs in Bohemia 
 and of his acquaintance with the names of the men who were 
 playing a prominent part in the Bohemian reform movement. 
 Thus he sends at the end of his letter greetings to all faithful 
 lovers of God's law and particularly to Hus's " helper in 
 evangelical work, Jacobellus." This refers to the famed 
 Master Jacob, or Jacobellus of Stribro (in German, Mies), who 
 played a great part in the Hussite movement during the last 
 years of the life of Hus and after his death. 
 
 A letter from so distant a country as England naturally 
 was received with great enthusiasm by the congregation of 
 Bethlehem. It cannot be better described than in the words 
 of Hus contained in the letter which he wrote in answer to 
 that of Wiche. 1 " Your letter," he wrote, " which descended 
 on us as from the Father of Light, strongly inflamed the minds 
 of the brethren in Christ; for it contains so much sweetness, 
 power, strength, and consolation that if by Antichrist all other 
 writings were swept away into a chasm, it would for the 
 faithful in Christ be sufficient to obtain salvation. While 
 revolving in my mind the pith of your letter and its vigour I 
 
 1 Palacky, Documenta, pp. 12-14. The letter is also printed by Hofler. 
 
136 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 said before many men while preaching — and I think about 
 ten thousand people must have been present — ' Behold, 
 dearest brethren, what interest the faithful preachers of Christ 
 in foreign parts take in your salvation, they who are ready to 
 pour out their hearts, if they can but maintain you in the law 
 of the Lord Christ,' and I added: ' Behold our dearest brother 
 Richard, the fellow-labourer of Master John Wycliffe in his 
 evangelical work, has written to you so comforting a letter 
 that, if I had no other Scripture, I should risk my life for this 
 message of Christ, and would do so with His help.' The 
 faithful in Christ were so inflamed by your message that they 
 begged me to translate it for them into the language of our 
 country." In a later part of the letter Hus begs Wiche to 
 pray for him, and rejoices that through his (Wiche's) efforts 
 Bohemia had already received so much good from blessed 
 (benedicta) England. Interesting though Hus's letter is, it is 
 too long to quote in its entirety, but I may notice a passage in 
 which he refers to the great strength which the movement for 
 church-reform had already acquired in Bohemia. He writes: 
 " Know, dearest brother, that our people will hear nothing 
 but Holy Scripture, particularly the evangels and epistles, and 
 whenever in a city or town, cottage or castle, a preacher of 
 holy truth appears, the people flock together, despising the 
 evilly-disposed clergy." It is evident that these ten thousand 
 people mentioned by Hus could not find room in the Bethle- 
 hem chapel; no doubt many, as had formerly been the case 
 during the sermons of Milic, assembled near the doors of the 
 church, trying as far as possible to catch the preacher's words. 
 On the next occasion on which Hus came into contact with 
 Englishmen, they met as adversaries, not as allies. But 
 before dealing with this incident, I must return to the litiga- 
 tion between Hus and the archbishop, which was still pursuing 
 its weary course. The reasons are not far to seek. Pope 
 John XXIII. , to whose mind Hus's austere views must have 
 appeared even more objectionable than absurd, naturally 
 

HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 137 
 
 wished at almost any price to silence a preacher of unwelcome 
 truths. He was not, however, an entirely free agent. 
 Though the luxurious and free-living clergy of Bohemia in- 
 stigated him by word and gift to accelerate the procedure 
 against the Bohemian reformer, the cunning diavolo car- 
 dinale knew that he couldn't risk to offend King Venceslas. 
 The election of Pope Alexander V. had not, as had been 
 thought, ended the schism. Benedict XIII. and Gregory XII. 
 still had many adherents, and among those of the last-named 
 pontiff still remained Sigismund, King of the Romans and 
 King of Hungary, brother of King Venceslas and, as the 
 latter was childless, heir to the Bohemian throne. In 1410 
 Venceslas had by the death of the Count Palatine Rupert 
 been freed from a rival claimant to the crown of Germany, 
 but his own treacherous younger brother Sigismund had been 
 chosen as king by some of the German electors. Others had 
 chosen Jodocus of Moravia, a cousin of Venceslas, as their 
 ruler. It appears probable that after the death of Rupert 
 Venceslas would again have been universally recognised as 
 King of the Romans had it not been that the protection which 
 he afforded to Hus was generally known. The ecclesiastical 
 electors thus became his natural enemies. It appeared 
 possible for a moment that he would play the part which a 
 century later the Elector of Saxony played with regard to 1 
 Luther. The weaknesses and follies of Venceslas, which even/ 
 those who know how greatly the king has been maligned must] 
 regretfully admit, prevented him from ever playing such a part.! 
 The Christian world was thus in the strange position of 
 having at the same time three popes and three Kings of the 
 Romans. Of these Sigismund and the former diavolo car- 
 dinal, now Pope John XXIII., were by far the most important, 
 and it must be admitted that never have two men of baser 
 character claimed to rule over the Christian world. 1 While 
 
 1 Dr. Flajshans (Mistr Jan Hus) hardly exaggerates when he writes, 
 " Sigismund was cruel and sensual, perjured and frivolous, rapacious and 
 
138 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 thus the political situation obliged John XXIII. to work 
 cautiously at the undoing of Hus, the latter also considered it 
 his duty to continue the negotiations with the Holy See. He 
 had begun these negotiations on the advice of the King and 
 Queen of Bohemia, and considering himself, as he did to the 
 end of his life, a true member of the Catholic Church, he believed 
 that he had the right of placing his views before the papal 
 court. 
 
 King Venceslas was greatly irritated because Archbishop 
 Zbynek had by order of the pope caused the decree pronounc- 
 ing the ban against Hus to be read publicly in the churches of 
 Prague. The king's principle during the protracted disputes 
 had been to maintain that the Bohemian Church should settle 
 its own differences within the country, and that the interven- 
 tion of foreigners should be eliminated as far as possible. To 
 this principle Venceslas adhered with a tenacity that was 
 rare with him. He had shortly after the burning of Wy cliff e's 
 works requested the archbishop to refund the value of these 
 books to those who had been deprived of them. Archbishop 
 Zbynek had tacitly ignored the royal command, and this in- 
 curred the wrath of the ever-irritable king. Venceslas now 
 decreed that certain estates and houses in Prague belonging 
 to the archbishop and other prelates who had taken part in 
 the burning of Wycliffe's books should be confiscated, and 
 their revenue employed to indemnify those who had been 
 deprived of their books. The carrying out of this order was 
 entrusted to the magistrates of the towns of Prague. Recent 
 changes in the constitution of these municipalities had given 
 the national party a majority in them, and the king's orders 
 were immediately obeyed. The archbishop, who had again 
 retired to his castle of Roudnice on May 2, 141 1, sent a letter 
 
 dissolute, fierce and pusillanimous, a bye-word and object of horror to the 
 Bohemians, hated and despised by the Germans, a warning to all rulers. 
 His companion John XXIII., lewd and murderous, a simonist and an infidel, 
 was a true comrade for Sigismund in all evil deeds, a warning lesson to all 
 future popes." 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 
 
 T39 
 
 to the city magistrates, protesting strongly against these 
 confiscations, and stating that the citizens had forcibly 
 possessed themselves of church property. A term of three 
 days was given them within which they were to restore the 
 confiscated property to the church. As no notice was taken 
 of this letter the archbishop pronounced the sentence of ex- 
 communication on all the magistrates and town-officials — 
 fifty persons in all — who had taken part in the execution of 
 the royal order. As all these persons belonged to the national 
 or reform party, no notice was taken of the archbishop's 
 decree. Zbynek then had recourse to an extreme step which 
 he had already taken once two years before. He proclaimed 
 the interdict over the town of Prague and its immediate 
 neighbourhood. As two years previously, this measure failed 
 to cause the panic which in mediaeval times was generally 
 connected with the interdict; perhaps its short duration 
 prevented its producing the usual effect. Hus and the other 
 priests favourable to church-reform continued to hold religious 
 services and to preach as usual. The disputations at the 
 university proceeded in the usual manner. It is a proof of 
 the slight importance which was attached to the interdict on 
 this occasion that we find Hus and his friends occupied in 
 drawing up the regulations for a college of students that was 
 to be founded in connection with the Bethlehem chapel. A 
 college for students had in 1397 been founded by Queen 
 Hedwiga of Poland, but of the curators whom she had then 
 appointed only Kriz — known to us as the founder of the 
 Bethlehem chapel — was then alive. He also was of a very 
 advanced age and he did not live to hear of the bitter, but 
 glorious death of his old friend Hus. The latter advised Kriz 
 to take the necessary steps to render possible the continuation 
 of this richly endowed foundation, which was then housed in 
 the " Jerusalem " buildings sanctified by the memory of 
 Milic. It was arranged that eleven students of theology, 
 belonging to the Bohemian nationality, should there receive 
 
i 4 o THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 a free education. The college naturally became a centre for 
 the friends of church-reform, and it was understood that the 
 preachers of the Bethlehem chapel should be chosen from its 
 members. Venceslas Kriz, son of the founder of Bethlehem, 
 appears to have nominated the first scholars of the reorganised 
 college. We find among them the name of Peter of Mlade- 
 novic, the disciple and biographer of Hus, whose account of 
 the last sufferings and death of his master has been translated 
 into many languages and read by countless people to whom 
 the name of Mladenovic is unknown. 
 
 While the more pious and enthusiastic priests drew closer 
 . to Hus and closer to each other, some more worldly members 
 ■ of the clergy of Prague began to desert Hus — often to become 
 afterwards his most venomous enemies. Some of these men 
 had during the disputations at the university gladly taken 
 part in the defence of Wycliffe's teaching, and had even up- 
 held some opinions that Hus, never an unconditional adherent 
 of Wycliffe, had not sanctioned. These men were, however, 
 strongly opposed to all innovations that might limit the liberty, 
 or rather licence, of the clergy of Prague. Besides the spy 
 Protiva, always an opponent of Hus, Stanislas of Znoymo and 
 Stephen Palec, formerly a friend of the Bohemian reformer, 
 now became his bitter enemies. Palec stated in a letter * that 
 the writings of Wycliffe were indeed delightful, but that he 
 very much doubted whether any of the Bohemian priests 
 would suffer death for the truth. He preferred, he said, a 
 faith which would allow him to go safely anywhere. This 
 mean letter, as Mr. Wratislaw rightly calls it, was no doubt 
 the result of the great physical fear which Palec had felt when 
 detained at Bologna. This does not, however, excuse the 
 animosity and rancour with which he pursued those whose 
 lofty thoughts raised them to a height to which his mean 
 and cowardly nature could not attain. All personal relations 
 between Hus and Palec ceased at this period, and Hus ex- 
 
 1 Printed in the late Rev. A. H. Wratislaw's John Hus, p. 181. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 141 
 
 pressed his opinion in the often-quoted words: Palec is my 
 friend ; truth is my friend ; both being friends, it is saintly to 
 give preference to truth. 
 
 Archbishop Zbynek was far too shrewd a man to think 
 that supporters such as Protiva, Palec, and Michael, sur- 
 named de causis, a German priest of evil repute, notorious as 
 an enemy of Hus, would avail him in his struggle with Ven- 
 ceslas. He knew that he had in the king a dangerous enemy. 
 Venceslas was deeply impressed by the dangerously great 
 power of the clergy, in whose hands a third part of the soil 
 of Bohemia then was. Zbynek therefore decided to make 
 his peace with the king. Though there is hardly sufficient 
 evidence to allow a positive affirmation, it is at least very 
 probable that the astute diavolo cardinale advised Zbynek in 
 this sense. Jodocus of Moravia had died very shortly after 
 his election as king. There therefore remained as claimants 
 to the throne only the brothers Venceslas and Sigismund. 
 John XXIII. could not risk offending either of these princes 
 before he had silenced the popes Gregory and Benedict — a 
 thing he hoped shortly to do. Through the mediation of 
 Rudolph, Duke of Saxony, and with the assent of several 
 foreign dignitaries who were then in Prague, it was agreed that 
 the whole dispute between Hus and the archbishop should be 
 settled by arbitration. The king was himself to act as arbi- 
 trator, and was to have as his assistants Duke Rudolph of 
 Saxony, Stibor Count of Transylvania, who was then at 
 Prague, and Lacek of Kravar, formerly master of ceremonies 
 to Venceslas, but now acting as his representative (" mar- 
 grave ") in Moravia. Both parties accepted this agreement, 
 which practically conferred on Venceslas unlimited power to 
 act as arbitrator. Hus thought it well that the university 
 should be consulted on the matter, and that body gave its full 
 assent, stipulating only that the king's decision alone should 
 be absolute, in case the appointed councillors should have left 
 Prague before judgment had been given. At the same time, 
 
I 
 
 142 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 the archbishop assembled numerous prelates in his palace in 
 the Mala Strana 1 and informed them that he had accepted 
 the arbitration of the king. Venceslas acted with great 
 prudence in this matter. Besides the coadjutors who had 
 already been appointed, he consulted also several other digni- 
 taries, both laymen and priests. The result of their delibera- 
 tions was, on July 6, 1411, formulated in an agreement which 
 under more favourable circumstances might have restored to 
 s Bohemia the peace which that country so urgently required. 
 It was decided that the archbishop should submit to the king 
 as his lord and then become reconciled to him. He was also 
 to write to the pope stating that he knew of no heresies in the 
 Bohemian kingdom, but only of dissensions between himself 
 and Hus, a matter regarding which the king was endeavouring 
 to mediate. The archbishop was also to beg the pope to 
 absolve those against whom he had pronounced the sentence 
 of excommunication, and Zbynek was himself to absolve those 
 on whom he had pronounced that sentence and also to revoke 
 the interdict on the city of Prague. Both parties were to 
 desist from the lawsuits which they had begun at the papal 
 courts, and recall their representatives there. The king was 
 to take council of the bishops, doctors, prelates, temporal 
 princes, nobles, and squires 2 concerning the existence of heresies 
 or vices among either laymen or priests, and eventually on the 
 advice of his spiritual and temporal councillors to extirpate 
 and punish such offences. The revenues and annuities which 
 had been taken from the priests were to be returned to them, 
 and those priests who had been imprisoned were to be released. 
 All the rights and privileges previously possessed by the 
 clergy, the university, the lords and squires were guaranteed 
 to them, and it was stipulated that the church should not 
 attempt to encroach on the temporal power. It was finally 
 
 1 The " small quarter " of Prague, situated on the left bank of the Vltava 
 (Moldau) river. 
 
 - In Bohemian, " zeman." The " zeman " may be described as a member 
 of the lesser nobility or country gentry. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 143 
 
 declared by the archbishop that he had believed that the 
 municipalities had on their own authority, and not by order 
 of the king, seized church property. Having now been in- 
 formed of the contrary, he wished to raise no further com- 
 plaints against the citizens. 1 
 
 This sensible and business-like document, which certainly- 
 contained the germ of a permanent agreement, has been little 
 noticed by historians. It is scarcely uncharitable to suggest 
 that this silence is due to the blind disparagement of King 
 Venceslas which we find in all the works of Roman Catholic 
 writers as well as in those of some German Protestants. The 
 statement contained in this document that it was the duty of 
 the rulers to suppress vices and heresies foreshadows the 
 Hussite period, where we find similar enactments in the Articles 
 of Prague, the compacts, and elsewhere. At the time when 
 the agreement mentioned above was drawn up, it was also 
 settled that Archbishop Zbynek should send to Pope John 
 XXIII. a letter interceding for Hus. A draft of such a letter 
 was actually drawn up, but the letter was never sent. This 
 caused renewed bitterness. The archbishop appeared to act 
 in a half-hearted manner, and Venceslas, impatient by nature, 
 soon again became incensed against the ecclesiastical digni- 
 taries of Bohemia. Hus meanwhile, relying on his firm convic- 
 tion that he had spoken and written nothing contrary to the 
 true Catholic faith, again wrote to Pope John. He again 
 affirmed that he was a true Catholic and denied ever having 
 stated that the material substance of bread remained in the 
 sacrament after communion or having said that a priest in 
 the state of mortal sin could not administer the sacraments 
 validly. These accusations had been frequently raised by 
 Palec and Michael de causis, who believed or pretended to 
 believe that if they proved that any book of Wycliffe which 
 Hus admitted to have read contained a statement contrary 
 to the teaching of the church, this was a sufficient proof that 
 
 1 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, vol. iii. pp. 494-495. 
 
144 THE LIFE 0F J 0HN HUS 
 
 Hus himself was a heretic. Hus read this letter to the as- 
 sembled members of the university, who entirely approved of 
 it, and it was decided that as a token of this approbation 
 the seal of the university should be affixed to the letter. 
 It is probable that about this time Venceslas also wrote to 
 Pope John XXIII. again praising Hus and interceding for 
 him. 
 
 The hope for a peaceful settlement disappeared almost 
 | as rapidly as it had arisen. The archbishop soon considered 
 that he had new causes to complain of the king and his 
 courtiers. It cannot be denied that Venceslas was during 
 his whole life hostile to the higher clergy of Bohemia, though 
 his attitude towards Hus proves that he honoured and 
 respected a pious and virtuous priest. Zbynek complained 
 that some of the royal courtiers had interfered with his archi- 
 episcopal rights and demanded an audience to bring his griev- 
 ances before the king. On his refusal Zbynek again declared 
 that he was no longer safe at Prague, and left the city only a 
 few weeks after the agreement had been made. The arch- 
 bishop first proceeded to Litomysl, the residence of John, 
 surnamed the " iron," bishop of the city. The iron bishop 
 was known as a bitter enemy of King Venceslas and a 
 notorious simonist. He was naturally and from selfish reasons 
 a strong opponent of church - reform. The iron bishop 
 played a considerable part in the life of Hus. It was at his 
 instigation that the wealthy Bohemian priests at the time of 
 Hus's departure for Constance collected a large sum of money 
 to procure evidence against him. Hus always believed that 
 the Bishop of Litomysl, with the spies and informers who 
 were in his pay, contributed largely to his condemnation at 
 Constance. In the Hussite wars the iron bishop became 
 notorious through his excessive cruelty and, as the Hussite 
 leaders were but too ready to follow his example, the Bishop 
 of Litomysl bears no slight responsibility for the cruelty and 
 bitterness, exceptional even among religious wars, which 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 145 
 
 marks the warfare between the Bohemians and the so- 
 called crusaders. The counsels of the iron bishop were not, 
 therefore, likely to have a conciliatory effect on Zbynek. He 
 addressed from Litomysl a letter to King Venceslas contain- 
 ing many complaints, of which some were perhaps justified, 
 many certainly unfounded. He also stated that he was going 
 to visit King Sigismund of Hungary, the treacherous younger 
 brother of Venceslas, and even threatened to induce Sigis- 
 mund, who always coveted his brother's kingdom, to invade 
 Bohemia. These plots or threats were not destined to lead to 
 any result. Archbishop Zbynek died at Presburg on Septem- 
 ber 28, 141 1, while on his way to Sigismund's court. Thus 
 Archbishop Zbynek, a man who had ascended the archi- 
 episcopal throne of Prague with the best intentions, ended his 
 life almost as a traitor to his country and his king. A man of 
 little intelligence and less learning, he was in spite of his good 
 qualities quite unfitted for the position in which he was placed 
 at a most difficult moment. Hus, mindful of his good inten- 
 tions and of the kindness once shown to him by Zbynek, ex- 
 pressed great sorrow when he heard of the archbishop's death.' 
 Zbynek's death was followed by a brief moment of calm, 
 preceding the storm, greater than all former ones, that was 
 shortly to break out. Only one incident belonging to this, 
 period is recorded by the contemporary chroniclers, and has 
 ever since found its way into all works dealing with Hus, 
 though it had little influence on the main current of the events. 
 Shortly after Zbynek had left Prague two English envoys 
 arrived there also on their way to Hungary, where they had 
 a diplomatic mission. These men were Sir Hartung van Clux, 1 
 one of the most trusted councillors of Henry IV. and of his 
 son, and John Stokes, licentiate of Cambridge. The object 
 of their mission was to conclude an alliance between England 
 
 1 The un-English name of this English agent has puzzled many writers. 
 Sir Hartung Clux was of Flemish origin, and a trusted agent of King Henry 
 IV. and Henry V. The latter conferred on him the Order of the Garter. 
 (See Lenz, Kdnig Siqismund tend Heinrich V. von England, pp. 31 -37-) 
 
 K 
 
146 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 and Sigismund, King of Hungary. The news of the arrival of 
 the Englishmen soon reached the hospitable citizens of Prague 
 and the Englishmen were invited to a banquet by the rector of 
 the university. Sir Hartung, probably aware of the theological 
 strife then raging at the university, politely declined the in- 
 vitation, but when John Stokes, evidently a novice in matters 
 of diplomacy, was questioned as to the cause of the refusal, he 
 plunged boldly into the Wycliffe controversy. He publicly 
 declared that whoever should read the works of Master John 
 Wycliffe, or should study them, even if he had the best in- 
 tentions and the firmest faith, must in course of time become 
 involved in heresy. Hus, always zealous for what he believed 
 to be truth, traversed Stokes's foolish statement and chal- 
 lenged him to a public disputation at the university in the 
 manner then customary. This challenge Stokes declined, 
 alleging that he had come to Bohemia on diplomatic business, 
 being on his way to the court of King Sigismund. Charac- 
 teristically, Stokes, who was either very little versed in the 
 ways of diplomacy, or irritated by the " Lollard " movement 
 which, he thought, he had discovered in Prague, described in 
 his letter King Sigismund as " Dei gratia regem Ungariae, nee 
 non ad regem Romanorum electum unicum." Venceslas 
 still claimed to be King of the Romans, and the words of 
 Stokes were bound to give grave offence to the King of 
 Bohemia and his court. Though declining the challenge for 
 the moment, Stokes, however, made the somewhat suspicious 
 suggestion that a disputation should take place later either in 
 Paris or at the papal court. It was probable in the former, 
 and certain in the latter case that a Bohemian who attempted 
 to uphold Wycliffe's views there would never have returned 
 : to his own country. Stokes, belonging to the period of re- 
 action against Lollardism in England, appears to have been a 
 thorough ultramontane, if we can apply the word to so remote 
 a period. At Constance he attacked Hus and wished to pro- 
 duce as evidence against him a book that he had found at 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 147 
 
 Prague, which, he said, contained the views of the Lollards 
 and which, he had been told, might have been written by Hus. 
 The book, as was proved, had not been written by Hus, nor had 
 he had any part in it. Though Hus was not able to enter into 
 a disputation with Stokes, he yet thought it his duty to reply 
 to the statement which Stokes had made. In a speech, which 
 has been preserved, he justly stigmatised the absurdity of those 
 who wished to declare heretics all who had read Wycliffe's 
 books. He acutely pointed out that Wycliffe had been hated 
 by many, and particularly by the higher clergy, because he 
 had blamed their vices and admonished them to lead honest 
 and blameless lives. 
 
 Hus's dispute with Stokes was no doubt soon forgotten in 
 view of the weighty events that followed at a short interval. 
 Through the death of Zbynek the important and valuable 
 archiepiscopal see of Prague had become vacant. Candidates 
 were numerous, and at a period when simony was almost 
 universal in the Roman Church, bribery was rampant. The 
 election at first proceeded slowly, and fears were expressed 
 that Baldassare Cossa might appoint a new archbishop. 
 The king therefore requested the canons to come to a decision, 
 and of the twenty-four candidates Albert of Unicov, physician 
 to the king, was on October 29, 141 1, unanimously chosen 
 as archbishop. A contemporary chronicler writes: 1 "After 
 him (Zbynek), Albik (Albert) a great master of the medical 
 sciences became archbishop. He was a German by birth, 
 born at Unicov. The people said that he had bought the 
 archbishopric, for he had much money. He was, however, a 
 very niggardly and miserly German, and would not have any 
 knights or pages around him, that he might not be obliged to 
 give them money." The well-meaning king, to whose in- 
 fluence the election of his former court-physician was largely 
 due, no doubt sincerely believed that Albert of Unicov would 
 be able to establish a quieter condition in Bohemia. The new 
 
 1 Ancient Bohemian Chroniclers, vol. iii. p. 14. 
 
i 4 8 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 archbishop shared the king's desire for tranquillity, and 
 perhaps under more favourable conditions their efforts might 
 have been successful. Albik or Albert of Unicov, then about 
 fifty-four years of age, could already look back on a long 
 career. He had begun life as a law-student at Prague, and 
 had obtained academic honours. As was often the custom of 
 scholars at that period, he afterwards travelled for a consider- 
 able period. He spent some time at the University of Padua, 
 where he obtained the degree of doctor of law. Somewhat 
 later he applied himself to the study of medicine and acquired 
 the reputation of being one of the greatest physicians of his 
 time. He had recently become a widower, was the father of 
 several children, and had taken vows shortly after the death of 
 his wife. He had through his medical practice acquired a 
 very large fortune, and he accepted the dignity of archbishop 
 mainly by wish of the king, with whom he was on terms of 
 intimacy. The reference in the chronicle quoted above to 
 the large sum Albik had spent to become archbishop refers to 
 a very large gift which he made to Pope John XXIII. That 
 pontiff, as Dr. Tomek writes, would without large payment 
 never have renounced his claim to appoint a successor to 
 Archbishop Zbynek. That the claim of Albik prevailed over 
 even that of the rich and unscrupulous Bishop of Litomysl, 
 who was also a candidate, is probably not due to his greater 
 munificence. It is an appalling proof of the universal 
 prevalence of simony at this period that the contemporary 
 chroniclers always allude to bribery as having decided elec- 
 tions among the clergy, and hardly seem to take other motives 
 into account. In the present case it is, however, very probable 
 that King Venceslas may have used his great influence to 
 prevent the election of his bitter enemy, John " the iron," to 
 the archbishopric of Prague. 
 
 It was natural to hope that the election of Albik, an elderly, 
 conciliatory, opulent, well-intentioned man, whose home life 
 was irreproachable, would at least cause a respite in the theo- 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 149 
 
 logical strife which was absorbing all interest in Bohemia. 
 Events in distant Italy brought on a crisis which was more 
 serious than any of the former disturbances in Bohemia. It 
 has already been mentioned l that, immediately after his 
 election to the papal throne, John XXIII. strove with his 
 entire indomitable energy to carve out for the papacy, or 
 rather, perhaps, for himself, a temporal dominion in Italy. 
 Here, however, the diavolo cardinale found a dangerous 
 antagonist in Ladislas, King of Naples, an adventurer of a 
 type somewhat similar to his own. Claiming to uphold the 
 cause of Pope Gregory XII., Ladislas invaded the papal states 
 and menaced Rome, where Pope John had then established 
 his residence. The pope therefore decided to proclaim a 
 crusade against his Italian rival. The name of crusade, so 
 venerable at its origin, had long been perverted to give a false 
 impression of sanctity to very unholy and worldly warfare 
 waged by ambitious popes against temporal rulers. It was only 
 the complete and ignominious failure of the so-called crusades 
 against Bohemia which caused the name to fall into oblivion. 
 Bohemia had in earlier days, because of its geographical 
 position, not greatly attracted the papal tax-gatherers. There 
 was, however, no hope that such an exemption would continue 
 at a time when the papal crown was claimed by three rival 
 pontiffs, each of whom could only rely on the financial support 
 of a comparatively limited extent of country. On December 
 2, 1411, a decree of John XXIII. declared Pope Gregory XII. 
 and his ally Ladislas, King of Naples, to be heretics, and 
 granted a plenary indulgence to all who took part in the war 
 against Ladislas or contributed to the expenses of the cam- 
 paign. It has often been stated that this was at that period a 
 very usual occurrence, and that it is surprising that Hus should 
 have raised objections to such a decree. Whatever may have 
 been the case in other countries, in Bohemia such proceedings 
 were exceptional. This fact, unnoticed by foreign writers, is 
 
 1 See p. 98. 
 
i 5 o THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 duly recorded by the Bohemian historians. The only pre- 
 cedent for the public sale of indulgences had occurred in the 
 year 1393. " In Bohemia," Professor Tomek writes, " the 
 unhappy recollection of the sale of indulgences in the year of 
 grace 1393 was still vivid, and the archiepiscopal consistory 
 thought it necessary to publish special regulations to prevent 
 the repetition of the more crying abuses that had then oc- 
 curred." Archbishop Albik also strictly prohibited the taxing 
 of the people in the confessional, that is to say, their being told 
 during confession how much they would, according to their 
 rank and fortune, have to pay for an indulgence — a custom 
 that had been general in 1393. 
 
 The orders given by Archbishop Albik and the consistory 
 certainly tended to avoid all scandal as far as possible. This 
 was naturally to be feared in a city where the teaching of 
 Hus and his forerunners had developed a somewhat puritanic 
 spirit. The papal representative, however, who now arrived 
 at Prague, Venceslas Tiem, Dean of Passau, was utterly unfit 
 for the difficult task which he had undertaken. His behaviour, 
 like that of Texel a century later, was bound to cause trouble. 
 Tiem took little notice of the restrictions that had been im- 
 posed on him. He carried on his traffic in divine indulgences 
 in the manner which he believed would give him the largest 
 profit and enable him to send the largest sums to Italy. To 
 simplify matters, he began to farm out archdeaconries, deacon- 
 ries, and even single churches to priests who, acting as con- 
 tractors, had to consign to him a fixed sum, while they were 
 at liberty to obtain as great a profit as they could by the sale 
 of the indulgences. " Naturally, worthy priests were not 
 suitable for such an unholy trade, and the business thus fell 
 into the hands of priests who were misers or gamblers, lived 
 in concubinage, or practised other vices of the period. These 
 men bargained shamelessly with the faithful in the confes- 
 sionals and committed infamous actions of every description." 1 
 
 1 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, vol. iii. pp. 508-509. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 151 
 
 The principal places of sale in Prague, the profits of which 
 Tiem had reserved for himself, were the three most important 
 churches of the city, the church on the Vysehrad, the Tyn 
 church in the old town, and St. Vitus's cathedral on the 
 Hradcany. In the last-named church the box in which the 
 offerings were to be deposited was placed near the altar of St. 
 Vitus, where the people mostly congregated. 
 
 It was impossible that this public simony should not 
 arouse discontent and indignation among the citizens of 
 Prague. One of the principal subjects of the sermons of the 
 priests who upheld church-reform had for some time been the 
 abuse of indulgences. Tiem had arrived at Prague in May, 
 1412, and early in June Hus invited all members of the univer- 
 sity to take part in a disputation that was to be held in the 
 large hall of the Carolinum college on June 17. The question 
 to be discussed was : Whether it was permissible and expedient 
 according to the law of Jesus Christ, (whether it was) to the 
 glory of God, the salvation of the Christian people, that the 
 bulls of the pope concerning the raising the cross against 
 Ladislas, King of Apulia, and his accomplices be commended 
 to the faithful in Christ?" 1 The meeting was somewhat 
 stormy, and several among the theologians, though not entirely 
 approving of the sale of indulgences as it was carried on in 
 Prague, yet declared that they would not oppose the papal 
 decree. Stanislas of Znoymo and Stephen Palec spoke in 
 favour of blind submission to all decisions of the pope. Hus 
 spoke quietly and firmly; he relied mainly on biblical quota- 
 tions, and maintained that Christ alone, not priests, could 
 forgive sins. On the same side as Hus spoke also Master 
 Jerome of Prague, who did not, however, follow the example 
 of moderation given by Hus. His speech, perhaps for that 
 reason, obtained greater applause from the young students, 
 
 1 The words of the Latin original ran thus: " Utrum secundum legem 
 Jesu Christi licet et expedit pro honore Dei, et salute populi Cliristiani et 
 pro commodo regru bullas papae de erectione crucis contra Ladislaum regem 
 Apuliae et suos complices Christi ndelibus approbare." 
 
i 5 2 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 who accompanied him back to his dwelling amidst great 
 enthusiasm. The moderation displayed by Hus during the 
 discussion on indulgences — a subject on which almost every one 
 will at the present day admit that he was right — is all the more 
 worthy of praise because almost at the same time the papal 
 court had definitively and irrevocably declared itself hostile 
 to his views. The parish priests, always, as has been fre- 
 quently noted, bitter enemies of church-reform and of Hus in 
 particular, thinking that the new archbishop was too lenient, 
 again appealed to the pope. In the course of the year 1412 
 they sent to the papal court two further documents x con- 
 taining the complaints against Hus that have already been 
 enumerated. They added, however, to their old grievances 
 one new one, stating that Hus had blamed the pope's action 
 in granting indulgences and remittance of sins to those who 
 took part in the warfare against " Ladislas, King of Apulia, 
 and Angelus Correr, who with sacrilegious daring calls himself 
 Gregory XII." Together with Hus some of his principal 
 disciples were denounced in these letters. The parish priests 
 were this time more successful than they had been in their 
 former attacks on Hus. They had secured a wily and utterly 
 unscrupulous agent at the papal court. This was one Michael, 
 a German of Nemecky Brod (Deutschbrod), some time parish 
 priest at St. Adalbertus's in Prague. 2 Michael was afterwards 
 by Pope John XXIII. appointed advocate in matters of faith 
 {procurator de causis fidei), and was therefore generally known 
 as " Michael de causis." His reputation was of the worst. 
 Neglecting his parish duties, he endeavoured to obtain money 
 by good or bad means. 3 He offered King Venceslas to im- 
 prove the working of the royal mines at Jilov, but absconded 
 with the money that had been entrusted to him. He fled to 
 the pope and gained a living by acting as advocate at the 
 papal law-courts. Through the influence of the astute Michael, 
 
 1 Palacky, Document a, pp. 457-461. ' See p. 141. 
 
 3 Dr. Flajshans, Mistr Jan Hus, p. 285. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 153 
 
 Cardinal Brancaccio was deprived of the direction of the 
 Bohemian affairs that had recently been entrusted to him. 
 His successor, Cardinal Peter of St. Angelo, acted entirely 
 according to the wishes of the Bohemian enemies of church- 
 reform. The representatives of Hus at the papal court were 
 declared to be heretics; some were imprisoned, while others 
 succeeded in escaping to Prague. The cause of Hus at the 
 papal courts was definitively lost and a decisive condemnatory 
 judgment against him was being prepared. Momentous 
 events, however, occurred in Prague before the judgment 
 became known there. 
 
 The attempt to establish at Prague the sale of indulgences 
 in a manner that was particularly repulsive to the citizens 
 had produced a state of feverish excitement. The Germans 
 and Romanist partisans declared that they would burn the 
 Bethlehem chapel and murder all heretics. Among the 
 friends of church-reform the more frivolous and unreflecting 
 men were led astray and organised demonstrations that must 
 have been very painful to the truly pious mind of Hus. 
 Jerome was still in Prague, and Hus, perhaps better acquainted 
 with his eloquence and learning than with his many faults, 
 did not attempt to exercise sufficient restraint over him. It 
 was, therefore, undoubtedly with the connivance of Jerome 
 that one of King Venceslas's favourite courtiers, Lord Vok of 
 VValdstein, organised a grotesque procession of which all 
 sober-minded citizens disapproved. It is probable that King 
 Venceslas, who was not at Prague on the day the procession 
 took place, was utterly unaware of the intended folly of his 
 courtier, but when after the death of Hus and the movement 
 of universal fury which the news of it caused in Bohemia, the 
 Council of Constance wished to attack the King of Bohemia, 
 he was accused of complicity. 1 It is certain that on June 24 
 
 1 This is stated in the acts of accusation against the King and Queen of 
 Bohemia (Palacky, Documenta, pp. 638-642). These acts contain many- 
 untruthful statements. 
 
154 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 a very strange procession left the Mala Strana and paraded 
 the streets. In an open carriage stood a young student in 
 the attire of a prostitute. 1 He had round his neck and arms 
 silver bells which rang continuously, and in front of him was 
 placed a large sheet of paper to which were attached leaden 
 seals, giving it the appearance of a papal bull. Behind the 
 carriage followed a crowd of students led by Waldstein. As 
 is always the case on such occasions in large towns, a vast and 
 noisy crowd joined the procession. Many carried sticks and 
 even swords. The procession wended its way through the 
 streets of the old town and the market-place to the new town, 
 where it stopped at the present Karlovo namesti (Charles's 
 vSquare). Here the documents imitating papal bulls were 
 placed under an improvised gallows and burnt amidst loud 
 applause of the crowd. The foolish freak was obviously in- 
 tended as a parody of the burning of Wycliffe's works by the 
 archbishop. This recalling of the destruction of the writings 
 of Wycliffe contributed to increase the public excitement. 
 The opposition to the sale of indulgences increased, and those 
 who had invested money in the sale naturally complained 
 bitterly of their financial loss. Some of the theologians of the 
 university, who may have been among the losers, accused Hus 
 of having spread heretical statements derived from Wycliffe's 
 works. These theologians wished to avoid all discussions on 
 the subjects on which Hus generally spoke, such as the scan- 
 dalous sale of indulgences, the immorality of the clergy, the 
 universal prevalence of simony, and to engage him in another 
 abstruse discussion of some obscure passages in Wycliffe's 
 works. The always well-meaning king again endeavoured to 
 mediate. He had for some time been residing at his castle of 
 Zebrak, and he now summoned there Hus and the leaders of 
 the Roman party at the university. At Zebrak Hus again 
 
 1 We must reduce to this amount of truth the statement of the council 
 that Waldstein had led a large procession through the streets of Prague 
 ■publicis meretricibits praeconibus. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 155 
 
 maintained that his teaching was in accordance with the true 
 Catholic faith, and declared that he was ready to die for his 
 opinions. On the ultramontane members of the university 
 being asked if they also were prepared to face a similar fate, 
 they at first declined, but finally stated that one of their 
 number was prepared to do so. What followed does not 
 appear very clearly from the contemporary accounts. An 
 ordeal such as that which was held in the case of Savonarola 
 may have been suggested. The meeting broke up without 
 any result, and when Hus and the scholars opposed to him 
 left the castle, the royal courtiers more kindly than wisely 
 advised them " to reconcile themselves nicely." On Sunday, 
 July 10, the theologians of the university were again invited 
 to Zebrak by the king, and they for the third time presented 
 to him articles concerning Wycliffe's doctrine. Among those 
 present were representatives of the towns of Prague and 
 several royal councillors and courtiers. We have no con- 
 temporary account of this assembly — no doubt because the 
 writers believed that the events at Prague on the same day 
 rendered it very unimportant. 
 
 The king had with regrettable leniency condoned Lord 
 Vok of Waldstein's participation in the procession through 
 the streets of Prague and had continued to consider him as a 
 favourite. He had, however, in agreement with the town 
 authorities of Prague, published a decree which threatened 
 with the death penalty all who should take part in riots in 
 the streets of the capital. Compared to the almost exag- 
 gerated leniency that had hitherto been the rule, this decree 
 was certainly very severe. On Sunday, July 10, the vendors 
 of indulgences who had lately suffered considerable losses, 
 encouraged by the royal decree, when preaching in several 
 churches, strongly advised their congregations to add to the 
 fund which Pope John was raising for his Neapolitan cam- 
 paign. They were, of course, not scrupulous in their enumera- 
 tion of the advantages which the faithful would thus obtain. 
 
156 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Public opinion was already so intensely excited and irritated 
 by the traffic in indulgences that troubles broke out in several 
 churches. In the cathedral of St. Vitus, the Tyn church, and 
 that of St. Jacob part of the congregation protested against 
 what it considered a glorification of simony. In each of 
 these three churches a young man who was supposed to be the 
 ringleader was arrested and brought to the town hall of the 
 old city. Through the vicissitudes of municipal politics, into 
 which I cannot enter here, the German, or, as we may call it, 
 the ultramontane party, had at that moment the upper hand 
 in the councils of the old town. The members of this party 
 saw that the government of their city was slipping away from 
 them, and they determined to intimidate the people by a 
 vigorous action. Here again it may be interesting to read 
 the words of a contemporary writer. After mentioning the 
 imprisonment of the three youths, the chronicler writes: 1 
 " Here I could tell much of what happened the day before 
 these men were beheaded. It was on a Monday (that they 
 were beheaded) and the Sunday before they were arrested 
 during the preaching. . . . But I must shorten my account. 
 I was present on that Monday; it was about the third hour, 
 and it was already rumoured that these three men had been 
 imprisoned because of the indulgences; and the news reached 
 Magister Hus. Then Magister Hus' with many other masters 
 and students went to the town hall begging the councillors that 
 they would allow him (Hus) to appear before them, for that he 
 wished to talk with them; and thus they allowed him with 
 some other masters to appear before them. The other 
 masters remained before the town hall with their students, 
 of whom there might be about two thousand. Meanwhile, 
 Master Hus spoke to the councillors, begging them to do no 
 harm to the three because of the indulgences, and saying that 
 he was himself the cause of the opposition to the indulgences. 
 
 1 Ancient Bohemian Chroniclers, vol. iii. pp. 16-18. It is often very 
 difficult to translate into English the rugged Bohemian original. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 
 
 ^7 
 
 If therefore anything was to be done to them for this, let it be 
 rather done to him, for he was the first cause of it. The coun- 
 cillors, after having conferred together answered him and the 
 other masters who were with him, saying that nothing would 
 be done to them (i.e., the three young men); therefore should 
 they with their following go home and all disperse to their 
 dwelling-places. Then Master Hus, thinking that nothing 
 would befall the young men, went with a cheerful mind with 
 all his followers to the Bethlehem chapel; and after they had 
 escorted him home, they retired each one to his dwelling- 
 place. A large crowd had assembled on the market-place, 
 waiting to see what would happen, and what would be the end 
 of the matter; for in the morning the town-criers had been 
 told to call on all rich and poor to assemble on the market- 
 place. Now, however, the order was given that all should 
 leave the market-place and return to their dwelling-places. 
 And when almost all the people had dispersed, the councillors 
 ordered the judge and the excutioners to lead them (the young 
 men) aside and behead them. And with them came many 
 soldiers in mail from the town hall — for at that moment all 
 the councillors were Germans, the armed men also were 
 Germans, and among the others present were many German 
 citizens — and when they had securely surrounded them, they 
 ordered them to be beheaded, to the great displeasure of the 
 mailed soldiers. They did not lead them to the place of 
 execution, but to a spot in front of the house of John Celny; 1 
 there they beheaded them. And immediately a pious woman 
 threw three linen cloths over the bodies to cover them. 
 Then Master John of Jicin, with a large crowd of magisters, 
 bachelors, students and common people assembled, but un- 
 armed and peacefully. They took up the bodies and carried 
 them to the Bethlehem chapel without asking permission of 
 the magistrates nor telling them where they were taking the 
 
 1 At the corner of the present Zelezna ulice (Iron Street) at the northern 
 extremity of the market-place. 
 
158 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 bodies. And the master (John of Jicin) with a loud voice 
 intoned the anthem, Isti Sunt Sancti, 1 which is sung of the holy 
 martyrs, and all joining with loud voices in the singing they 
 bravely and joyfully carried the bodies to Bethlehem, while 
 all the mailed soldiers and councillors looked on. Many 
 students also, common people, lords and ladies, followed the 
 bodies with much crying and lament, but with great piety, 
 and while accompanying them to their graves they heartily 
 pitied the young men, saying they had not deserved 
 to die." 
 
 Hus acted with great moderation during these events. 
 His innate belief in the goodness of human nature, which had 
 led him to hope that even a man such as Pope John XXIII. 
 would do him justice were he but informed of the noble motives 
 by which the Bohemian reformer was inspired, had also led 
 him to believe the word of the German councillors of the old 
 town of Prague. He continued to maintain this attitude of 
 moderation even after the judicial murder of the three young 
 men. It is difficult to describe otherwise the deed of the 
 magistrates of Prague. During the brawls on July 10, violence 
 had been used on both sides. The three young men were only 
 accused of having noisily interrupted sermons; on the other 
 hand, when in the church of St. Jacob, part of the congregation 
 had protested against the sale of indulgences, choir-boys and 
 young monks had rushed into the church from the adjoin- 
 ing monastery and had driven some of the faithful into the 
 common-room, where they were cruelly flogged. On Sunday, 
 July 17, Hus preached as usual at Bethlehem, but made no 
 allusion to the events of the past week. His somewhat 
 ignoble adversaries, the rich parish priests of Prague, declared 
 that he had been intimidated by the immediate severe punish- 
 ment that had been inflicted on the three young men. The 
 motives of Hus were very different. He knew that a large 
 
 1 These words belong to the first antiphone of the second vesper in the 
 Commune plurium martyrum of the Roman breviary (Dr. Lechler). 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 159 
 
 number of soldiers had been gathered together in the town, 
 and though he had always cherished loyal feelings toward 
 Venceslas, he was too well acquainted with him not to know 
 to what sudden movements of fury he was subject. An order 
 of the king could, on the slightest provocation on the part of 
 the citizens, cause a terribly murderous struggle in the streets, 
 the responsibility for which Hus could not, and would not 
 assume. One word of Hus from the Bethlehem pulpit would 
 have brought on such a desperate struggle, particularly as 
 many Germans and Romanists were still in the city. 
 Through Hus's silence such a catastrophe was averted. The 
 Praguers also, following the example of their leader, behaved 
 on this occasion with studious moderation. They indeed 
 declared themselves ready to accept death as the three young 
 men had done, but no attack was made on the German 
 soldiery. We meet with this moderation on the part of the 
 citizens of Prague generally during the earlier part of the 
 Hussite struggle. If after the ruthless and treacherous execu- 
 tion of their revered leader they became revengeful and cruel, 
 those only are entitled to blame them who practise truly the 
 precept: " Whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, 
 turn to him the other also." 
 
 Thanks mainly to the energy of the notorious Michael de 
 Causis the proceedings at the papal courts had meanwhile 
 come to an end. In August, 1412, a papal bull, published 
 under the authority of Hus's new judge, Cardinal Peter of 
 St. Angelo, reached Prague. It proclaimed the aggravation 
 (aggravatio) of the sentence of excommunication which Cardinal 
 Colonna had previously pronounced against Hus. The ban 
 was to be proclaimed publicly, and all the faithful were for- 
 bidden to give him food or drink or to speak to him; then 
 followed all the habitual clauses of a mediaeval bull of excom- 
 munication. Hus's reply was a step for which he has been 
 frequently blamed, particularly perhaps by those who did not 
 bear sufficiently in mind the spirit of the times in which Hus 
 
160 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 lived. He appealed 1 from the sentence of the Roman pontiff 
 to Jesus Christ, the supreme judge. In an age when positive 
 and undisputed belief in the fundamental doctrines of Chris- 
 tianity was universal, the direct intervention of Divinity in 
 the affairs of mankind met with no disbelief. It will be 
 remembered — to quote but one example — that the citizens 
 of Florence at one time placed their city under the direct 
 temporal government of Jesus Christ. The arguments em- 
 ployed by Hus in his appeal were simple. He stated that it 
 was not from obstinacy that he had refused to go to the papal 
 court, that his first representatives there had been im- 
 prisoned, and that the other ones had been refused audience 
 and accused of heresy without being allowed to defend them- 
 selves. The enemies of Hus do not appear to have considered 
 their victory over Hus at the papal courts as sufficiently com- 
 plete. Again, through the influence of Michael de causis, a 
 second bull appeared which commanded all the faithful to 
 seize Hus by force and deliver him over to the Archbishop of 
 Prague or the Bishop of Litomysl, who were to condemn him 
 and have him burnt. The bull also decreed that the Bethle- 
 hem chapel, " a nest of heretics," should be destroyed and 
 levelled to the ground. The indefatigable Michael also sug- 
 gested that King Venceslas and his most prominent coun- 
 cillors and courtiers should be excommunicated. Pope John 
 XXIII., however, declined to accede to this proposal. The 
 diavolo cardinale was ready to proceed to any lengths against 
 a pious and powerless priest, but he could not afford to quarrel 
 with King Venceslas. The partisans of Gregory XII. were 
 at that moment gaining ground, and the support of the King 
 of Bohemia might become of great importance to the pope. 
 These measures directed against Hus were followed by measures 
 against the city of Prague. The interdict was again pro- 
 claimed, and it was now carried out thoroughly with all the 
 
 ' Appelatio M. Joannis Hus a sententiis pontificis Romani ad Jesum 
 Christum supremum judicem (printed by Palacky, Documenta, pp. 464-466). 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 161 
 
 accompanying horrors that terrified the mediaeval mind. All 
 masses and sermons, all religious functions, even burial with 
 the Christian rites were prohibited. The sacrament of ex- 
 treme unction was not administered to the dying ; none could 
 confess, or receive communion. A troop of German fanatics 
 attacked the Bethlehem chapel, while Hus was preaching there, 
 but the determined though pacific attitude of the congregation 
 intimidated them and they retired. Somewhat later— on 
 October i— Romanist citizens, led by the parish priest, Bernard 
 Chotek, again attacked the chapel, but were repulsed by the 
 friends and adherents of Hus, who were keeping watch. 
 
 The merciless execution of the interdict at Prague greatly 
 troubled the mind of Hus, whose conduct was always guided 
 by his conscience. He was in doubt whether he should leave 
 the city or remain there. He has himself described his hesita- 
 tion in a very striking manner in several of his books. ' To 
 me also," he writes, " it happened that some advised me to 
 preach when there was an outcry against the brethren (of the 
 Bethlehem chapel), when they were outlawed and their religious 
 services were stopped; others again advised me not to preach. 
 But I understood that both advised me with a good intention, 
 and I was not certain as to which counsel would agree with 
 God's will." Closely connected with the question whether his 
 duty permitted Hus to continue preaching was the question 
 whether he should stay in Prague or leave that city — as he 
 eventually did. This decision is next to his resolution to pro- 
 ceed to the Council of Constance, the most momentous one in 
 his life. It is interesting to study the motives of his decision 
 rather in his own writings than in the comments of others. 
 We find in the works of Hus an important passage x that deals 
 with this question. Hus here, as so frequently, refers to the 
 writings of St. Augustine, one of the fathers of the church to 
 whom he had devoted much study. Hus writes: " Note that 
 
 1 Postilla, xxv. p. 165 of Dr. Flajshans's edition. I have somewhat 
 abridged Hus's statements. 
 
 L 
 
162 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 St. Augustine asks this question: As the apostles were good 
 shepherds and not hirelings, 1 why did they fly when it was 
 attempted to kill them? But they acted according to the 
 word of Christ, who said: When they persecute you in this 
 city, flee ye into another. 2 And Bishop Honoratus put the 
 same question, when writing to St. Augustine and asking him 
 what he should do when men were attempting his destruction. 
 ' Behold,' he said, ' the gospel of Christ: when they persecute 
 you in this city flee ye into another. And Christ also said: 
 " He that is an hireling and not the shepherd, whose own the 
 sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming and leaveth the sheep 
 and fleeth." How then shall I act that I may fulfil this word 
 of Christ, and yet not fly like a hireling? And in answer to 
 this question St. Augustine wrote for him a whole book in 
 which he examines the whole question very lengthily, and in 
 conclusion he establishes this rule: Either the danger is one 
 that threatens equally the lives of all, priests and laymen, or. 
 it does not threaten all. If the danger is common to all, then 
 if all can escape to a safe spot, let them escape. But if it is 
 not the life of all that is threatened, but either only that of all 
 the priests or that of all the laymen : if only the laymen are in 
 danger the priests need not fly, and the laymen can seek safety, 
 for they are not shepherds. But if the lives of all priests are 
 menaced, then may they not all fly, for they then would be 
 hirelings, leaving their people without spiritual aid, that is 
 without God's word and without baptism. . . . But if only 
 one priest is in danger and the people can without him obtain 
 spiritual aid, then that person may fly for future benefit, as 
 the apostle Paul fled from Damascus; thus also St. Athanasius 
 fled when the emperor wished to kill him; and after he had 
 fled he later rendered great service to the holy church against 
 the heretics; for he made that profession of faith which we 
 usually sing or recite at the first hour, and which begins with 
 the words: " Whosoever will be saved." But if the people 
 
 1 St. John x. 1 1 -i 2. 2 St. Matthew x. 23. 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 163 
 
 should by the flight of a priest be deprived of the word of God 
 and of baptism, then he must not fly; for if such a man fled 
 from his flock, leaving it to the devil, he would be as a hireling, 
 who loves his body more than the salvation of his fellow- 
 creatures.' Thus did St. Augustine answer this question to 
 this Honoratus. And I relying on the love of God and the 
 advice of many whose heels I am not worthy to kiss and on 
 this speech of St. Augustine, seeing that the people had suffi- 
 ciently of God's word and spiritual aid, fled when they at- 
 tempted to murder me. Then I returned and again preached, 
 and then when a consultation concerning an agreement was 
 held by wish of the king and with the consent of the people, I 
 again fled. Then when the consultation did nothing to free 
 the word of God (to allow the freedom of preaching) I again 
 preached and they always stopped the (religious) services 
 (because of the interdict) , and this diabolical stopping caused 
 great injury to the people as they (the priests) would neither 
 christen nor bury the dead; and dreading this great disaster 
 among the people I again fled. And I know not whether I 
 did well or evilly like a hireling nor whether these reasons will 
 help me (to prove) that I was not a hireling." 
 
 This passage giving an interesting insight into the mind of 
 Hus proves how earnestly and piously he weighed all argu- 
 ments both in favour of his leaving Prague and of his remain- 
 ing in that city. As already mentioned, Hus finally decided 
 in favour of the former alternative. He determined to leave 
 Prague for a short time. King Venceslas still hoped against 
 hope that an agreement between the contending parties could 
 be concluded, and he thought that the absence from Prague of 
 Hus, who had incurred the deadly hatred of the rich parish 
 priests, would facilitate a settlement. He therefore begged 
 Hus to leave Prague for a short time, and the pious Queen 
 Sophia, who had always continued to attend Hus's sermons in 
 the Bethlehem chapel, probably used her influence for the 
 same purpose. Hus was also moved by the sufferings of the 
 
164 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 people of Prague in consequence of the interdict which, now 
 carried out with relentless severity, deprived them of all 
 spiritual consolations. He therefore left Prague, probably in 
 October 1412. 1 
 
 The departure of Hus from Prague naturally caused great 
 rejoicing among his enemies, who declared that he had been 
 expelled from the city. The fanatical monk Stephen of Dolein 
 in particular expressed great joy that " he who in spite of the 
 prohibition had not ceased to preach and would not leave 
 Prague, had now been driven away by the just judgment of 
 God." 2 
 
 The period in the life of Hus with which this and the fourth 
 chapter deal, begins with his formal rupture with the clergy 
 and ends with his departure from Prague. The writings of 
 this time, which Dr. Flajshans, whose services for the biblio- 
 graphy of Hus cannot be sufficiently praised, calls the polemical 
 period, are not as valuable as those of the first period, to 
 which at least one work of the highest value, the Super IV. 
 Sententiarum, belongs. Still less can this period be compared 
 to the following one, to which belong two of Hus's greatest 
 Bohemian works, as well as his hitherto best known Latin 
 book, the treatise De Ecclesia. With the exception of a few 
 Bohemian sermons, all the writings belonging to this period 
 are Latin. They are, as already mentioned, mainly of a 
 polemical character. Of these polemical writings the treatise 
 
 1 The date of Hus's departure from Prague as well as those of his subse- 
 quent short visits to the city has caused much controversy among the modern 
 historians of Bohemia — Palacky, Tomek, Dr. Loserth, have all suggested 
 different dates. More recently Dr. Novak has also written on this subject, 
 which is also thoroughly discussed by Dr. Vaclav Novotny, in a lengthy 
 treatise published in the Vestnik kr. ceske spolecnosti nauk (Journal of the 
 Bohemian Society of Science) for 1898. The date of Hus's departure given 
 here is in accordance with Dr. Novotny. 
 
 2 Dolein writes, addressing Hus: " Vides, qui pro tempore a praedicatione 
 et tua rebellione ordinarie prohibitus in loco illo cessare noluisti, jam justo 
 Dei judicio inde cum confusione per inobedientiam ejectus, jam vagus et 
 latitans, velis, nolis, silentio comprimeris et ori tuo magnalia eructanti digitum 
 superponis." (Stephanus Dolanensis Antihussus, Pez Thesaurus Anec- 
 dotorum, T. iv. par. 2, p. 373.) 
 
HUS AS LEADER OF HIS NATION 165 
 
 Contra Anglic urn Joan Stokes is interesting. It refers to the 
 conflict between Hus and the English ecclesiastic, John Stokes, 
 which took place at Prague and which has already been men- 
 tioned. Hus has in this treatise reproduced the contents of 
 the speech against Stokes which he delivered at the university. 
 Stokes had stated that whoever read the works of Wycliffe or 
 studied them would in the course of time become a heretic, 
 however good his disposition might be, and however firmly 
 his faith might be grounded. The treatise is valuable as it 
 indicates Hus's attitude with regard to Wycliffe, which was 
 by no means one of blind and unreasoning admiration, as has 
 been frequently affirmed. Hus declines to give a positive 
 answer to the question whether Wycliffe was a heretic or not, 
 but in view of the obscurity of the question he thinks it more 
 charitable to adopt the more favourable view and to hope 
 that Wycliffe obtained salvation. 1 
 
 Perhaps of yet greater interest is another polemical treatise 
 entitled Contra occultum adversarium. Though Hus does not 
 give the name of his adversary, the person referred to is known 
 to have been the Bohemian priest Marik or Mauritius de Praga, 
 surnamed Rvacka. Marik has already been mentioned as 
 having been employed by King Venceslas in negotiations for 
 the purpose of terminating the schism. 2 He was a determined 
 opponent of church - reform and secretly attended Hus's 
 sermons, taking notes there concerning those points in which 
 he believed that Hus's words were contrary to the teaching 
 of the Church of Rome. Marik affixed to the pulpit of the 
 Bethlehem chapel a written statement — given in full in Hus's 
 treatise — in which he declared that Hus had by his last sermon 
 attacked the law of God and the authority of the clergy. The 
 
 1 " Ego autem non credo nee concedo quod Magister Joan Wicleff sit 
 haereticus, sed nee nego; sed spero quod non est haereticus cum in occultis 
 de proximo debeo meliorem partem eligere, unde spero quod Magister Joan 
 Wicleff est de salvandis." (Contra Anglicum Joan Stokes, Nuremberg 
 edition of Hus's Latin works, 1715, vol. i. p. 136.) 
 
 3 See p. 99. 
 
166 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 principal grievances of Marik were, firstly, that Hus had inter- 
 preted the action of Christ who had driven the traders from 
 the temple as signifying that He had granted to a lay king 
 the right of ruling over the clergy, and, secondly, that Hus had 
 stated that Christ had lamented over the destruction of 
 Jerusalem principally because it had been caused by the sins 
 of the clergy. In his treatise Hus maintained his theses 
 though defining them in a manner somewhat different from 
 that of Marik. The treatise Contra occultum adversarium is 
 very difficult reading and its importance is not immediately 
 obvious. Basing as usual his arguments on Scripture, Hus 
 here maintains the power which the secular authorities should 
 exercise over the church in a manner similar to that of Wycliffe 
 — and indeed of many earlier writers — as well as to that of the 
 later reformers, of Luther in particular. The friends of Hus 
 therefore strove, and strove successfully, to prevent this treatise 
 from being brought to the knowledge of the Council of Con- 
 stance. The ecclesiastics of whom that assembly was mainly 
 composed would of course deeply resent the theories contained 
 in the treatise as encroaching on their rights, while they would 
 not obtain for Hus the support of Sigismund, whose desire to 
 annihilate the Bohemian reformer was founded on political 
 motives. Hus's language in this treatise is very outspoken. 
 He declares that it is the duty of kings and lords of the secular 
 arm to restrain the wickedness of the clergy and extirpate the 
 heresy of simony. 1 
 
 1 " Dixi quod Sal va tor noster ejiciens vendentes et ementes de templo 
 dedit exemplum Regibus et Saccularis brachic Dominis quod vindicando Dei 
 injuriam debent primum Cleri malitiam compescere et praesertim Symoniacae 
 haeresis negotia extirpere." [Contra occultum adversarium, edition of 17 15, 
 vol. i. p. 169.) 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 HUS IN EXILE 
 
 Compared to the period of constant struggle, such as thel 
 years 1409 to 141 2 had been to Hus, the time between October 1 
 141 2, when he left Prague, and October 1414, when he started 
 on his fateful journey to Constance, cannot be considered 
 momentous. Still less can it be compared in interest to the 
 period of Hus's residence in Constance, which comprises his 
 imprisonment and sufferings there, and his death which has 
 rendered him immortal. If these months during which Hus 
 was mostly absent from Prague do not require as detailed an 
 account as other periods of his life, most of his most prominent 
 works were written at this time and will require careful notice. 
 It is not easy to ascertain with certainty where Hus wended 
 his way when he left Prague. As was the case a century later 
 when Luther sought refuge in the Wartburg, Hus and his 
 friends thought it advisable that his dwelling-place should 
 remain for a time unknown. It appears most probable that 
 Hus went first to Southern Bohemia, and a very ancient 
 tradition states that he visited Husinec, his birthplace, and 
 preached there. In December Hus addressed to the citizens 
 of Prague a letter in which he explained to them the reasons 
 that induced him to leave Prague. He again referred to the 
 passage from the Gospel of St. John (chapter x.), which has 
 already been mentioned, 1 and defended his conduct by the 
 example given by Jesus Christ. 2 A man so entirely guided by 
 the dictates of his conscience as was Hus felt obliged to recur 
 
 1 See p. 162. 
 
 2 " Non igitur minim est quod ego exemplo ejus (Christi) fugi, et quia 
 quaeritant et colloquuntur sacerdotes similiterque alii, ubi sim ego." 
 (Piagetisibus, December 141 2. Palacky, Documenia, pp. 40-47.) 
 
 167 
 
168 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 frequently to this question, and we find allusions to it in several 
 of his works. It is certain that Hus at the beginning of his 
 exile spent some time at the castle, or " tower " as it is called 
 in Bohemian, of Kozi Hradek, the property of John the elder, 
 Lord of Usti, one of the firmest upholders of the cause of 
 church-reform. 
 
 Shortly after the departure of Hus from Prague, King 
 Venceslas resumed his well-meant attempts to re-establish 
 religious concord in Bohemia. His task was not an easy one. 
 The opponents of church-reform, considering the departure of 
 Hus from Prague as a signal victory, became more exigent and 
 more intransigent in consequence of that event. They con- 
 tinued to maintain that Hus had been expelled from Prague — 
 a totally untrue statement that was repeated by the mendacious 
 Michael de causis at Constance. The Estates of Bohemia met 
 at Prague in December. Hus from his place of exile addressed 
 a petition to the assembly, in which he complained of the 
 persecution which he had suffered on the part of the parish 
 priests of Prague and begged that the freedom of preaching 
 should be maintained in the city. Hus's words did not fail 
 to make a considerable impression on the members of this 
 assembly, composed mainly of Bohemian nobles, many of 
 whom shared their sovereign's objection to the extreme power 
 and wealth of the clergy. It is but just to add that some of 
 these men supported the cause of church-reform from higher 
 motives and afterwards offered up their lives for it on the 
 battlefields of the Hussite wars. The Estates advised the king 
 to call together a synod of the Bohemian clergy which was to 
 mediate between the contending parties. Venceslas gladly 
 assented. He was, during all these protracted negotiations, 
 guided by the wish to settle as far as possible within the 
 country the differences that had broken out among the 
 Bohemian clergy. It was endeavoured to exclude as far as 
 possible the intervention of Pope John XXIII. The latter on 
 February 2, 1413, at a meeting of the Roman clergy at the 
 
HUS IN EXILE 169 
 
 Lateran, which the pope considered to be a council, condemned 
 as heretical all the writings of Wycliffe without exception. 
 
 The meeting of the Bohemian synod was, however, delayed 
 by a new change in the person of the Archbishop of Prague. 
 Archbishop Albik, a wealthy and well-intentioned man had, 
 on the particular request of King Venceslas, consented to 
 become Archbishop of Prague and had even, according to the 
 evil custom then prevalent in Bohemia, paid a large sum for 
 that honour. Albik soon tired of his new dignity and felt that 
 it became ever more difficult to conform to the wishes both of 
 King Venceslas and of Pope John, whose views were often 
 directly contradictory. He therefore entered into an agree- 
 ment with two other great dignitaries of the Bohemian Church, 
 according to which they were on receipt of a considerable 
 pecuniary remuneration to exchange their offices. Large 
 presents were previously sent to Pope John XXIII. , who on 
 receipt of them gave his consent to the agreement. Albik 
 resigned the archbishopric of Prague in favour of Conrad of 
 Vechta, then Bishop of Olomouc (Olmiitz). Conrad, a German 
 of Westphalian origin, had been one of the favourites of King ' 
 Venceslas. Later in life, when Archbishop of Prague, he 
 joined the Hussite Church and became the object of great 
 opprobrium on the part of ultramontane writers. Tomek, 
 whose strictly impartial attitude contrasts favourably with 
 that of most historians of this period, writes: 1 " Archbishop 
 Conrad was neither better nor worse than the great majority 
 of those who held the prominent ecclesiastical offices in 
 Bohemia in his time. Like the others, he only wished to 
 acquire large worldly possessions as rapidly as possible." A 
 contemporary chronicler, writing of the accession of Conrad of 
 Vechta, tells us: 2 "Conrad was an elderly and weak man. 
 He pledged many of the towns and estates belonging to the 
 archbishopric, and some are still in pawn. For himself, he 
 
 1 Story of the Town of Prague, vol. iv. p. 140. 
 1 Ancient Bohemian Chroniclers, vol. iii. p. 14. 
 
170 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 kept only the Castle of Roudnice." Albik, however, though 
 anxious to abandon the difficult task of ruling the archbishopric 
 of Prague, had no intention of foregoing altogether the eccle- 
 siastical dignities which had come to him late in life. A 
 further agreement, concluded at the same time, stipulated that 
 the new archbishop should cede his bishopric of Olomouc to 
 Venceslas of Burenic, provost of the Vysehrad, who was to 
 give over his previous dignity to Albik, who was also given 
 the titular rank of Archbishop of Caesarea. 
 
 Even at a period when simony was universal in Bohemia, 
 this chaffering for the highest ecclesiastical dignities in the 
 land became the subject of general talk and caused much 
 scandal and indignation. 1 It is in such occurrences in Bohemia 
 itself, far more than in the influence of distant countries, that 
 ; we must seek the origin of Hussitism as well as the enthusiasm 
 i which the ascetic teachings of Hus aroused in Bohemia. On 
 ; the other hand, the more Hus spoke against the avarice and 
 immorality of the Bohemian clergy, the greater became the 
 hatred and the animosity of the unworthy priests. They con- 
 sidered it necessary to silence at any price so dangerous an 
 enthusiast — and they eventually succeeded in doing so. 
 
 It was this ignoble traffic in ecclesiastical dignities which 
 was the immediate motive of Hus's famous treatise, svato- 
 kupectvi (On Simony), which will be mentioned presently. It 
 was probably written at Prague, where Hus stayed secretly 
 for a short time during the last weeks of the year 1412. He 
 wished to confer there with his friends with regard to the 
 attitude which the church-reformers should take up at the 
 synod which was shortly to meet. On January 2, 1413, King 
 Venceslas published a decree summoning the members of the 
 synod to meet at Nemecky Brod (Deutsch Brod) on February 
 1. The reason why the meeting was not to take place at 
 Prague appears to have been that Archbishop Albik, though 
 
 1 A contemporary writer— quoted by Tomek — says: " Mirabile cambium 
 tecerunt! Sed utinam illud cambium csset sine simonia maxima." 
 
HUS IN EXILE r 7 i 
 
 he had resigned his dignity, still resided in the archiepiscopal 
 palace. Albik, however, removed from his former residence 
 before February I, and the synod took place at the palace 
 of the archbishops. Two statements were immediately laid 
 before the assembly. One, which emanated from the party 
 that favoured the existent state of affairs — it would be in- 
 vidious to call it the conservative party — stated that the 
 present discord had been caused by some priests who had 
 disobeyed their superiors, and by those who spread the heresies 
 of Wycliffe. They therefore recommended that Wycliffe's 
 heresies should be again denounced, and that the papal bull 
 which decreed the destruction of the Bethlehem chapel should 
 be carried out. They also demanded that Hus should be 
 delivered up to the temporal authorities to receive condign 
 punishment. An additional paper from the same source 
 offered suggestions as to the steps to be taken to suppress all 
 opposition to the Church of Rome, and also protested against 
 Hus's visits to Prague, " be they manifest or secret." The 
 church - reformers in their statement demanded that Hus 
 should be allowed to appear before the synod in his own 
 defence. If no one there was prepared to bring accusations 
 against him, then those who had calumniated him should be 
 called on to prove that, as they had previously stated, heresies 
 were prevalent in Bohemia; should they be unable to do this, 
 they were to be punished. Simultaneously the university also 
 forwarded to the synod a document from the pen of the gifted 
 Master Jacobellus which covered the same ground as the one 
 mentioned before, but expressed more fully and more clearly 
 the views of the Bohemian church-reformers. It began by 
 stating the necessity of restoring peace in Bohemia and putting 
 a stop to the disorders in the Bohemian Church. The king 
 should therefore take determined measures to secure the 
 re-establishment of peace and concord, to destroy the heresy 
 of simony, adultery, fornication, concubinage, and the super- 
 fluity of worldly goods and temporal power among the clergy. 
 
172 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 The priests would thus be able to discharge more freely their 
 sacerdotal duties and live according to the rules of the gospel ; 
 the laity also would in consequence fulfil more worthily its 
 duties according to the decrees of Scripture. All customs 
 obviously contrary to Christ's law which had been introduced 
 among the Christian people should be extirpated everywhere 
 — from the king downward to the meanest layman. With 
 regard to Hus, the statement demanded that he should be 
 confronted with his adversaries. Should it, after this con- 
 frontation, appear to be impossible to obtain both spiritual 
 unity and worldly advantage, let at least peace and concord 
 according to Christ's law be maintained in Bohemia, and all 
 be ordered to conform to it. Then would evil report and the 
 accusation of heresy not harm the kingdom of Bohemia. If 
 unfounded evil report did not harm the Son of God, neither 
 would it harm the Bohemian kingdom. The puritanic note 
 of this spirited declaration is very striking. We meet here 
 with ideas such as that of the duty of rulers to suppress open 
 sin that played a large part in the Hussite movement. The 
 controversy continued, and both parties replied to the accusa- 
 tions raised against them by their opponents. The friends 
 of church - reform denied again that Hus and his friends 
 were guilty of heresy. They maintained that the real 
 cause of the complaints against them was the fact that 
 they had strongly denounced the vices prevalent among the 
 Bohemian clergy. The party opposed to church-reform found 
 a very energetic champion in John the iron, bishop of 
 Litomysl, afterwards of Olomouc. He addressed to the new 
 Archbishop Conrad a letter couched in very strong language, 
 but which contained nothing that had not been previously 
 stated. The bishop made no allusion to church-reform, but 
 maintained that the pope alone could and should decide on 
 all contentious questions of doctrine, and insisted on the blind 
 obedience to their hierarchical superiors which was the duty 
 of all priests. Hus was denounced in violent terms as one 
 
HUS IN EXILE 173 
 
 who shed the venom of his wickedness, heeding not the papal 
 interdict, who falsely invoked in his favour decisions of the 
 church that had never been published, that he might not be 
 hindered by the teaching of the church which did not admit 
 the " snarling of foxes and howling of wolves " which Hus 
 mendaciously declared to be evangelical voices. 1 As was 
 inevitable under the circumstances, the synod soon separated 
 without having arrived at any conclusion. Hus had again 
 left Prague, probably at the time when the sittings of the 
 synod began. He appears again to have been guided by the 
 advice of the king, who well knew that his renewed preaching 
 at the Bethlehem chapel had greatly irritated those who 
 wished to suppress at any price every discussion on the all- 
 important question of the prevalence of simony. 
 
 King Venceslas was naturally greatly disappointed at the 
 complete failure of the synod in which he had placed great 
 hopes. He rightly attributed this failure mainly to the attitude 
 of the opponents of Hus, and, always an enemy of the rich and 
 overbearing higher clergy of Bohemia, he now became even 
 more determined in his hostility to these men. He did not, 
 however, even now despair of reconciling the contending 
 parties. By his wish a large number of prominent ecclesiastics 
 in April 1414 met for another conference at the house of 
 Magister Kristan of Prachatice, parish priest of St. Michael, 
 who was at that time also rector of the university. Kristan 
 was a thorough adherent of Hus, and the choice of the meeting- 
 place proves that the king still favoured the party of church- 
 reform. As royal commissioners Archbishop Albik and 
 Zdenek of Laboun, Provost of All Saints, were present. Four 
 masters of theology, Peter and Stanislas of Znoymo, Stephen 
 Palec, and John Elias, represented the theological faculty, in 
 which the opponents of church-reform still had the upper 
 
 1 All the documents concerning the synod referred to above are published 
 by Palacky, Docnmenta, pp. 472-504. It has here only been possible to note 
 the most important points. 
 
174 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 hand. The other representatives of the university were, 
 besides Kristan the rector, Magister Jacobellus, Simon of 
 Tisnov, and John of Jesenice, one of Hus's intimate friends, 
 who seems to have acted as his representative at the confer- 
 ence. The conference ended almost as soon as it began. 
 Acting by royal authority Zdenek of Laboun asked the assembly 
 whether they would consider themselves bound by the deci- 
 sions of the Roman Church in all matters of faith. Palec and 
 his friends said that they agreed to this, but added that they 
 wished to state that the Roman Church was that of which 
 Pope John XXIII. was the head, and his cardinals the members. 
 John of Jesenice protested against this statement declaring 
 that the Roman Church was that of which Christ was the head 
 while the pope was his representative. He added that he and 
 his friends would obey this church " as faithful and pious 
 Christians." Laboun, who, like his master, wished above all 
 things to re-establish concord in the country, declared that 
 these definitions formed the base of an agreement and that 
 their acceptation bound all present under penalty of fine and 
 imprisonment to submit to whatever resolutions the conference 
 might adopt. His hopes were not destined to be fulfilled. 
 At the second meeting of the conference Stephen Palec raised 
 various sophistical objections to the continuation of the pro- 
 ceedings. 1 The bad faith of Palec appears to have been so 
 palpable that it caused the indignation of the royal commis- 
 sioners, who spoke sharply to Palec, accusing him of rendering 
 an agreement impossible, while the friends of church-reform 
 had been willing to come to terms. 2 The conscience of Palec 
 
 1 It has not appeared to me necessary to give a full account of these 
 objections. They will be found in Dr. Flajshans, Mistr Jan Hus, p. 325, and 
 Tomek, History of the Town of Prague, vol. iii. p. 538. We have also Palec's 
 own letter to his colleagues of the theological facultv (Palacky, Documenta, 
 pp. 507-510). 
 
 a " Ipsi vero " (the royal commissioners) " commoti sunt et nos gravissime 
 inclamaverunt, comminationes facientes quod infra sex dies adhuc, debet 
 redundare in nostra capita, et quod volunt D. Regi et omnibus dicere quod 
 pars adversa vult et voluit, quae nos optavimus consentire et omnia facere, 
 et nos noluimus acceptare; et sic cum indignatione magna stomachati 
 recesserunt." (Letter of Palec. Palacky, Documenta, p. 509.) 
 
HUS IN EXILE I75 
 
 does not appear to have been very clear, for he and his col- 
 leagues did not assist again at the meetings of the conference, 
 which therefore broke up. Palec and the other members of 
 the theological faculty, declaring that they were afraid of the 
 anger of King Venceslas, left Bohemia and retired to foreign 
 countries, where they continued to stir up public opinion not 
 only against Hus and his disciples, but also against the King 
 and Queen of Bohemia and their court. Many of their false- 
 hoods and fictions were circulated at Constance and have even 
 found their way into books written centuries after these 
 events. King Venceslas was not unnaturally indignant at the 
 departure of Palec, which accentuated the failure of another 
 attempt to re-establish concord in his kingdom. By a decree 
 published in the month of April 1414 he pronounced the 
 sentence of banishment against Palec and his companions and 
 gave the order that other masters should in order of seniority 
 obtain the offices that had become vacant. 
 
 Hus had on leaving Prague again retired to the castle of 
 Kozi Hradek. 1 He seems now to have despaired of a recon- 
 ciliation between the contending parties and to have spoken 
 even more openly than before. Now, as ever, he dwelt little 
 in his sermons on controversial matters of theology, but he 
 exhorted the peasants who flocked to his preaching to lead 
 honest, chaste, pious, and abstemious lives and to demand that 
 the priests, who, according to the church, were superior to 
 them in authority, should at least not be inferior to them 
 in their private life. Hus preached not only in the immediate 
 neighbourhood of Kozi Hradek, but also at more distant 
 places such as Usti, Lhota, and at Cerveny Dvur, where, 
 according to a very ancient tradition, he said mass in a barn. 
 His sermons, preached of course in the national language, 
 attracted great crowds and caused intense enthusiasm. The 
 neighbourhood of Tabor henceforth became the centre of the 
 
 1 According to some Bohemian writers the spot to which Hus first retired 
 on leaving Prague is uncertain, and he only now proceeded to Kozi Hradek. 
 
176 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 partisans of church-reform. Among the younger men who 
 listened to Hus's preaching were many who afterwards as 
 " warriors of God " formed part of the armies which under 
 Zizka beat back the forces of the whole world that was in 
 arms against Bohemia. From this period dates the immense 
 popularity of Hus among the Bohemian people — a popularity 
 that clings to his memory up to the present day. It would, 
 however, be very untrue to history if we pictured Hus as a 
 democratic or socialist agitator — and it is not only his enemies 
 who have sometimes attempted to do this. Hus remained to 
 his death a loyal subject of King Venceslas, and for his pious 
 consort, Queen Sophia, he always retained a respectful admira- 
 tion. He was always on terms of friendship with many of the 
 Bohemian nobles, as is indeed proved by the fact that he 
 sought refuge in their castles. As he wrote in his famed 
 Bohemian letter of June 10, 1415 — a letter to which I shall 
 again refer — he wished " the nobles to rule justly, the burghers 
 to conduct their business honestly, the artisans to work con- 
 scientiously, the servants to obey faithfully their master and 
 mistress." The unspeakably evil life, the avarice, and the 
 simony of the Bohemian clergy strongly excited his indignation, 
 and as a true Bohemian patriot he deeply resented the fact 
 that, in consequence of former faulty regulations of the uni- 
 versity, the rich benefices of his country were almost exclusively 
 in the hands of German aliens. Frequent preaching did not, 
 however, entirely absorb the activity of Hus at Kozi Hradek. 
 He kept up a constant correspondence with his many friends 
 at Prague and exhorted them to continue to worship at the 
 Bethlehem chapel as long as it should not have been de- 
 stroyed by the Germans; for it was frequently rumoured at 
 this time that they had the intention of doing so. Some of 
 Hus's most important works also were written at the castle 
 of Kozi. 
 
 Neither the departure of Hus from Prague nor the exile of 
 Palec and his adherents had re-established tranquillity in the 
 
HUS IN EXILE 177 
 
 city. Lengthy and wordy warfare was carried on between 
 the contending parties by means of numerous books and 
 pamphlets. Some writings of Hus which deal with these 
 polemics will be mentioned presently when referring to his 
 works of this period. The population of Prague took an 
 increasing interest in the controversy. Bohemia has, except 
 during the not infrequent periods when the ruling powers have 
 forbidden all discussions on matters of religion, been one of 
 those countries where, as in England and Scotland, theological 
 controversies have greatly interested the large masses of the 
 people. Nicknames were soon given to the adherents of the 
 contending parties, and while the upholders of church-reform 
 were called " Wycleffites," its opponents became known as 
 " the Mohamedans." The latter strange byname is said to 
 have been given to them because of the violence with which 
 they enforced their doctrines. 1 It may also have conveyed an 
 ironical allusion to the morals of the rich parish priests of 
 Prague, who were Hus's bitterest enemies. 
 
 Foreign countries, in which — with the exception of England 
 — Hus's teaching had not hitherto attracted much attention, 
 now began to feel a certain interest in the Bohemian move- 
 ment in favour of church-reform. The first statements con- 
 cerning the Bohemian movement came from France, a country 
 that, mainly through dynastic links, had for some time been 
 closely connected with Bohemia. A man whose opinion\ 
 carried the greatest weight in France wrote denouncing 
 severely the endeavours of Hus and his friends. This man 
 was the famed divine, John Gerson, then chancellor of the J 
 University of Paris. Since Dr. Schwab 2 has proved that 
 Gerson was not the author of the treatise De modis uniendi et 
 reformandi Ecclesiam 3 long attributed to him, and on the 
 
 1 This is the explanation given by Magister Jacobellus in a treatise printed 
 by Von der Hardt, Magnum Oecomenicum consilium Conlantiense. in. 
 Jacobellus writes: " Hanc enim legem, ut legitur in chronicis Machmet 
 docuit suos. ut scilicet persequerentur et occiderent, non Christus." 
 
 - Dr. Schwab, Johannes Gerson. 
 
 3 Printed by Von der Hardt, who attributed the authorship to Gerson. 
 
 M 
 
178 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 strength of which he was believed to have been a tolerant and 
 enlightened divine, Gerson's violent attack on the Bohemian 
 church-reformers no longer causes surprise. In a letter sent 
 from Paris on May 27, 1414, to the new Archbishop Conrad, 1 
 Gerson denounced the heretical views that were then being 
 spread in Bohemia, and earnestly entreated the archbishop to 
 extirpate at any price all doctrines and practices contrary to 
 the Roman Church. Gerson laid great stress on the necessity 
 of employing if necessary the secular arm. This, he continued, 
 the archbishop should do at any price lest his sheep be in- 
 fected with the poison of heresy; for St. Peter, who had con- 
 fided them to him, had ordered him to feed them, not to allow 
 them to be poisoned. Archbishop Conrad was to appeal to 
 King Venceslas to advise, request, and, if necessary, order him 
 to exterminate all heresies, if he wished to avoid the penalties 
 that awaited all rulers who were lax in the persecution of 
 heretics. Conrad's answer 2 was very short. He entirely 
 joined in the reprobation of the " heresiarch " Wycliffe, and 
 said that as far as it was his duty and circumstances permitted 
 he would extirpate heresy, even at the risk of his soul or his 
 body. Conrad, who had been a member of the royal court, 
 knew how anxious the king was to re-establish peace among 
 the Bohemian clergy, and how strongly he objected to the 
 intervention of foreigners in what he considered the internal 
 affairs of his country. Gerson was by no means deterred from 
 further attempts to obtrude his unwelcome advice. He ad- 
 dressed another letter to the Archbishop of Prague, 3 in which 
 he laid great stress on the fact that it was rather by fire and 
 sword than by argument that the prevalent heresies should be 
 extirpated. 4 Gerson sent with this letter a list of heretical 
 statements which, as he said, had been made by Hus. We 
 
 1 Printed by Palacky, Documenta. 
 
 - Palacky, Documenta. 3 Ibid. 
 
 * " Videtur autem parvitati meae quod contra nunc errorem exsurgere 
 deberet omnis dominatio tarn spiritualis quam temporalis ad cxtcvminationem 
 magis igne et gladio quam cuviosa ratiocinatione." 
 
HUS IN EXILE i 79 
 
 again find among them the wearisome falsehood that Hus had 
 said that the sacraments were invalid when administered by 
 an unworthy priest. These bitter letters, written some time 
 before the meeting of the Council of Constance, render Gerson's 
 intransigent attitude at that assembly less surprising. The 
 voice of Gerson did not remain isolated. Thus Simon, Cardinal 
 of Rheims, addressed a letter to Archbishop Conrad in which 
 he also begged him to extirpate heresy in his diocese. 1 The 
 evil fame of Bohemia as a country where heretics dwelt now 
 began to spread, and was indeed scarcely extinct among the 
 uneducated in Austria before the beginning of the nineteenth 
 century. We find an early proof of this animosity when 
 we read that Bohemian students were attacked as being 
 " heretics " at the then newly-founded University of Vienna. 
 A letter of Magister Michael Malenic, rector of the University 
 of Prague, in which he complains to the authorities of the 
 Vienna University of the ill-treatment of Bohemian scholars, 
 has been preserved. 2 
 
 The movements of Hus are at this period very uncertain, 
 but there is little doubt that he paid another short visit to 
 Prague in April 1414. He appears not to have stayed there 
 long. The letters of Gerson, who as chancellor of the famed 
 University of Paris and friend of the French royal family was 
 greatly esteemed, made Hus's position in Prague even more 
 difficult than it had been before, and they may also have im- 
 pressed for a time King Venceslas. He was at heart always a 
 friend of Hus, but greatly feared his treacherous younger 
 brother Sigismund, through whose intrigues he had at the 
 beginning of his reign twice been imprisoned by his own 
 subjects. Utterly faithless and unscrupulous as was Sigis- 
 mund, he was as ready to employ the accusation of heresy as 
 any other for the purpose of injuring his brother. Hus, in 
 whose character his deep gratitude for the often unstable 
 support of his king must be noted as a somewhat touching 
 1 Palacky, Documenta. - Ibid. 
 
180 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 feature, decided again to leave Prague. He did not, however, 
 return to Kozi Hradek, but accepted the invitation of Lord 
 Henry Lefl of Lazan to make his temporary home at Krakovec, 
 one of Lord Henry's many castles. Krakovec, near the small 
 town of Rakonic in Western Bohemia, was, very conveniently 
 for Hus, situated much nearer to the capital than Kozi 
 Hradek. The career of Henry of Lazan is very interesting as 
 being typical of that of many Bohemian nobles of his time. 
 He had met Hus at the court of King Venceslas and had, like 
 so many others, been fascinated by the manner and the enthu- 
 siasm of the young Bohemian priest. Lazan was one of those 
 who, when Hus was illegally imprisoned at Constance, de- 
 manded most energetically that King Sigismund should release 
 him. Yet he, some time after the execution of Hus, joined the 
 forces of Sigismund, whom, after the death of King Venceslas, 
 he considered his legitimate sovereign. He fell fighting against 
 his country at the battle of the Vysehrad, 1 and before dying 
 received communion in the two kinds according to the custom 
 of his own Bohemian Church. 2 Perhaps among no class of 
 men have these conflicts of contradictory duties been so fre- 
 quent and so painful as among the nobles of Bohemia. At 
 Krakovec, as at Kozi Hradek, Hus worked assiduously at the 
 numerous and important books that belong to this period of 
 his life. He also continued preaching to the people, who again 
 flocked to his sermons, even from great distances. Hus was 
 in constant touch with the court of King Venceslas, and it is 
 probable that he was about this time informed of the plan of 
 convoking a general council of the church, and of the possi- 
 bility that he might be summoned to defend his opinions there. 
 The innate goodness of Hus always led him to disbelieve in 
 V evil, unless confronted by its dire reality. He believed that 
 the proceedings of the council would be somewhat similar to 
 
 1 See Chapter XII. 
 
 2 Lawrence of Brezova, p. 440 of Dr. Goll's edition. See also Dr. Flajshans, 
 Mistr Jan Hus, p. 348. 
 
HUS IN EXILE 181 
 
 those of the " disputations " in which he had so often taken 
 part in Prague. He did not think that the council would pro- 
 ceed almost exactly on the lines of the trials instituted by the 
 inquisition, that he would merely be summoned to recant all 
 statements attributed to him by his enemies — whether he had 
 ever made them or not — and that in case of his refusal he would 
 be delivered over to the civic authorities to suffer death at the 
 stake. 
 
 Meanwhile the negotiations between Venceslas's treach- 
 erous brother Sigismund and Pope John XXI 1 1., which were 
 to lead to the meeting of the council at Constance, had 
 already begun. The diavolo cardinale was strongly opposed 
 to a general council of the church, and particularly to one held 
 outside the frontiers of Italy. He still had in that country a 
 large military force by means of which he could, should a 
 council meet in Italy, exercise over it the same dictatorial 
 power which he had previously exercised at Pisa and Rome. 
 On the other hand, the pope was obliged to consider the wishes 
 of King Sigismund, for the two rival popes still had many 
 adherents. Another difficulty that confronted the pope was 
 that, even at that unscrupulous and unspeakably corrupt 
 period, his evil life caused much scandal. At the recent 
 " private council," if we may call it so, Baldassare Cossa was 
 said to have stopped on their way to Rome and ordered back all 
 prelates whom he believed to be hostile to his cause. Sigis- 
 mund, whose help against his old enemy, the King of Naples, 
 Cossa then desired, was intent on furthering the meeting of a 
 general council of the church, which was to assemble under his 
 control in an imperial free city. He rightly thought that 
 nothing would contribute more to the restoration of the some- 
 what faded prestige of the empire. The fact that war was 
 then about to break out between England and France also 
 made the moment appear a favourable one for reviving the 
 glories of the Holy Roman Empire. It is probable that to the 
 humble priest John of Husinec Sigismund also assigned a 
 
182 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 part in his far-reaching plans. Sigismund, always well in- 
 formed on matters concerning Bohemia, knew that Venceslas 
 had to a great extent regained his popularity in that country. 
 His vices, in consequence of the influence of the pious Queen 
 Sophia, were less prominent. He was decidedly popular 
 with the townsmen and on good terms with a large part of 
 the nobility. Sigismund knew that he could not now, acting 
 as a bandit, seize and imprison his brother, as had been possible 
 formerly. Sigismund had, as he mentioned at Constance, 
 followed the career of Hus from its beginning. He did not 
 doubt that the pious, simple-minded priest, whose actions 
 were entirely governed by his conscience, would consider it 
 his duty to appear at the council. Still less did he doubt that 
 it would be possible to prevent Hus's return to his native 
 country. This, at least, he was from the first determined to 
 prevent. Sigismund believed — wrongly, as events proved, — 
 that Hussitism, Hus once removed, would have a brief and 
 precarious existence. The king knew that both Venceslas 
 and Queen Sophia were already suspected of heresy. Should 
 they be convicted of it, Sigismund could, as defender of the 
 Roman faith, conquer Bohemia and free himself of his detested 
 brother. The English students of the life of Hus have gener- 
 ally first met with Sigismund when he entered the cathedral 
 of Constance on Christmas Day, 1414. His earlier record, his 
 actions in Poland and Hungary, tainted as they are with per- 
 fidy and treachery of every description, are less known. 1 
 
 The two men, who, not to the honour of humanity, were 
 then the rulers of the Christian world, had some difficulty in 
 agreeing as to the locality and the date of the council. When 
 the papal envoys, Cardinals Antony of Challant and Francis 
 Zabarella, who were accompanied by the Greek scholar Chry- 
 solaras, visited Sigismund at Como in October 1413, they used 
 
 1 Those who do not feel inclined to wade through the contemporary Polish 
 and Hungarian chronicles, written in mediaeval Latin, will find a good account 
 of the early life of Sigismund in Aschbach's Geschichte Kaiser Sigmunds. 
 
, B<,„r, ra Cttmata ta~c„.<„r f.I.Sm,. 
 
 t.Cp&fioh &™r,;„,r Sis^r,;. 
 
 PLAN OF CITY i>l r CONSTANCE Al TIME OF COUNCIL, I4I4-I418 
 
HUS IN EXILE 183 
 
 all their eloquence to persuade him to consent to the meeting 
 of the council on Italian soil. Sigismund had, however, 
 already decided that the council should meet at Constance, 
 and not to lose time, he published a decree x dated October 31, 
 1413, in which he stated that the papal envoys had in the 
 name of the Pope John XXIII. and with the approval of King 
 Sigismund convoked a general council of the church that was 
 to meet at Constance on November 1, 1414. Cossa was still 
 reluctant, but at a meeting with Sigismund at Cremona at 
 Christmas, 1413, he gave his definitive consent, and even 
 promised to be present at the council. The meeting at 
 Cremona has retained some celebrity because of the alleged 
 intention of Gabrino Fondolo, tyrant of Cremona, to throw 
 the spiritual and secular rulers of the world from the summit 
 of a high tower to which he had conducted them. 
 
 Sigismund employed his great energy in endeavouring to 
 induce all countries to send their representatives to the council. 
 France was secretly ill disposed to the meeting of the council, 
 and indeed to Sigismund who, abandoning the traditional 
 policy of the House of Luxemburg, which was favourable to 
 France, was then engaged in negotiations with England. The 
 popular feeling was, however, at that time so strongly in favour 
 of a council that, largely in consequence of the intercession of 
 the University of Paris, the rulers of France decided to send 
 representatives to Constance. England was favourable to 
 the council. It was no doubt in consequence of the reaction 
 against Wycliffe's teaching that the English representatives 
 assumed what would now be called an ultramontane attitude 
 at Constance. In every part of Europe the coming council 
 was awaited with great anxiety. In view of the hopeless con- 
 dition of the church ruled by men such as Cossa, it was hoped 
 and believed that a council inspired by the Holy Ghost would 
 re-establish union in the church and also — what appeared 
 almost more important — check the unspeakable corruption of 
 
 1 Palacky, Documenta, pp. 515-518. 
 
184 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 the priesthood. From the sources we possess it does not 
 appear very clearly when the negotiations to induce Hus to 
 attend the council began. As one who was excommunicated 
 he was by canon law prohibited from attending a council. 
 His frequent -requests to appear before the recent synod at 
 Prague had met with a refusal. It was, therefore, a very 
 serious step on the part of Hus to proceed to Constance. Yet 
 now, as at every moment when he believed that he was obeying 
 God's command, he did not hesitate. The negotiations con- 
 cerning Hus's journey to Constance were probably carried on 
 at the castle of Krakovec. Peter of Mladenovic, 1 who is our 
 foremost authority on the last months of the life of Hus, 
 writes: 2 " After having come to an agreement with Pope John 
 XXIII. for the purpose that a general council of the church 
 should be held at Constance in Suabia, King Sigismund sent 
 from Lombardy certain Bohemian noblemen, his councillors 
 and friends, who were to persuade Magister John Hus to 
 proceed to Constance that he might there purge both himself 
 ■ and the kingdom of Bohemia from the infamous accusation 
 (i.e., of heresy). They were to inform him that the king 
 would grant him a safe-conduct which would enable him to go 
 safely to Constance and to return safely to Bohemia." The 
 much-discussed though really very clear question as to Hus's 
 safe-conduct will have to be mentioned when referring to its 
 violation by Sigismund. It should, however, here already be 
 noted that Sigismund distinctly guaranteed Hus's safe return 
 to Bohemia, whatever might be the decision of the council. 
 Hus, Mladenovic continues, having received so great and so 
 far-reaching promises, wrote to the king that he would proceed 
 to Constance. 
 
 There were not wanting warning voices that advised Hus 
 to reconsider his decision. Even one of Sigismund's envoys, 
 
 1 For Mladenovic, see my History of Bohemian Literature, 2nd edition, 
 p. 145. 
 
 - " Relatio de magistri Joannis Hus causa " (printed by Palacky, Docu- 
 ment a). 
 

 - 
 
 DISTRIBU 1 ION OF 1 OOD A I ( ONSTANCE 
 DURING THE COUNCIL, I4I4 I418 
 
 (From L's Chronicle of I 
 
HUS IN EXILE ^5 
 
 Nicholas Divoky of Jemniste — according to the Bohemian 
 custom of abbreviating names he was generally known as 
 Divucek — during the final negotiations that took place at 
 Prague said to Hus: " Master, be sure that thou wilt be 
 condemned." A member of the court of one of the most 
 perfidious of rulers, Divucek well knew how easy it would 
 be to Sigismund and to the council to apply to Hus the then 
 generally accepted maxim that no faith should be kept with 
 heretics. Hus at this time, probably to consult his friends, 
 left Krakovec and again visited Prague for a short time. Here 
 many of the prominent members of the university also en- 
 treated him to remain in Bohemia, where he would be safe 
 under the protection of the nobles and the people. Many of 
 the nobles — as one of them afterwards declared at the council 
 — were not only willing, but able to defend Hus in their castles 
 against all enemies. Of the sympathy of King Venceslas and 
 the more open friendship of the queen, Hus felt sure. Yet he 
 remained firm. He wrote several letters of farewell to friends, 
 one of which has somewhat the form of a last will. There is, 
 however, no justification in suggesting, as has been sometimes 
 done, that Hus believed from the first that King Sigismund 
 would break his word. His way lay through a wide expanse of 
 German territory, and he knew, and even exaggerated, the 
 hostility of the Germans to his person. It was also known 
 that the former German members of the University of Prague 
 were stirring up the people against Hus and the Bohemian 
 kingdom. Hus being a man of truly apostolical poverty, it 
 now became necessary to raise money to enable him to under- 
 take so lengthy a journey. Many of the nobles and probably 
 the king and queen contributed to the expenses. The univer- 
 sity, which considered him its representative at the council, 
 also supplied some financial aid. The " nobles presented him 
 with a comfortable carriage, Lord Pflug of Rabstein gave him 
 a handsome horse, and another noble also gave him a horse." 1 
 1 Dr. Flajshans, Mist* Jan Hus, p. 360. 
 
186 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 On October n, 1414, Hus left Prague accompanied by Lord 
 Venceslas of Duba, Lord John of Chlum, whom King Sigis- 
 mund had deputed to escort him, Peter of Mladenovic, private 
 secretary to Lord John, and some attendants. A large crowd, 
 including many magisters and other members of the univer- 
 sity, accompanied him to the city gate. Many expressed fears 
 that Hus would never return to his native country. 
 !;/ It has already been mentioned that the years 1412-1414 
 jTfwere the years of Hus's greatest literary activity. It will be 
 well to notice first his Bohemian writings, which are more 
 interesting as giving a clearer insight into the individuality of 
 the writer. The recent researches of scholars have added so 
 largely to the number of works rightly or wrongly attributed 
 to Hus that I shall here confine myself to the mention of a 
 few that are particularly valuable. 1 To the earliest part of 
 this period, if not to a yet earlier date, 2 belong two treatises 
 entitled Zrcadlo Hrichuv (the Mirror of Sin), an almost literal 
 translation of fhe~woTk; entitled Speculum Peccatoris that has 
 been attributed to St. Augustine, and a similar shorter work 
 entitled Mensi Zrcadlo (the Smaller Mirror). To the year 
 1412 belong a series of expositions (Vyklad) dealing consecu- 
 tively olthe faith, the commandments, and the Lord's Prayer 3 
 and a short work entitled Dcerka (the Daughter) dedicated to 
 one of the pious women who had taken up their abode near the 
 Bethlehem chapel. An ancient and interesting tradition 
 states that the book was dedicated to Anezka, the daughter of 
 Thomas of Stitny. The teaching of Hus is here quite in 
 accordance with that of the Roman Church. He here and 
 
 1 The late Rev. A. H. Wratislaw in the chapter of his John Hus entitled 
 " John Hus as a writer in his native language," refers to some of the Bohemian 
 works of this period, though many would not now agree with his appreciation 
 of their relative value. In my History of Bohemian Literature I refer (pp. 
 121-131) to the Bohemian works of Hus. 
 
 2 See Dr. Flajshans, Literarni cinnost Mistra JanaHusi (Literary Activity 
 of Master John Hus). It is not — according to Dr. Flajshans — certain that 
 the Smaller Mirror is a work of Hus. 
 
 3 My History of Bohemian Literature (2nd ed., pp. 123-127) contains 
 translations from the Vvklad. 
 
HUS IN EXILE 187 
 
 everywhere maintains the mediaeval and indeed monkish i 
 theory of the superiority of maidenhood to the state of a 
 matron. 
 
 Of greater interest than any of these writings is the short 
 book entitled Svatokupectvi (On Simony) written early in 
 1413 ; for it deals with the real cause of the Bohemian troubles 
 of this period. The intense horror and detestation of the 
 traffic in ecclesiastical titles and religious dignities — enhanced 
 by the fact that both buyer and seller were generally Germans 
 — was really the greatest factor in the religious upheaval of 
 Bohemia. This has often been overlooked by those who have 
 written on this period, though it is obvious enough to the 
 reader of the contemporary Bohemian chronicles. In close 
 connection with this point arose the question whether men 
 who had by foul and unworthy means obtained ecclesiastical 
 dignities could truly and validly administer the sacraments. 
 Hus himself, as has already been stated, held the orthodox 
 Roman opinion, but the subject gave rise to much discussion, 
 which was by no means exclusively caused by the study of 
 Wycliffe's works. The troubles of the schism had, of course, 
 increased the difficulty of judging what bishops and priests 
 could administer the sacraments validly. The papal secretary 
 Collucio, in a letter addressed to Margrave Jodocus of Moravia, 
 even stated that a schismatical or simoniacal pope could not 
 ordain true bishops, and that those who worshipped the sacra- 
 ment administered b}' a schismatical priest worshipped an 
 idol. 1 It was for this reason that the Hussites in the " Articles 
 of Prague " and elsewhere laid so great stress on the ad- 
 ministration of the sacrament by " worthy priests." 
 
 1 " Quis nescit ex vitiosa parte veros episcopos esse non posse? et per 
 consequens veros deficere sacerdotes, veraque non habituros post aliquid 
 temporis sacramenta, quos contigerit partem vitiosam esse secutos. . . . 
 Illi ergo qui fuerint obedientes non vero pontifici quamvis simpliciter et 
 conscientia non corrupta, si in aliquem inciderint ordinatum ab episcopis 
 novis adorantes hostiam et calicem non Christi corpus et sanguinem. sed 
 illam puram panis materiam atque vini cum aqua mixti veiut quoddam 
 idolum adorabunt." (Letter printed by Martene et Durand, Thesaurus, 
 novus Anecdotortim, vol. ii. pp. 160-161.) 
 
188 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 It is with this then burning question that the treatise .on_ 
 simony 1 deals. It was stated by the adherents of all the con- 
 tending popes that their opponents were heretics, and at that 
 period, more than at any other, the accusation of heresy was 
 scattered broadcast among the people. Hus desired to affirm 
 that simony also is a form of heresy. Written at a time when 
 Hus was incessantly accused of heresy by all those whom his 
 denunciations of simony displeased, the book has, of course, 
 an intensely personal note. In the first chapter Hus writes : 
 "As simony is heresy, and as the evil denounce good men as 
 heretics, I wish — as an admonition and confirmation for the 
 good, and also for the correction of the evil — to define first of 
 all what heresy is, that people may know whether those are 
 heretics to whom they give that name, or whether they are 
 themselves tainted by heresy. ' ' Hus then gives a definition of 
 heresy derived almost literally from St. Augustine, and iden- 
 tical with the one contained in his Super IV. Sententiarum* 
 In the following chapter Hus defines the three sources from 
 which heresy springs; they are apostacy, blasphemy, and 
 simony. Apostacy is committed by those who forsake God's 
 laws. Those are guilty of blasphemy who attempt to limit 
 God's power, or speak irreverently of him, or attribute to 
 human force things that God alone can do; among the latter 
 are the priests, who say that they are creators of God, that they 
 create the body of God whenever they wish, and that they 
 send to hell whomever they will. Even such a short extract 
 from this chapter conveys an idea of the unlimited power 
 which a clergy holding such views necessarily acquired over 
 an uneducated population, and of the terrible consequences 
 which such a power wielded by immoral and unscrupulous 
 men was likely to produce. 
 
 In the third chapter Hus writes of the origin and develop- 
 ment of simony. Its beginnings, he tells us, date from the 
 
 1 I have used Dr. Novotny's edition published in 1907. 
 1 See Chapter III. 
 
HITS IN EXILE i8c> 
 
 time of the Old Testament. It had " two fathers, one in the 
 Old Testament called Gehazi, the other in the New Testament 
 called Simon. The former took gifts for the healing of Naa- 
 man of leprosy, 1 the latter gave the apostles money, 2 wishing 
 to obtain the power of conferring the Holy Ghost on men by 
 laying their hands on them — but I will now more plainly 
 describe the simonists, who are like those sons who, having 
 had evil fathers before them, put on their boots." 3 " Know 
 then," Hus continues, " that as those who follow Simon are 
 called Simoniacs or Simonists, thus the followers of Gehazi are 
 called Gehazites, those of Balaam Balaamites, of Jeroboam 
 Jeroboamites, of Judas Judites." Hus, whose knowledge of 
 Scripture was exceptionally extensive for his time, enlarges on 
 these early simonists and then proceeds to more recent events. 
 He writes: " Thus this year lying, lascivious, avaricious men, 
 who by their evil deeds disowned Christ and derided the true 
 path of Christ, have robbed the people by false indulgences, 
 imagining strange speeches and absolutions, and granting 
 remittance of all sins and punishments. And these men having 
 the support of the masters (of the university) robbed the 
 people all the more boldly, and lied as much as they could. 
 But our dear Lord God gave the inspiration of the Holy Ghost 
 to the good priests that they might preach against these liars, 
 and to faithful laymen also (he gave it) that they should 
 bravely risk their lives 4 and they offered up three lives 
 (namely), Martin, John and Stasek 5 who, because they pro- 
 tested against false preaching, were beheaded in Prague, while 
 others were struck, whipped and cudgelled in the church of 
 Prague by the choir-boys, and others again cursed, insulted 
 and imprisoned. Praise be given to Thee, dear Christ, that 
 
 1 Kings ii. 5. ■ Acts> viii. 
 
 3 A colloquial expression in old Bohemian signifying the following an 
 example {i.e. " walk in their footsteps "). 
 
 * In the original, " necks." 
 
 6 The names of the three young men who were beheaded by order of the 
 magistrates of the old town of Prague. See p. 157. 
 
i 9 o THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Thou hast given Thy faithful such grace that they professed 
 Thy truth." 
 
 In the following chapters Hus deals with simony as it 
 appears in the different ranks of the hierarchy. He first— in 
 Chapter IV.— treats of the papacy, and begins by Re futing the 
 theory that it is impossible that a pope should commit a sin 
 and therefore that he should be guilty of simony. Hus then 
 denies that the pope is the most holy father, whorrfsin cannot 
 touch; for only one is our most Holy Father, the Lord God 
 whom sin cannot touch. Hus then proceeds to define in the 
 customary scholastic fashion of his time the different manners 
 in which a pope can commit simony. Always, however, 
 mainly interested in the affairs of his own country and en- 
 deavouring to contribute to its spiritual welfare, he soon refers 
 to the manner in which in Bohemia, as in other countries, 
 papal nominees, often men of detestable reputation, were 
 appointed to ecclesiastical dignities. "Is it not," he writes, 
 " contrary to God's regulations that the pope should decree 
 that his cooks, porters, equerries, footmen, should have first 
 claim on the most important benefices even in lands of which 
 they do not know the language? " This matter had great 
 practical importance in Bohemia, where at that moment 
 Roman nominees had even more than in other countries taken 
 the places of native priests. 1 In Chap ter V. Hus refers to 
 bishops. " A worthy bishop," he writes, " must be of holy 
 life, called by God through the will of the people, and without 
 having bestowed gifts. When he is called, let him consider 
 himself unworthy; and when he is compelled to accept, let 
 him do so meekly for the praise of God, for the salvation of the 
 people, and his own. For if he who accepts a bishopric is of 
 holy life, full of learning and thus able to instruct the people, 
 chosen by God through the people, consecrated and approved 
 
 1 This matter has been very clearly stated in the Cesky Historicky Casopis 
 (Bohemian Historical Yearbook) by Dr. Krofta in a series of articles to which 
 I have already referred. 
 
HUS IN EXILE 
 
 191 
 
 without gifts, then he truly enters into (possession of) his 
 bishopric. But how nowadays shall such a one, who is worthy, 
 be elected, and also confirmed by the pope? Sooner will the 
 bridge of Prague break down than that any one shall in this 
 holy manner obtain possession of the bishopric of Prague." 
 This interesting passage proves that Hus had studied the 
 records of the early church, when men were modestly reluctant 
 to accept the office of bishop, and had almost to be forced to 
 do so. Hus's ideal bishop also contrasts strangely with the 
 bishops of his own time, who were warriors and lawyers rather 
 than priests. In Chapter VI. Hus deals wit h, th p Tnpnkc; anrl 
 specially— with__t he mendicant fria rs. Of these, like most 
 mediaeval writers, he speaks unfavourably. After referring to 
 St. Bernard, on one of whose works this chapter is, according 
 to Dr. Novotny, partly founded, Hus writes: " But he who 
 has not the books of St. Bernard, let him observe their (the 
 friars') deeds, how with their meals and their servants, their 
 fattening and dressing (their food), their dishes and goblets, 
 their drinking and their spoons, they surpass the lords of the 
 land. Driving in their carriages also and riding on their 
 horses they surpass the lords of the land and the knights. 
 Then in feasting and banqueting with their friends and others, 
 who are compliant to them, they lose (spend) their alms very 
 gaily. And how much do they spend on the keep of their 
 dogs of various breeds ? Who can write of their foreign wines 
 of various fragrance? St. Bernard, a monk, describes to us 
 how this one of their wines tastes of wormwood, that of rose- 
 mary, that of laurel, that of sage, that of elecampane, that of 
 ginger, how sweet some are, and others how fragrant; and 
 these they pour out, now from one distillery, now from another. 
 And though thou, St. Bernard, wert not in Bohemia, I will 
 tell thee that they (the friars) have also beer, both old and 
 new, heavy and light. If unknown laymen visit them, they 
 give them this light beer, thinking that they will believe that 
 they (the friars) also drink it, and also that they (the visitors) 
 
192 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 may drink less. But if they perceive a man of whom they 
 think that he might wish to rest (to be buried) with them after 
 death, or of whom they hope that he may give them something, 
 then they draw for him a good pittance, 1 and one pittance 
 follows another, and with them a pittance signifies to drink 
 deeply and to feed well. Thus have these poor people re- 
 nounced the bodily pleasures of this world that there are no 
 men who have a more delightful dwelling-place for their bodies. 
 Kings, lords, princes have not always food and drink so good, 
 and always ready. The cellars of worldly men are sometimes 
 empty, theirs never. Kings and lords may not find their food 
 cooked and roasted, and may even lack bread, but for them 
 deliciously white bread is always ready." 
 
 In the following two short chapters — VIII. and IX. — Hus 
 discourses on simony among the lower clergy, and among the 
 laity. Chapter IX., one of the most interesting, treats of 
 those who indirectly abet simony, and shows how difficult it 
 was at that time to avoid committing that sin. Among those 
 here accused by Hus we find also the magisters of the univer- 
 sity, and this affords to him the opportunity of introducing 
 references to himself that, written with touching humility, 
 appeal to all readers of his works. He writes: " Truly have I 
 in the schools heard the magisters speak of humility, patience, 
 poverty, courage, and other virtues, and very diligently and 
 firmly did they speak, as if nothing could be better, and as if 
 they fulfilled (possessed) all these virtues; but then in their 
 deeds I found naught of these virtues, but a fulness of pride, 
 avarice, impatience, and cowardice. And, as dear Christ 
 states, they lay heavy burdens on the people, issuing their 
 decrees, pressing forward to (obtain) the highest dignities of 
 priesthood; and if men bow not before them like before gods, 
 they wax angry; and if they are not placed at the highest 
 
 1 The Bohemian word pitancie is identical with the English word pittance 
 in the ancient monastical sense. Hus has here made a pun on the similarity 
 of this word with the verb " piti " (to drink). It is impossible to render 
 the pun in English. 
 
HUS IN EXILE 
 
 193 
 
 place at table, they strangely mark their displeasure, and they 
 dispute much for the foremost place in the schools." After a 
 reference to the pride of the monk Marik, one of Hus's adver- 
 saries at Prague, Hus continues his reflections on the magisters, 
 whom he compares to the Pharisees. He writes: "Our Saviour 
 said that they (the magisters) love the first places at assemblies, 
 they spread out the edges of their robes and cloaks and tabards 
 and mantles. Alas! I also had these tabards, robes with wide 
 sleeves, capes lined with white fur; for, alas! thus have they 
 hedged in the rank of magister that you cannot attain it if you 
 have not these garments. Therefore to guard men against 
 pride did Our Saviour say to his disciples and the people: 
 ' But be not ye called Rabbi, for one is your master, even 
 Christ.' 1 Of these words St. Jerome has said that Christ thus 
 wished to check evil desires, so that none might from pride 
 claim to be called master. And truly I do not understand how 
 a man can worthily be a master unless it be that he may have 
 a better place to teach God's truth, and that he may more 
 bravely speak the truth and defend it. But I have already 
 found that simple poor priests, poor laymen, and women 
 defend the truth more bravely than doctors of the Holy Writ, 
 who from fear flee from the truth and dare not speak it. And 
 I, myself, alas! was he who dared not sincerely and openly 
 preach the truth. And why are we (magisters) thus? Be- 
 cause we are cowardly, fearing some of us to lose the praise of 
 the world, and its favour, others (fearing to lose) our income. 
 We are as the Jewish priests of whom St. John wrote : ' Among 
 the chief rulers many believed in him, but because of the 
 Pharisees, they did not confess him, lest they should be put 
 out of the synagogue. For they loved the praise of men more 
 than the praise of God.' " 2 
 
 The extreme conscien tiousness and the extreme humility 
 of Hus areappare nt in this chapter. He deeply repented the 
 natural, momentary pleasure which the son of the peasant of 
 
 1 St. Matthew xxiii. v. 8. a St. John xii. 42-43. 
 
194 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Husinec felt when first arrayed in academic garb, and again 
 felt doubtful whether he had done his duty when he left 
 Prague for Kozi Hradek. 
 
 The last chapter of the treatise on simony endeavours to 
 find a remedy for the terrible abuses which had been so power- 
 fully described in the previous ones. Hus's suggestions are 
 very bold, and they must have added greatly to the already 
 large number of his enemies among the Bohemian clergy. 
 Hus begins by expressing a somewhat Utopian hope that 
 Christianity would return to the institutions of the primitive 
 church. " The best way " (to prevent simony), he writes, 
 " would be that men be elected bishops and parish priests 
 according to God's will. Thus did the apostles act, having no 
 revelation as to whom they should receive as bishop in place 
 of Judas. Referring to this, St. Jerome^ says: ' As so great 
 a man as Moses was not allowed to choose the priests of the 
 people according to his own sagacity, or to appoint a sub- 
 stitute, who would there be among the people — who are often 
 excited by rumours, vain-glory and material advantages — 
 who also among the priests, who would consider himself worthy 
 (to be a priest or bishop) ? He only to whom, after he has 
 implored God and prayed, God manifests this wish that he 
 should become a priest.' " Direct election by God is therefore, 
 according to Hus, the most perfect way by which the priests 
 of the Lord could be appointed. The Bohemian brethren who 
 considered themselves the true successors of Hus actually 
 attempted to carry out this precept. 2 From these ideal 
 heights Hus descends to more matter-of-fact suggestions. He 
 considered the present system of the appointment of bishops 
 and priests as a necessary evil, but thought that strict subjec- 
 tion of the clergy to the secular power would act as a beneficial 
 
 . * According to Dr. Novotny these words are quoted literally from the 
 
 * Decretum of Gratian. 
 
 a The first priests of the brethren were chosen in this manner. It was 
 believed that God's will could be ascertained by the drawing of lots. See 
 my History of Bohemian Literature (2nd edition, pp. 208-211). 
 
HUS IN EXILE 
 
 control, and check the sins and especially the simony prevalent 
 among the clergy. " As every king," he writes, " has of God 
 power over his kingdom that he may truly and justly rule 
 his kingdom, and as the priests are in the kingdom, the king 
 must guide them in the path of truth and justice; and he 
 would not guide them in the path of truth and justice did he 
 allow them, like negligent servants, to incur the wrath of the 
 Highest of Kings; he would not thus fulfil the duties of his 
 royal office." 
 
 I must reluctantly refrain from dwelling longer on the 
 treatise Svatokupectvi, to which I have perhaps already 
 devoted todnrmcrispace. It is, however, impossible, I think, 
 to exaggerate the importance of this treatise. The positions 
 of the contending parties, of the king and his court, of the 
 opulent and simoniac clergy, and of the church-reformers, 
 with whom was the great mass of the people, appear very 
 clearly. We understand the true causes of the prolonged 
 struggle in Prague which was delineated in the previous 
 chapters. I may here mention that I entirely agree with a 
 remark made some years ago by the late Rev. A. H. Wratis- 
 law, who wrote: The treatise on simony would well bear 
 translation into English as a whole. 
 
 That Hus was thoroughly aware of the importance of his 
 book, of its boldness, and of the danger to which it might 
 expose him, is proved by its closing words. " I have 
 written these leaflets," he tells us, " knowing that I should 
 obtain through them neither praise nor kindness nor bodily 
 advantage either from avaricious priests nor from others who 
 are laymen, for I demand no such things from them, desiring 
 only God's reward and salvation. And if blame and torment 
 befall me, I have placed it before my mind that it is better to 
 suffer death for the truth than to obtain by flattery earthly 
 reward. Thus also St. Paul said: ' If I yet pleased men, I 
 should not be the servant of Christ.' l Understand then : if I 
 
 1 Galatians i. 10. 
 
196 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 had by flattery pleased the people, I should not have been a 
 servant of God — therefore I avoid flattery that I may not 
 imperil the souls of others and my own by flattery. Openly 
 and simply have I set down my speech, that I may as far as is 
 in my power crush and weed out simony. Deign Thou to be 
 helpful to me in this cause, oh, merciful Saviour." I am not, 
 I hope, prejudiced as being a countryman of Hus if I venture 
 to state that, according to my opinion, few sublimer words have 
 ever been written by the pen of man. 
 
 To the year 1413 belongs also another of Hus's most valu- 
 able Bohemian works. It may be stated generally that the 
 treatise on Simony, the Postilla to which I shall now refer, and 
 •the Letters are the most precious of Hus's works written in 
 his own language. It is in them that we find the true Hus, 
 not in the scholastic and sometimes sophistical controversies 
 with Stokes, Palec, and others. The Postilla, finished by Hus 
 on October 28, 1413, was not actually the last even of his 
 Bohemian works. It was, however, the last of his more 
 extensive and striking writings and was therefore afterwards 
 greatly venerated as his " testament " or " last will." A 
 particular veneration for the Holy Scriptures was characteristic 
 of Hus as of Matthew of Janov and all Bohemian church- 
 reformers. The Bible was, however, very little known to the 
 Bohemian people, and its study was by no means encouraged 
 by the priests. The Postilla is a collection of sermons on the 
 gospel for every Sunday and more important holy days of the 
 year. Hus writes in his introduction: " I resolved for the 
 glory of God, and for the salvation of the faithful Bohemians, 
 who wish to know and to fulfil God's will, briefly to expound 
 with God's help the gospel for all the Sundays of the year. I 
 desire that those who read or listen be saved, that they may 
 beware of sin, love God above all things, love one another, 
 increase in virtue and pray to the Lord God for me, sinner." 
 Hus then alludes to the ignorance of the Bible that was general 
 among the Bohemians. " As the people," he writes, " gener- 
 
HUS IN EXILE I97 
 
 ally have no gospel written in Bohemian, and it is difficult to 
 understand an exposition without a foundation (previous know- 
 ledge), therefore will I always place the gospel first (at the 
 beginning) of the exposition." The Bohemians thus became 
 acquainted with at least a small part of the Holy Scriptures, 
 which was read out to them in their own language. 
 
 Hus in this work, and indeed generally when he is not 
 writing according to the scholastic method, shows a lightness 
 of touch and a sometimes almost playful manner which render 
 the Postilla very attractive. Since the Bohemians have 
 obtained at least a certain amount of religious liberty, the book 
 has been frequently published. 1 It is very difficult to give 
 short extracts from a book such as the Postilla, but I think 
 that a quotation from the exposition of the gospel for Palm 
 Sunday - will give an idea of the interest and value of the book. 
 After quoting the gospel of the day, 3 Hus writes : " Our gracious 
 Saviour, approaching Jerusalem for our salvation, as to-day, 
 showed great humility, great mercy; and entering the temple 
 he showed humility, mercy, and justice. Humility because 
 though being the Lord and King of the whole world he rode 
 simply on an ass, to condemn worldly pride. Mercy he 
 showed because, coming to Jerusalem and knowing what 
 would befall its people both in spirit and in body, he cried 
 bitterly till he sobbed, and unable to finish his speech said: 
 ' Jerusalem, Jerusalem, if thou hadst known, even thou ' — he 
 did not through tears finish his speech, but cried. 
 
 " In the temple also he showed mercy when the blind and 
 lame came up to him, and he healed them. Justice he showed 
 when with a whip he drove the priests and merchants out of 
 the temple, saying to them: 'It is written. My house shall 
 be called the house of prayer, but ye have made it a den of 
 thieves.' " After again referring to the gospel of the day, Hus 
 
 1 I have used the edition published by Dr. Flajshans, who has modernised 
 the Bohemian of Hus. 
 
 -Pp. 121-127 of Dr. Flajshans's edition. 
 3 St. Matthew xxi. 
 
198 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 continues: " Behold this is what, word by word, the pope, the 
 bishop, the parish priest must read to-day when they stand at 
 the church gates in procession, that is, in the ordered march of 
 the deacons and the rest of the people. And I know not how 
 the pope could well read out this, if he can read, or a bishop; 
 for there are many popes, archbishops, cardinals, bishops, 
 canons, and parish priests who know not how to read in books. 
 How also could (such a one) wish to read (the gospel) when 
 everything (contained in it) would be against him ? Christ on 
 an ass and he on a large white stallion or horse, with a golden 
 bit, the bit, girths and harness adorned with gold and precious 
 stones; coloured tassels float from his hat down to the ground, 
 and the caparison which covers his steed trails to the earth; 
 before him they drive an ass or mule, which carries the body 
 of Christ * and sometimes feeds on the grass in the fields ; 
 meanwhile they heed not Christ but kneel before the pope. 
 They carry a baldachin over him, call him the most holy, 
 throng round him begging for prebends and kissing his feet, if 
 the mercenaries clad in armour, who with silver clubs drive 
 away the poor, permit it. And he (the pope) sits on his war- 
 horse smiling that he has so much praise. And our dear, 
 tranquil, meek Redeemer rides onward on his mule weeping 
 bitterly." Hus gives here a very striking sketch of the ap- 
 pearance and surroundings of a great warrior-priest of his 
 time. If we remember that the reigning pope of the time was 
 the diavolo cardinale, the contrast between the haughtiness of 
 the pope and the meekness of Jesus Christ contained in this 
 passage has a touch of very bitter though perhaps uninten- 
 tional irony. Here, as ever, Hus expresses the craving for 
 the return to the simplicity of the primitive church, which 
 was the ideal of most noble minds of his time. The ideal may 
 have been delusory and unattainable ; it was certainly noble. 
 He who attempts to outline the life of Hus must allude to 
 
 1 Opulent priests at this period were in the habit of having the sacrament 
 carried before them in the manner described here. 
 
HUS IN EXILE i 99 
 
 all those of his works that are important, or characteristic of 
 the writer. I cannot, therefore, omit the strange little book 
 entitled, Writings against tlie Priest-Kitchcnmastcv . The work, 
 written, as the title indicates, in a popular manner, met with 
 great favour, and has been mentioned oftener than it deserves. 
 Written in 1414, it was first printed in 1509, at an earlier 
 period than almost any other work of Hus. 1 It certainly 
 gives evidence of the occasional smallness of a great mind. It 
 appears that Hus, during his exile, perhaps while a guest at 
 the castle of one of the Bohemian nobles, met a " priest- 
 kitchenmaster " (or steward of the kitchen), who is otherwise 
 unknown to us. The man, who had given up his ecclesiastical 
 rank to take a situation in a kitchen, affronted Hus, stating 
 that " he was worse than any devil." Hus bore down on the 
 unfortunate cook with all the weight of his scholastic skill. 
 He advances fifteen arguments to prove that he was not worse 
 than the devil, one of them being that the devil had sinned for 
 6005 years, while he (Hus) had not sinned for fifty years, not 
 having as yet attained that age. Incidentally — and this is 
 the only real interest of the book — Hus shows how largely 
 the priests then occupied secular offices. ' The priests," he 
 writes, " now strive to obtain a hold on all worldly offices, 
 where they smell money. We find priests as burgraves, priests 
 at the register offices, priests as judges, priests as estate-agents, 
 priests as cooks, priests as writers, and if the beadle's work 
 were not so hard and so ill-paid, we would find priests as 
 beadles also." Hus then somewhat uncharitably reminds his 
 adversary of the proverb that there is no shorter walk than 
 that from the kitchen to the beer-cellar. 
 
 Of the Latin writings of Hus that belong to this period, 
 the most important is the treatise De Ecclesja._ I t was the 
 principal cause or rather pretext of his condemnation at Con- 
 stance. J he -book is an abridgment ol the work of Wvcliffe ' 
 
 1 Printed in Erben's Husi Sebrane spisy ceske (Hus's selected Bohemian 
 works), vol. iii. pp. 241-254. 
 
200 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 that bears the same name, and its last chapters are also largely- 
 grounded on Wycliffe's treatise De Potestate Papae. It is not 
 only certain that Hus differed from Wycliffe on several dog- 
 matic subjects — being nearer to the teaching of the Roman 
 Church than the English reformer was — but we have also no 
 proof that he considered all the statements contained in the 
 treatise De Ecclesia as absolute and indisputable truths. He 
 never asserted this, and when questioned on this subject at 
 the Council of Constance, declared that he would withdraw 
 whatever might be contrary to the true faith, if valid evidence 
 from Scripture were placed before him. No such discussion 
 was allowed to take place. The members of the council in- 
 terrupted Hus with loud threats and cries and silenced him. 
 The condemnation of Hus was for the council a foregone con- 
 clusion, and as the treatise De Ecclesia contained sentences of 
 Wycliffe that had already been declared heretical, the treatise 
 was the safest weapon to bring about the death of Hus. 
 
 The keynote of the treatise. De- Ecclesia is the theory of 
 predestination, but as will have to be noted when dealing with 
 the trial of Hus, it is not certain that his views differed widely 
 from those of the Roman Church at the point of development 
 which they had then attained. The theory of predestination 
 had undoubtedly by both Wycliffe and Hus been adopted 
 from St. Augustine. In some cases the views expressed by 
 St. Augustine do not differ widely from those contained in 
 Hus's treatise De Ecclesia. 1 On the subject of predestination, 
 as on almost all more important points, Hus was not allowed 
 freely to express his views at Constance ; but it is evident that 
 he firmly believed that his views on this subject were not 
 opposed to those of the Roman Church. He relied on his 
 
 1 Compare the following passage from St. Augustine (De praedestinatione, 
 34) : " Electi sunt ante mundi constitutionem ea praedestinatione in qua 
 Deus sua future facta praescivit; electi sunt autem de mundo ea vocatione, 
 qua Deus id quod praedestinavit, implevit. Quos enim praedestinavit ipsos 
 et vocavit ilia scilicet vocatione secundum propositum von ergo alios, sed 
 quos praedestinavit ipsos et vocavit nee alios sed quos praedestinavit, vocavit 
 justificavit ipsos et glorificavit, illo utique fine, qui non habet finem." 
 
HUS IN EXILE 201 
 
 studies of the works of St. Augustine. A man of great 
 humility and simplicity, he little thought that St. Augustine 
 himself was little in favour with the churchmen of that day, 
 who were statesmen, lawyers, warriors, anything but priests.' 
 
 The principal ideas contained in the treatise De Ecclesia 
 may be briefly summarised thus: All men are divided into 
 two classes, those who are — either conditionally or uncon- 
 ditionally — predestined (predestinati) to eternal bliss, and 
 those who are foreknown (presciti) to damnation. The mass 
 of the predestinati form the true Holy Catholic Church, but 
 the church as at present constituted includes the presciti as 
 well as the predestinati . Of the true church Christ is the only 
 head. As man He is " head of the church within it " {caput 
 intrinsecum), as God He is its " head without " (caput extrin- 
 secum). Christ is the true Roman pontiff, the high priest, and 
 the bishop of souls. The apostles did not call themselves 
 " Holy Father " or " Head of the Church," but servant of God 
 and servant of the church. A change came with the " dona- 
 tion of Constantine." 2 Thenceforth the pope considered 
 himself as head (capitaneus) of the church and Christ's vicar 
 upon earth. It is not, however, certain that the pope is 
 Christ's successor in this world. Only then is he Christ's 
 representative and the successor of St. Peter, and only then 
 are the cardinals successors of the apostles, when they follow 
 the examples of faith, modesty, and love which St. Peter and 
 the apostles gave. Many popes and cardinals have not done 
 this, and indeed many saintly men, who never were popes, 
 were truer successors of the apostles than, for instance, the 
 present pope (John XXIII.) St. Augustine did more for the 
 welfare of the church than many popes, and studied its doc- 
 
 1 This interesting subject into which I cannot enter is very clearly ex- 
 pounded by Dr. Harnack (Dogmengeschichte, iii. pp. 434-439). Dr. Harnack 
 writes: " Die Geschichte der Kirchenlehre im Abendlande ist eine vielfach 
 verdeckte Geschichte des Kampfes gegen Augustin." 
 
 2 Hus of course believed in the authenticity of the " donatio " as did all 
 mediaeval writers before its exposure by Laurentius Valla. 
 
202 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 trines more profoundly than any cardinal from the first to the 
 last. If pope and cardinals give their attention to worldly 
 affairs, if they scandalise the faithful by their ambition and 
 avarice, then are they successors not of Christ, not of Peter. 
 not of the apostles, but of Satan, of Antichjistr-^f Judas 
 Iscariot. It is not certain that the pope lsTeafiy^fche head of 
 the church ; he cannot even be sure that he is not a prescitus, 
 and therefore no member of the true church at all. St. Peter 
 erred even after he had been called by Christ. Pope Leo was 
 a heretic and Pope Gregory (XII.) was but recently con- 
 demned by the Council of Pisa. It is a popular fallacy to 
 imagine that a pope is necessary to rule the church. We must 
 be thankful to God that He gave us His only son to rule over 
 the church, and He would be able to direct it, even if there 
 were no temporal pope, or if a woman occupied the papal 
 throne. 1 As with the pope and the cardinals, so with the 
 prelates and the clergy generally. There is a double clergy, 
 that of Christ, and that of Antichrist. The former live accord- 
 ing to the law of God, the latter seek only worldly advantage, 
 Not every priest is a saint, but every saint is a priest. Faith- 
 ful Christians are, therefore, great in the church of God, but 
 worldly prelates are among its lowest members, and may 
 indeed, should they be presciti, not be members of the church 
 at all. 
 
 Of the other Latin works that belong to this period, in 
 which — as already mentioned — Hus's literary activity was 
 greatest, only a few can be mentioned. Foremost among 
 them, mainly because of its great historical interest, is Hus's 
 Appeal from the Pope to Jesus Christ, 2 to which I have already 
 referred. 3 To the haughty and worldly clergy of the time 
 it appeared both absurd and insolent, and every mention of 
 
 1 An allusion to the fable of Pope Joan. 
 
 2 " Appellatio M. Joannis Hus a sententiis pontificis Romani ad Jesum 
 Christum supremum Judicem " (printed Hus Opera, 171 5, vol. i. pp. 22-23, 
 and more correctly Palacky, Documenta, pp. 464-466). 
 
 * See p. 160. 
 
HUS IN EXILE 203 
 
 the document was at Constance received with jeers and deri- 
 sion. With the articles derived from Wycliffe's works, which 
 Hus was, rightly or wrongly, stated to have accepted in their 
 entirety, and the ludicrously untrue and wicked statement 
 that Hus had declared that he was one of the persons of the 
 divinity, the appeal was the document by which the council 
 was mostly influenced when it pronounced sentence on Hus. 
 This is a striking proof of the unacknowledged and perhaps 
 unconscious scepticism which prevailed among the rich pre- 
 lates whose influence directed the deliberations at Constance. 
 Hus's profound piety is evident in every line of his appeal. 
 He confidently appeals to " the omnipotent God, the first and 
 last refuge of the oppressed, the Lord who will preserve the 
 truth in all eternity." Hus then quotes the examples of Christ 
 himself, St. Chrysostomus, Bishops Andrew of Prague and 
 Robert of Lincoln as precedents for his direct appeal to God. 1 
 He then begs all faithful in Christ, particularly the princes, 
 barons, knights, citizens, and all other inhabitants of the 
 Bohemian kingdom, to pity him, who had been unjustly 
 struck down by excommunication on the instigation of his 
 enemy, Michael de causis. Pope John XXIII. had decreed 
 this punishment without even granting a hearing to Hus's 
 representatives, a favour which should not even be refused 
 to Jew, pagan, or heretic. Hus ends by again appealing to 
 the " Lord Jesus Christ, the justest judge, who knows, pro- 
 tects, and rewards all men whose cause is just." Though one 
 of Hus's shortest works, the Appeal is, because of its historical 
 interest, one of the best known. We therefore possess very 
 numerous manuscripts of the treatise, and it has been fre- 
 
 1 " . . . ad Deum appello, committens sibi causam raeam, salvatoris 
 Jesu Christi sequens vestigia, sicut sanctus et magnus patriarcha Constanti- 
 nopolitanus Joannes Chrysostomus a duplici episcoporum et clericorum 
 concilio, et beati in spe episcopi, Andreas Pragensis et Robertus Linconiensis 
 episcopus a papa ad supremum et justissimum judicem, qui nee timore con- 
 cutitur, nee amore flectitur, nee munere curvatur, nee falsis decipitur testibus, 
 injnriose oppressi humi]iter et salubriter appellarunt." 
 
204 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 quently printed and translated into Bohemian, German, 
 English, and French. 
 
 The A ppellati o dates from August 141 2, and almost at the 
 same time Hus first wrote a short treatise, which he afterwards 
 submitted to the Council of Constance, and which in conse- 
 quence has become known as his protest to the council. 1 
 Hus frequently refers in his other writings to this brief docu- 
 ment, which is a short confession of faith. He repeatedly 
 affirms in it that he is a faithful member of the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, who is the head and bridegroom of the holy church 
 which he redeemed, and that he never had maintained and 
 never would maintain any doctrine that was contrary to the 
 truth, and that he was ready to lay down his life for the law 
 of Christ. 
 
 Incessantly attacked as Hus was by opponents who were 
 largely influenced by personal and egotistical motives, he 
 naturally became engaged in frequent polemics. This applies 
 to this period also, though not so exclusively as to the previous 
 one. Of the polemical works written between 1412 and 1414 
 I will only mention two. One of these is the treatise entitled 
 Replica Contra Pr&dicatorem Plznensem (A Reply to the 
 Preacher of Plzen). It is very interesting as showing what 
 outrageous pretensions the Bohemian clergy raised at this 
 period. They explain to a great extent the stern disapproval 
 and dislike of priests shown by many genuinely pious 
 Bohemians at this time. The friends of Hus informed him 
 that a preacher at Plzen had in his sermons raised strange — 
 to a modern mind they appear blasphemous — claims on behalf 
 of the clergy. The priest had stated, among other things, 
 that the worst priest was better than the best layman, 2 and 
 that a priest when officiating was the father of God and the 
 
 1 Printed in Hus Opera, 171 5, vol. i. p. 13, and Palacky, Documenta, 
 p. 267. 
 
 2 Tertio praedicavit quod pessimus Sacerdos est melior optimo Laico." 
 (Hus Opera, 1715, vol. i. p. 179.) 
 
HUS IN EXILE 205 
 
 creator of God's body. 1 Hus then drew attention to a book, 
 entitled Stella Clericonum, which was then widely read by 
 the clergy. The book contained even more outrageous state- 
 ments than those mentioned before. Thus the superiority of 
 priests over the Virgin Mary was affirmed. 2 Hus indignantly 
 repudiated these pretensions of the clergy, which he rightly 
 stigmatised as being blasphemous. This little known polemi- 
 cal treatise to a great extent explains the strong opposition 
 to the doctrine of transubstantiation which we find in the 
 writings of many Bohemian church-reformers, though not in 
 those of Hus. Though greatly disapproving of claims such 
 as those mentioned above, Hus always accepted the doctrine 
 of transubstantiation as taught by the Roman Church. 
 
 The only other polemical work of this period which I shall 
 mention is Hus's Answer to the Writings of Stanislas. Stanislas 
 of Znoymo had at the beginning of the Bohemian movement 
 been a favourer of church-reform and a personal friend of Hus. 
 He shared the latter's admiration of the writings of Wycliffe, 
 and accepted the theories of the English church-reformer far 
 more unconditionally than Hus ever did. Stanislas several 
 times defended the famous articles of Wycliffe before the 
 University of Prague. He afterwards entirely changed his 
 views and became, with Palec and the infamous Michael de 
 causis, one of Hus's bitterest enemies. It was, of course, the 
 principal task of these enemies to maintain that Hus had 
 expressed heretical opinions, and that they attacked him for 
 this reason, not because he blamed the evil life of the Bohemian 
 priests. Stanislas had written a book, known from its opening 
 words as Alma Venerabilis. This book has not been pre- 
 served and we can only judge of its contents by Hus's refuta- 
 tion. It is certain that in his work Stanislas dealt largely 
 
 1 " Articulus secundus ponit quod Sacerdos postquam officiat est pater 
 Dei et creator corporis Dei." (Hits Opera, 1715, vol. i. p. 181.) 
 
 2 " Unde assumpto mendacio arguunt (the priests) sic: Si virgo Maria est 
 beata, vel digna quia semel Christum genuit, beatior vel dignior est quilibet 
 sacerdos, qui eum saepe creavit, et potest creare quando vult." (Ibid. p. 182.) 
 
206 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 with the power and authority of the pope, which he appears 
 to have defined in a manner similar to that of the most extreme 
 modern ultramontanes. His opinions were thus in direct 
 opposition to those of Hus. 1 As Hus very openly stated, 
 Stanislas was to a great extent influenced by fear. Hus did 
 not omit to draw attention to the strange contrast between 
 Stanislas's former exaggerated praise of Wycliffe and his 
 present equally exaggerated denunciations of the English 
 divine. Replying to Stanislas's panegyric of the papal power, 
 Hus naturally, though perhaps hardly fairly, alluded to the 
 infamous character of Pope John XXIII., who then held the 
 dignity of pontiff. After denying that it could be proved 
 from Scripture that God had given unlimited power to a pope 
 chosen at an election influenced by the favour of man, fear, 
 and cupidity, Hus challenges Stanislas to prove John XXIII. 's 
 claim to the throne " by the sanctity of his life and of his 
 deeds, not by his desire for the comforts and honours of the 
 world, not by the fulminations of terrible censures to show his 
 power, not by the plundering of the subject fold, not by 
 extortion and simony; for Christ hath said: Ye shall know 
 them by their fruits." 2 The book generally somewhat recalls 
 the treatise De Ecclesia. We meet here again with the de- 
 fence of the claim of the temporal power to control the papacy 
 
 1 Stanislas — quoted by Hus — stated that the pope was the head of the 
 church " in quo capite est fontalis et capitalis plenitudo ecclesiasticae 
 potestatis supra terram propter quod illud caput omnes alias simul super 
 terram dignitates officiarias, ecclesiasticas et seculares, Patriarchales, Episco- 
 pales, Sacerdotales, Clericales, Magistrales, Imperiales, Regales, Ducales, 
 Marchionales, Comitales, Baronales, Militares, Consulares, etc., in dignitate 
 transcendit innumerabiliter, in profunditate sicut fons, in altitudine sicut 
 caput, in latitudine sicut alveus." Responsio ad Scripta Stanislai (Hus 
 Opera, 17 15, vol. i. p. 342). 
 
 1 " Non sufhcit doctori (Stanislas) humana electio, quae ex favore humano, 
 Timore vel cupidine processit, imo claudicat doctoris positio, nisi ipsam 
 stabilitat a posteriori scilicet ex vitae et operum sanctitate ipsius Joannis, 
 non ex aspiratione ad seculi commodum vel honorem, nee ex fulminatione 
 censurae terrificae ad ostendendam dominationem, quam Petrus sequendo 
 Christum prohibet, nee ex tonsione gregis subjecti per temporalium extor- 
 sionem, nee ex fomento publicanatus vel Simoniae. . . . Cum dicat Christus, 
 Dominus Joan, 10, Operibus credite ; et Matth. 7, A fructibus eorum 
 cognoscitis eos." (Ibid. p. 342.) 
 
HUS IN EXILE 207 
 
 and the church. They were the same views that had ap- 
 peared so prominently in the writings of Marsiglio of Padua 
 and of the other theologians of the court of Louis of Bavaria, 
 as well as in those of Wycliffe. We find again in this con- 
 troversial work of Hus allusions to the two great fables of the 
 Middle Ages, the one papal, the other anti-papal. I refer to 
 the " donation of Constantine " and the tale of the Popess 
 Joan, whom Hus calls " Agnes." Hus here again affirms that 
 Jesus Christ, not the pope, is the head of the Catholic Church. 
 In this mass of argument founded on the writings of earlier 
 theologians, we meet here and there with opinions very char- 
 acteristic of Hus, who always wished to be a moralist rather 
 than a theologian. Thus, when animadverting on the evil 
 choice often made by popes when appointing bishops, he 
 writes: 1 "Christ, the bridegroom of the church, would far 
 better and more readily choose for the people of the Bohemian 
 nation a bishop learned in its law, able to preach the gospel in 
 Bohemian, one living soberly, chastely, piously, and justly." 
 
 1 Hus Opera, 1715, vol. i. p. 348. 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 
 HUS AT CONSTANCE 
 
 Hus and his companions, who had left Prague on October n, 
 1414, were joined on their journey at Plzen (Pilsen) by Lord 
 Henry of Chlum, surnamed Lacembok, who appears to have 
 been sent by King Venceslas as a protector of Hus, and by 
 John of Rejnstein, surnamed " Kardinal." John of Rejn- 
 stein, a parish priest of Prague and a great friend of Hus, had, 
 with Lord John of Chlum, undertaken to represent at the 
 council the University of Prague. Mainly through the in- 
 fluence of Gerson and Cardinal d'Ailly they obtained no hear- 
 ing, and the University of Prague was, like King Venceslas, 
 unrepresented at Constance. The Bohemians passed the 
 frontier of their country at Barnau and arrived at the free 
 imperial city of Nuremberg on October 19. On their way 
 through German territory they were everywhere well received 
 by the people, who saw in Hus the champion of church-reform, 
 which all thoughtful men and the worthier members of the 
 clergy also desired. The difference of nationality proved no 
 barrier, and it may here be mentioned that nothing can be 
 less true than the ancient statement which accuses Hus of 
 having been an enemy of the Germans generally. It is certain 
 that Hus disliked the Germans in Bohemia who had taken 
 possession of most of the ecclesiastical benefices and other 
 important appointments in his country, while they — not only 
 at the time of Hus — looked down on the Bohemians as intel- 
 lectually their inferiors. Hus's views on this question have 
 already been mentioned, and I shall again have to refer to 
 them. The feelings of the Bohemians of this period were 
 somewhat similar to those which the Italians of the earlier 
 
 208 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 209 
 
 part of the nineteenth century entertained towards the 
 tedcschi, who were considered as intruders. When Italy 
 became free the hatred of Germans gradually ceased. 
 
 Of Hus's stay at Nuremburg, Mladenovic, his faithful com- 
 panion on his last journey, writes: 1 "When he (Hus) then 
 arrived at Nuremberg with the lords, whom I have mentioned, 
 after they had dined, some magister, I think he was one 
 Albert, parish priest of St. Sebaldus, came to them saying 
 that he wished to discourse with them in a friendly manner. 
 After he (Hus) had consented, some other priests came, among 
 whom was a doctor (of theology) and several members of the 
 council of the town. They then discoursed with the master 
 for four hours on various matters connected with him, and on 
 what rumour had reported, and when they had conferred on 
 each one of these matters, they said: ' For certain, master, 
 this which we have heard is catholic (doctrine). We have 
 for many years taught and held these doctrines and we now 
 teach and believe them, and if there is nothing else against 
 thee, thou wilt certainly leave the council and return from it 
 with honour. And then they all parted in a friendly 
 fashion." At Nuremburg Hus was informed that King 
 Sigismund had now prepared the letter of safe-conduct for 
 him, and it was suggested that he should proceed to Spires, 
 where Sigismund then stayed, to receive the letter and place 
 himself under the king's immediate protection. Hearing 
 that many members of the council had already arrived at 
 Constance, and that Pope John XXIII. was already on his 
 way there, Hus decided to continue his journey directly to 
 Constance. He begged his friend Lord Venceslas of Duba to 
 proceed to the imperial court and receive the letter of safe- 
 conduct for him. Hus has often been blamed for this decision, 
 which certainly bears witness to his innate belief in the good- 
 ness of human nature, and perhaps to his want of worldly 
 wisdom. Yet if we take the nature of Sigismund into account 
 
 1 Palacky, Documenta. 
 
 O 
 
210 THETLIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 and remember that he was acting in accordance with a pre- 
 conceived plan, it is difficult to believe that the final result 
 would have been different had Hus proceeded to Spires. 
 From Nuremburg the Bohemians continued their journey- 
 through Southern Germany by Ansbach and Ulm to Biberach, 
 then a free city, now an insignificant and decaying town in 
 the kingdom of Wurtemberg. Here, as everywhere, the 
 Bohemians showed that fondness for theological discussions 
 which was then characteristic of their nation and which only 
 disappeared when, after the battle of the White Mountain, all 
 religious liberty perished for centuries. When a discussion on 
 religious matters began at Biberach, Lord John of Chlum took 
 so prominent a part — while Hus spoke little — that the citizens 
 believed him to be a doctor of theology. His companions 
 henceforth gave Lord John the nickname, doctor alls de 
 Pibrach. From Biberach the Bohemians proceeded by 
 Ravensburg to Buchhorn, on the lake of Constance. They 
 crossed the lake in a boat and arrived at the city of Constance 
 on November 3, 1414. Hus was lodged in the house of " a 
 good widow named Fida," as Mladenovic writes, which was 
 situated in St. Paul's Street — now called Hus's Street — near 
 the Schnetz gate. The house, which is probably little changed, 
 is shown to visitors. A medallion with a bust of Hus and an 
 inscription in Bohemian and German was placed on it some 
 years ago. In his first letter 1 after his arrival at Constance 
 Hus writes, on November 4: " We arrived at Constance on 
 the Saturday after All Souls without any annoyance, after 
 having passed through different cities and after having every- 
 where distributed our proclamation (stating that Hus was 
 going to Constance freely to clear himself of the accusation 
 of heresy), written both in Latin and in German. We live at 
 Constance near the pope's dwelling-place, and have arrived 
 
 1 Palacky, Documenta. When the contrary is not stated I have always 
 quoted Hus's letters from Palacky's work, which contains far the most 
 complete collection of documents referring to Hus. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 211 
 
 without safe-conduct. The day after my arrival Michael de 
 causis placed on the door of the church (cathedral) an in- 
 formation against me written in large letters and stating that 
 he accuses John Hus, a man excommunicated, pertinacious, 
 and suspected of heresy and other such things. But with 
 God's help I will not heed this, knowing that God sent him 
 against me that he (Michael) should curse me because of my 
 sins, and also to try me (my strength) whether I could and 
 would endure suffering. 1 
 
 By this time Hus's enemies had begun to assemble at 
 Constance. Friends, except his few Bohemian comrades, he 
 could not expect to find there, and although he put trust in 
 the faithless Sigismund, the fact that he undertook the journey 
 proves how entirely he submitted himself to the behests of 
 his conscience and to the decrees of providence. Some days 
 before Hus, the famed pontiff John XXIII. had arrived at 
 Constance. He left Bologna at the beginning of October and 
 made his way to Constance through the Tirol. At Trent he 
 had an important interview with Duke Frederick of Austria, 
 then ruler of the Tirol. An unwritten alliance between the 
 house of Habsburg and the papal see has, with brief intervals, 
 existed since the time of Rudolph of Habsburg. The duke 
 and the pope, therefore, soon came to an agreement. John 
 XXIII. conferred on Frederick the title of gonfalonier of the 
 holy church with an annual salary of 6000 ducats. Frederick, 
 on the other hand, recognised the claims of John to the papacy, 
 promised to escort him to Constance with an armed force, and 
 to afford him a refuge in his dominions — which marched with 
 those of the city of Constance — if he should not feel safe there. 
 These negotiations begun at Trent were concluded at Meran. 
 In agreeing to this alliance Frederick was guided not only by 
 the hope of pecuniary advantage, but also by his bitter hatred 
 
 1 The letter — written in Latin — ended with the words: " Datum in Con- 
 stantia. Oretis Deum pro constantia in veritate." 
 
212 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 of Sigismund, which sprang from a cause equally discreditable 
 to both princes. 1 
 
 From the Tirol the pope crossed by the Arlberg Pass into 
 Vorarlberg. Richenthal, that very entertaining, though very 
 mendacious chronicler of the council, thus describes the pope's 
 journey: 2 " When the pope arrived at the summit of the Arl- 
 berg near where the monastery is, his carriage overturned and 
 he lay in the snow under the carriage. Then his lords and 
 courtiers came to him and said : ' Holy Father, hast thou not 
 been injured! ' He answered, ' I lie here in the name of the 
 devil ! ' Then when they proceeded onward from the monas- 
 tery and could look down on Bluditz (probably Bludenz) and 
 the land, he said: Sic capiuntur vulpes, which means, ' Thus are 
 foxes entrapped.' ' The pope and his party then proceeded 
 to Feldkirch and from there by Reinegg to Constance, where 
 the pope was received with great solemnity. 
 
 It was not, however, Baldassare Cossa who was to prove 
 Hus's most dangerous and bitterest enemy. These were 
 found among his own countrymen. It is the fact that in all 
 the most important moments the task of great Bohemians has 
 been frustrated by the envy and malice of their own country- 
 men that renders the history of Bohemia one of the saddest 
 in the annals of the world. Foremost among Hus's enemies 
 was John f the iron^Bishop of Litomysl. It is not probable 
 that he was greatly interested in Wycliffe's profound but arid 
 doctrines. Like most of Hus's Bohemian opponents, he had 
 probably read none of the English reformer's works. But as 
 a notorious simonist and a very opulent man, he saw the great 
 danger which men of his class would necessarily incur, if the 
 
 1 During the festivities that by Frederick's order took place at Innsbruck 
 in honour of Sigismund, a young girl, the daughter of a notable citizen, was 
 violated, and public opinion pointed to one of the two princes as having been 
 guilty of the deed. Both Sigismund and Frederick affirmed their innocence, 
 each maintaining that the other was the culprit. Mortal enmity arose 
 between the two princes in consequence. The whole story is told by Eberhard 
 Windeck, c. 32. 
 
 2 Ulrich von Kichenthal, Chronik des Coustanzer Concils, ed. 1SS2, p. 25. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 213 
 
 praise of poverty and the laudation of the simplicity of the 
 primitive church were permitted. Though a very rich man 
 — he had even attempted to outbid Albik when the latter 
 obtained the archbishopric of Prague — John the iron did 
 not think his own ample means sufficient to crush the detested 
 Hus. He therefore applied to the higher ecclesiastical digni- 
 taries of Bohemia and Moravia, to the parish priests of Prague, 
 who had a great personal interest in the matter, and to several 
 nobles who were opposed to church-reform, asking them for 
 financial aid. By means of this subscription a very large sum 
 of money was raised ; the services of many informers were 
 secured ; Hus was surrounded by spies as soon as he arrived j 
 at Constance. Among the early arrivals at Constance also ! 
 was Venceslas Tiem, Dean of Passau, whose trade in indul- 
 gences in Prague had caused the outbreak of the crisis. No 
 doubt also with a desire for revenge several members of the 
 new university of Leipzig attended the council, wishing to 
 denounce Hus, through whose influence, as they believed, they 
 had been unjustly driven from Prague. Michael de causis, as 
 mentioned, had arrived at Constance before Hus. Stephen 
 Palec, who was to take so prominent a part in the proceedings 
 against Hus, now also arrived there. Mladenovic writes: 
 " Stephen Palec arrived at Constance. He had travelled 
 from Bohemia with Magister Stanislas of Znoymo, but the 
 latter had been struck down by apoplexy at Jindrichuv 
 Hradec (Neuhaus) and had died. Here (at Constance) Palec 
 immediately associated with Michael de causis, the ' in- 
 stigator,' x and an enemy of Hus. They wrote down some 
 articles against Magister Hus which, they said, they had 
 derived from the treatise De Ecclesia. Stephen, with the said 
 Michael, ran hither and thither 2 among the principal cardinals, 
 archbishops, bishops, and other prelates, and we saw him do 
 
 1 Palacky adds as an explanation the Bohemian word nabadac. The 
 French word; agent-provocateur perhaps best conveys the meaning intended. 
 - " cursitabat." 
 
214 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 this almost daily. He there accused Magister Hus and in- 
 stigated them at least to arrest him. Then he associated with 
 the friars, showed them the articles already mentioned and 
 others, and he especially stirred up against Hus the older and 
 more learned men, showing them other accusations, of which 
 I obtained a copy from one of them." Mladenovic then gives 
 some personal details concerning Palec and Michael de causis. 
 He states that the former had been a friend of Hus and that 
 the latter — as has been already mentioned — had been obliged 
 to fly from Bohemia because he had embezzled money con- 
 fided to him for the working of gold-mines. 
 
 As soon as Hus had arrived at Constance two of his pro- 
 tectors and companions, Lord Henry of Chlum and Lord John 
 of Duba, had visited Pope John XXIII. , who lived in the 
 palace of the bishop not far from the dwelling-place of Hus. 
 They announced Hus's arrival to the pope, who assured them 
 that he would allow no one to molest him and that he would 
 be perfectly safe at Constance, even should he have killed his 
 own brother. To the diavolo cardinale Hus probably appeared 
 as a harmless enthusiast, and he may have considered it 
 politic to befriend the Bohemian noblemen in view of his 
 possibly being involved in a conflict with Sigismund. During 
 the short period of freedom which was granted to Hus at 
 Constance he led the life of a recluse, hardly ever leaving his 
 dwelling. As had been his custom during his journey and also 
 when living as an exile in Bohemia, he said mass daily in 
 strictest privacy. It was only from his little window that he 
 watched the gay life of the city of Constance, which for a time 
 had become the intellectual and political, and, to a certain 
 extent, even the social capital of the world. He watched the 
 cardinals on richly-caparisoned horses, followed by numerous 
 attendants as they rode through the neighbouring Schnetz 
 gate. He cannot have been entirely unaware of the terrible 
 immorality which the presence of numerous rich and un- 
 scrupulous men caused in the city — so great, as the citizens said, 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 215 
 
 that it would require a century to purge Constance from sin. 
 A man of ascetic and, if we may call it so, puritanic mind, 
 Hus looked on all this with displeasure, and he must have felt 
 strangely isolated in the city. The house in which he lived 
 was constantly watched by numerous spies, who were in the 
 pay of the Bishop of Litomysl. Bishop John was incessantly 
 demanding that Hus should be immediately arrested. Like 
 most of King Venceslas's enemies in Bohemia, he was no doubt 
 on good terms with Sigismund, and knew how difficult it 
 would be for him to sanction the arrest of Hus at Constance if 
 he were himself in the city. The spies and informers, therefore, 
 redoubled their activity. When a hay cart was seen before 
 the house of Hus, the spies immediately reported that Hus 
 intended to escape hidden in it. The tale, which, as we know 
 from Mladenovic, was immediately circulated by Michael 
 and Palec, is found also in the chronicle of Richenthal, that 
 somewhat frivolous writer, who was more interested in 
 enumerating the gains of butchers, fishmongers, and others 
 practising less respectable professions than in studying the 
 serious events connected with the council. It has also been 
 conjectured that Richenthal here confused Hus with Jerome 
 of Prague, who actually made a successful attempt to escape 
 secretly from Constance. It should be mentioned that few 
 serious historians have alluded to Richenthal's tale. A firm 
 adherent of the Roman Church, Baron Helfert, in his interest- 
 ing work, Hus unci Hieronymus, rejects the story as decidedly 
 as do all the other writers who have considered it worth 
 mention. Like many other falsehoods, however, this one 
 also served its purpose. We cannot, of course, fathom the 
 true motives of the members of the council, but Bishop John's 
 men could not have found a better pretext for obtaining that 
 which they desired — the immediate imprisonment of Hus. 
 That event can best be told in the words of Mladenovic. 1 He 
 
 1 It has been necessary to abridge considerably the narrative of Mladenovic 
 contained in his Relatio de M. J. Hus causa. 
 
216 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 writes: " Then shortly after St. Catherine's day, the cardinals 
 who were then at Constance, on November 28, instigated by 
 his (Hus's) enemies, Palec and Michael, sent two bishops, 
 those of Augsburg and Trent, the burgomaster of the city of 
 Constance, and one Hans von Poden, a soldier, 1 to his dwelling- 
 place. They arrived at the hour of dinner and told Lord John 
 of Chlum that they had come on the part of the cardinals and 
 by order of the pope to visit John Hus, and, as he had formerly 
 wished to speak to them, they were now prepared to hear him. 
 Then John of Chlum rose, greatly incensed, and said: ' Know 
 you not, reverend brethren, how and in what fashion Magister 
 John Hus came here? If you know it not, I will tell you that 
 when I and Lord Venceslas of Lestna 2 were in Friulia with 
 our lord the emperor and intended to return to our own 
 country, he ordered us to assure Magister John of his safe- 
 conduct that he might come to this council. Know, therefore, 
 that you must do nothing against the honour of our master.' 
 And to the burgomaster he said in German : ' Thou shouldst 
 know that if the devil came to have his case tried, he should be 
 given a fair hearing.' Then addressing the bishops he con- 
 tinued: ' Our lord the king (Sigismund) also said: " If Magister 
 Hus consents to go to Constance, tell him that on this matter 
 (the question of heresy) he must say nothing except in my 
 presence, when, by the help of God, I shall have come to Con- 
 stance." ' Hearing this, all those who had come, particularly 
 the Bishop of Trent, said, as he answered them in so violent a 
 manner: ' Lord John, we have come only in the interest of 
 peace, that there should be no uproar.' Then rising from 
 table Master John Hus, whom the bishops had not recognised, 
 said : ' I did not come here to see the cardinals, nor to converse 
 with them. I came to the whole council. There will I speak, 
 as God will direct me, and answer on what I am questioned; 
 but on the wish of the cardinals I am ready to come to them, 
 
 1 Poden was the captain of the town guard. 
 
 2 Another title of Lord Venceslas of Duba. « 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 217 
 
 and if they interrogate me, I hope rather to choose death than 
 deny any truth that is known to me from Scripture or other- 
 wise.' " 
 
 Mladenovic then describes how the city magistrates had 
 ordered Hus's dwelling-place to be surrounded by armed men, 
 and writes: " When the magister descended the steps, his 
 hostess (the widow Fida) met him, and he took leave of her, 
 saying: 'God's blessing on thee,' and she wept answering 
 him. The bishops, while he descended the steps, said to him : 
 ' Now wilt thou no longer officiate, or say mass.' Then he 
 mounted a poor horse and with the envoys (of the council) and 
 his companion, Lord John of Chlum, rode to the palace of the 
 pope and the cardinals." Mladenovic then tells us that the 
 cardinals informed Hus that many complaints against him 
 had been sent to them from Bohemia. Hus replied that he 
 had come freely to the council, and that if he were convicted 
 of error he would gladly accept instruction. 
 
 Before Hus was imprisoned, an event took place which, 
 proving as it does how unscrupulously and energetically the 
 agents of the Bishop of Litomysl strove to deprive him of his 
 liberty, has an importance that is not superficially obvious. 
 It is, however, a fact that, when Palacky was — about the year 
 1840 — publishing the first edition of his monumental history 
 of Bohemia, the ecclesiastical censure office of the Austrian 
 government 1 ordered Palacky to omit all mention of the 
 monk Didacus. Here again it will be well to quote Mlade- 
 novic, who was with Hus and Duba during the occurrence. 
 He writes: " They then sent a minorite friar named Didacus, 
 a professor of Holy Writ, who was to sound the master, who 
 was then already in the custody of armed men. He ap- 
 proached him and said: ' Reverend master, I, who am but a 
 simple, ignorant 2 monk, have heard that you assert much 
 that deviates (from the doctrine of the Roman Church), and 
 
 1 See my History of Bohemian Literatitre (2nd ed., pp. 396-398). 
 2 " idiot a." 
 
218 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 so I have come, wishing to know if this is true, and if you hold 
 the views that are attributed to you. Firstly, it is said that 
 you maintain and assert that, after consecration, material 
 bread remains in the sacrament of the altar.' And Magister 
 John Hus: ' I hold not this view,' and he: ' You hold it not? ' 
 Then the magister (said) : ' No, I hold it not.' When he had 
 given this answer three times, Lord John of Chlum, who was 
 sitting near, said: ' What kind of a man art thou? If some 
 one were once to affirm or deny something to me, I should 
 believe him, but this man has answered thee three times 
 saying: " I hold not this view," and thou continuest to ques- 
 tion him.' Then the monk said: ' Noble knight, bear me no 
 ill-will, for I am a simple, uneducated monk, who seeks in- 
 struction.' Then when the monk began to question Magister 
 John as to the unity of the human and the divine nature in 
 Christ, the magister said to Lord John in Bohemian: ' This 
 monk says indeed that he is a plain, uneducated man, but he 
 cannot be so very simple, as he questions me on the most pro- 
 found subjects.' Then, turning to the monk, he said: ' Thou 
 sayest that thou art simple (simplex), but I say that thou art 
 false (duplex), not simple.' Then the monk said: ' I deny 
 that I am false.' " Mladenovic then reports the continuation 
 of the conversation, or rather of the cross-examination of Hus 
 by the monk. " Then," Mladenovic continues, " the monk 
 left, and the armed men who were standing near, the guards 
 of the supreme pontiff John XXIII., said: ' Know ye who this 
 man was ? ' And when the magister replied that he knew not, 
 they said : ' He is Magister Didacus, reputed in all Lombardy 
 the most subtle of theologians.' Then Magister Hus said: 
 ' Had I but known it ! I would have plied him x differently 
 with Scripture. Were they but all like that, with God's aid 
 and the support of Holy Scripture supporting me, I should 
 fear none of them! ' " During the time that Hus remained 
 in the bishop's palace, a considerable number of Bohemians 
 
 1 " pupitgissem." 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 219 
 
 had assembled there, who waited in the ante-room to hear the 
 decision of the cardinals. Among them were several friends 
 of Hus, and also Stephen Palec and Michael de causis, the 
 ringleaders of the agents of the Bishop of Litomysl. When 
 they found that Hus would be detained, they displayed 
 ignoble and indecent joy. They danced round the room 
 exclaiming: 1 " Ha! ha! now we have him, he will not escape 
 us till he has paid the last farthing; " by this they meant that 
 he would suffer the supreme penalty, the sentence of death. 
 The cardinals at last sent a message saying that Lord John 
 might depart, but that Hus was to remain in custody. Lord 
 John made a direct appeal to the pope, who declined all 
 responsibility and said that the arrest was the work of the 
 cardinals, with whom he was himself on bad terms. It is 
 very difficult to conjecture the part of the cunning Italian 
 Baldassare Cossa in this matter. Little acquainted with the . 
 affairs of Northern Europe, he probably considered Hus a )ji 
 person of very slight importance. Perhaps hoping to win " 
 Bohemia to his side, he had at first promised Hus's companions 
 that he would protect him. He now also assured the 
 Bohemian noblemen that he had no part in his arrest. He 
 repeated this assertion afterwards to King Sigismund, when 
 the latter, on arriving at Constance, feigned to be indignant 
 at the imprisonment of Hus. Later, however, when John 
 XXIII. had fled from Constance to Schafhausen and was on 
 terms of enmity with Sigismund, he wrote to the King of 
 France stating that by his order Hus had been imprisoned as 
 a heretic, though Sigismund had endeavoured to protect him. 
 After protesting energetically, Lord John of Duba left the 
 palace, where Hus remained surrounded by armed guards. 
 Peter Mladenovic, as he tells us, brought him his fur coat and 
 a supply of money. In the evening Hus was conveyed to 
 the house of a precentor of the cathedral. After a week — on 
 
 1 " Et saltantes circa aestuarium gaudebant dicentes: Ha! ha! jam 
 habemus eum ; non exibit nobis, quousque non reddat minimum quadrantem." 
 
220 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 December 6, 1414 — he was taken to the Dominican monastery, 
 situated on a small island in the lake that is separated from 
 the rest of the city only by a very narrow course of water. 1 
 Here he was imprisoned in a gloomy dungeon in the immediate 
 vicinity of the sewer. 
 
 The friends of Hus did not meanwhile remain inactive, but 
 their efforts were necessarily futile as they put their trust in 
 Sigismund. The King of Hungary never honestly wished that 
 Hus should be restored to liberty, but in view of the great in- 
 dignation caused in Bohemia — of which country he considered 
 himself the future king — by the imprisonment of the venerated 
 leader of the nation, he thought it politic to feign displeasure. 
 These repeated expressions of simulated indignation on the 
 part of Sigismund scarcely deserve mention. The loyal Lord 
 John of Chlum, according to the fashion of the time, twice 
 affixed to the gates of the Cathedral of Constance protests 
 against the imprisonment of Hus, referring directly to the 
 imperial safe-conduct. He also wrote to Sigismund, who sent 
 a protest to the pope and the cardinals, of which they — 
 probably aware of the king's real feelings — took no notice. 
 Early in January 1415, the nobles of Moravia, with whom 
 were also Hanus of Lipa, supreme marshal of Bohemia, and 
 other Bohemian lords, met at Mezeric. They addressed to 
 King Sigismund a letter which contained guarded, but yet 
 significant remonstrances. The letter 2 stated that the 
 nobles had heard " that Hus had on his arrival at Constance 
 been arrested and imprisoned while holding a royal safe-con- 
 duct, without cause and examination, in a manner contrary 
 
 1 The Dominican monastery is now the Insel Hotel, known to most 
 travellers. The cloisters and the former chapel, now the dining-room, alone 
 recall the former character of the building. To a Bohemian it does not 
 appear that the memory of Hus is held in great honour here. Recently- 
 painted frescoes decorate the cloisters. A small one represents Hus in 
 prison, while one of the largest records one of the least interesting events in 
 modern German history (the meeting at Constance and reconciliation of the 
 German emperor, William I., and the Duke of Nassau, whom Prussia had 
 deprived of his dominions). 
 
 - Palacky, Documenta. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 221 
 
 to order, faith, and the royal safe-conduct. There is much 
 talk here and elsewhere," they continued, " among the princes 
 and lords, the poor and rich, concerning the holy father's having 
 acted contrary to order, faith, and the royal letter of safe- 
 conduct, 1 and his having imprisoned a just and innocent man. 
 Therefore, may your majesty graciously deign as king and lord, 
 and eventual heir to the Bohemian throne, to take measures 
 that Master John Hus be delivered from this illegal imprison- 
 ment." The question whether the Bohemian crown was 
 elective or hereditary was then and continued for many years 
 afterwards to be uncertain. These words have, therefore, a 
 somewhat menacing note, which is yet more accentuated in a 
 later passage of the letter: " It would indeed," the nobles 
 wrote, " be an offence to the Bohemian crown should anything 
 befall a just man, holding such a safe-conduct. God knows 
 that we should hear with great displeasure that your Majesty's 
 good name suffered through such an event. It would indeed 
 be a reason why many would distrust your Majesty's safe- 
 conduct, and there has already been talk of this." 
 
 Sigismund does not appear to have heeded this warning. 
 There is little doubt that he thought that, Hus once removed, 
 the Hussite movement would collapse. Of course, events 
 proved the contrary, but Sigismund's conjecture was not de- 
 void of plausibility. No less a historian than Palacky has 
 written that, had not the exceptional military genius of Zizka 
 enabled the Bohemians to defend their country and their 
 faith, Hus would appear in history as an isolated enthusiast 
 like Savonarola. The admirable organisation of the Bohemian 
 armies and the wisdom which the magisters of the university, 
 particularly the learned Jacobellus, displayed as spiritual 
 leaders of the people, enabled Bohemia to retain for two 
 centuries a national and independent church. 
 
 While Hus's friends were endeavouring to help him, his 
 enemies strove with equal energy and greater success to bring 
 
 1 These words are repeated, no doubt to lay stress on them. 
 
\, 
 
 222 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 about his ruin. They naturally considered it very favourable 
 to their cause that Hus had through their influence been cast 
 into prison. Mainly through the influence of the Bohemian 
 enemies of Hus, who disposed of very large pecuniary means, 
 the council on December 4 appointed three commissioners, 
 John, (titular) patriarch of Constantinople, and the Bishops 
 John of Liibeck and Bernard of Citta di Castello, who were to 
 report on the case of Hus. Michael de causis, the Judas of 
 Bohemia, had drawn up a series of accusations against him. 
 The heretical statements of which he was accused were prin- 
 cipally derived from Hus's treatise De Ecclesia. Some of these 
 accusations were palpably and positively false; thus it was 
 affirmed that Hus had said that the substance of bread 
 remained in the sacrament after consecration and that 
 unworthy priests could not validly administer communion. 1 
 Much ingenuity was displayed also by Michael's accomplice 
 Palec, who described accusations made by Hus against Pope 
 John XXIII. — far more moderate than those afterwards 
 sanctioned by the council — as general accusations against 
 papacy. It is difficult to imagine a greater amount of ignoble 
 and mendacious sophistry than that which was produced by 
 i Michael de causis and Stephen Palec. 
 
 It is almost pitiful to imagine the position of a simple, 
 truthful, and honest man as was Hus when attacked by such 
 unscrupulous and mendacious adversaries. He seems himself 
 to have felt the necessity of obtaining legal advice, and begged 
 to be allowed to employ a lawyer for his defence. In distinc- 
 tion from a large number of priests of his day who were better 
 jurists than theologians, Hus had devoted his time to preach- 
 ing and writing in favour of the cause of church-reform, as 
 well as to theological study. Michael de causis, on the other 
 hand, was the type of the most unscrupulous and cunning 
 
 1 As regards the first point, Hus had already, when questioned by Didacus, 
 denied holding the opinion attributed to him. See p. 218. On the second 
 point Hus long before had expressed views in accordance with the teaching 
 of Rome in his Super IV. Sententiarum. See p. 92. 
 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 
 
 223 
 
 lawyer — priests of a period when the ecclesiastical state was 
 often assumed by unworthy men, because of the advantages 
 and privileges which it conferred. 
 
 Hus's request was immediately and sternly refused. It 
 was declared that, according to canon law, no aid could be 
 given to a heretic. Hus only now saw how greatly he had 
 been deceived 'and how desperate his position was. The 
 mediaeval church looked on heretics very much as the Roman 
 emperors looked on the early Christians. They were men out- 
 side of the pale of humanity with whom no faith need be kept. 
 The same argument was brought forward later when Hus's 
 safe-conduct was declared invalid. That the refusal to allow 
 Hus to obtain a legal representative sealed his fate was 
 afterwards openly stated by John Gerson, one of the most 
 prominent members of the council. When the proposed 
 condemnation of the monk John Petit (Parvus), who had 
 written in praise of tyrannicide, 1 was discussed, Gerson, in- 
 dignant at what he considered the unfairness of the council, 
 declared that, had Hus been allowed an advocate, he would 
 never have been convicted of heresy and that he (Gerson) 
 would rather be tried by Jews and pagans than by the members 
 of the council. Hus, though now aware that he had been 
 enticed to Constance entirely on false pretences, could but 
 submit. Palec and Michael continued their proceedings 
 against him with indefatigable energy. Hus, shortly after 
 his imprisonment, had fallen dangerously ill, as he had been 
 placed in a dungeon close to the sewer. With fiendish in- 
 genuity Michael de causis thought that this moment when 
 Hus was weak through illness and deeply depressed by the 
 treachery of which he had been the victim was a favourable 
 one to confront him with as many witnesses as possible. Ac- 
 cording to the proceedings of the inquisition which were 
 adopted, publicity was excluded, but the witnesses gave their 
 
 1 This matter, which cannot be discussed here, is thoroughly treated by 
 Von der Hardt, Lenfant, and also by Dr. Schwab, Johannes Gerson. 
 
224 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 evidence on oath in the presence of the accused. Once, when 
 Hus's illness was at its worst, fifteen witnesses were brought 
 into his prison on the same day. It was natural that he should 
 be quite bewildered, and God only, as he afterwards wrote, 
 knew what he suffered. Mladenovic, who enumerates many 
 of those who were made to give evidence against Hus, writes 
 that some of them were very reluctant to do so. A layman, 
 before he was called in, said: " I swear to God that I have 
 nothing to depose." Then Michael de causis said to him : " My 
 good man, you don't know what they will ask you, and you 
 swear that you have nothing to depose. As for me, I would 
 bear witness against my own father if it was (if he was accused 
 / of) something against the faith." The result of these investi- 
 j gations was that the commissioners, on the advice of Michael 
 ! and Stephen Palec, drew up a new act of accusation against 
 Hus consisting of forty-four articles, all derived from the 
 treatise De Ecclesia. " These had," Mladenovic writes, " been 
 falsely and unfairly extracted from the book by Palec, who 
 had mutilated some sentences at the beginning, others in the 
 middle, others at the end, and who had also invented things 
 that were not contained in the book at all." 
 
 The Bohemian informers uninterruptedly continued their 
 task of persecuting Hus, but the council was now for a time 
 occupied with other matters. On Christmas Day, 1414, 
 Sigismund arrived at Constance. Richenthal, who describes 
 the arrival of such illustrious visitors in his native town with 
 evident pleasure, writes: " On the holy day early, two hours 
 after midnight, came from Ueberlingen to Constance that 
 most noble prince Sigismund, King of the Romans, of Hun- 
 gary, Dalmatia, Croatia, etc., and with him the most noble 
 princess, Lady Barbara, Queen of the Romans, his spouse, by 
 birth Countess of Cilli, and the most noble princess, Lady 
 Elizabeth, Queen of Bosnia, 1 and also the most noble princess, 
 
 1 Wife of Tvartko of Bosnia, who had been an ally of Sigismund during 
 his wars in Hungary and Dalmatia. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 225 
 
 Lady Anne of Wurtemberg, by birth a burgravine of Nurem- 
 berg. There came also with the king the most noble elector, 
 Duke Louis of Saxony. After landing from the boats they 
 retired to their apartments and warmed themselves for an 
 hour. Then the citizens of Constance presented them with 
 two golden cloths. The one was carried — as a baldachin — on 
 four poles over the king, the other, also on four poles, over the 
 queen and the Queen of Bosnia. Thus they proceeded to the 
 cathedral, and the pope, wearing a handsome mitre adorned 
 with gold and precious stones, read the first mass on Christmas 
 Day, which they call Dominus dixit ad me." Richenthal then 
 continues to describe the other functions, for the pope, accord- 
 ing to custom, said three masses on Christmas Day. He after- 
 wards presented Sigismund with a sword, hoping that he would 
 use it for the defence of the church. The German princes had 
 not at first paid much attention to the council. The schism 
 and the violent and undignified controversies between the 
 adherents of the rival popes, which had been its consequence, 
 had caused the clergy to fall in Germany into a state of con- 
 tempt and disesteem, which is not the less certain because 
 little written evidence of this feeling remains. 1 The Bohemian 
 writers of the fifteenth century who so strongly attacked 
 papacy and the Roman Church certainly met with more 
 sympathy in Germany than is usually supposed. The German 
 princes, therefore, felt little inclined to go to Constance to greet 
 Pope John XXIII. Some of their number, such as the Arch- 
 bishop of Trier, still acknowledged the obedience of Pope 
 Gregory XII. After the arrival of Sigismund, the head of the 
 empire and — since his recent coronation at Aachen — emperor, 
 a great change took place in this respect. In January 1415, 
 the Bavarian princes, Louis Count Palatine — who played a 
 prominent part at the execution of Hus — and Dukes Henry 
 and Louis, arrived at Constance. Other new arrivals were, the 
 
 1 This is, of course, only true of the early part of the fifteenth century. 
 There are, as is known, countless German writings with anti-papal tendency 
 belonging to the sixteenth century. 
 
 P 
 
^ 
 
 226 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 burgraves John and Frederick of Nuremberg, Duke Frederick 
 of Austria, the Margrave of Baden, and the Elector-Archbishop 
 John of Maintz. This prelate rode into Constance in full 
 armour, a fact that scandalised even the large-minded 
 Richenthal. 
 
 Sigismund, whose dominant characteristic, next to perfidy, 
 was puerile vanity, greatly rejoiced over his position as leader 
 of so brilliant an assembly. He had undoubtedly succeeded 
 in renewing the waning prestige of the Roman crown. 
 Though Hus's loyal Bohemian friends continued to bring 
 their unwelcome grievances before Sigismund, he felt little 
 interest in the case of the pious and humble Bohemian priest. 
 He knew him to be under lock and key, and had decided long 
 ago that he should never return to his native country. No 
 one at the council probably attached the slightest import- 
 ance to the protestations against Hus's imprisonment, which 
 Sigismund still thought it politic to make. The members of 
 the council were now entirely absorbed in the conflict between 
 the papacy and the college of cardinals. The position of Sigis- 
 mund was a difficult one. Immediately after his arrival at 
 Constance, Baldassare Cossa had attempted to win him over 
 to his side by the offer of a gift of 200,000 florins. 1 The 
 emperor declined this offer, probably considering the pope's 
 position as already hopeless, or distrusting his promise. It 
 appeared certain that even the laxity of morals of that period, 
 almost inconceivable as we now consider it, would in the long 
 run not accept a man such as the diavolo cardinale as head of 
 the Catholic Church. Sigismund therefore arrived at the con- 
 clusion that it was only by forcing John XXIII., as well as 
 Gregory XII. and Benedict XIII. , to abdicate that the termina- 
 tion of the schism could be assured. 
 
 Sigismund therefore soon assumed a conciliatory attitude 
 towards the council. He entirely gave up his insincere 
 
 1 Dr. Aschbach {Geschichte Kaiser Sigmunds, vol. ii. p. 38), who makes 
 this statement, founds it on documentary evidence. There is nothing in the 
 character either of Sigismund or of Baldassare Cossa to render it improbable. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 227 
 
 demand that Hus should be released from prison, and in 
 contradiction to his former, probably also disingenuous, desire 
 that the council should first devote its attention to church- 
 reform, he now consented to its first discussing the schism. 
 The negotiations between John XXIII. and Sigismund, 
 between the pope and the college of cardinals, the dissensions 
 between the cardinals and the other members of the council — 
 all these events here require but brief mention. To exercise 
 a certain pressure on John XXIII., it was decided that the 
 council should not be considered as a continuation of that of 
 Pisa, which had deposed Popes Gregory and Benedict. Re- 
 presentatives of these pontiffs were, therefore, allowed to 
 appear before the council and the emperor. The representa- 
 tives of Gregory declared that their master was willing to 
 renounce the papal throne if John and Benedict did likewise, 
 and Benedict's envoys expressed themselves in a manner that 
 was interpreted as expressing a similar intention. John 
 XXIII. , however, who denied the analogy between his own 
 case and that of Gregory and Benedict, who had been deposed 
 by the Council of Pisa, took up a very intransigent attitude. 
 His partisans among the members of the council, however, 
 constantly diminished in number, particularly after a docu- 
 ment attributed to an Italian priest had been circulated, i_ 
 which contained a detailed account of all the crimes and sins 
 committed by Baldassare Cossa. The document, probably 
 published for the purpose of intimidating the pope, was 
 promptly suppressed, but many of the unspeakable accusa- 
 tions contained in it were embodied in the act of deposition 
 of John XXIII., which was published on May 25, 1415. A 
 resolution of the council had meanwhile altered the system of 
 voting at its deliberations, and had greatly reduced the power 
 of the minor Italian ecclesiastics, who were Pope John's 
 principal adherents. He therefore determined to yield. At a 
 general meeting of the council held on February 16, in the 
 presence of Sigismund, Cardinal Zabarella read out a state- 
 
228 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 ment of John XXIII. He declared that he was prepared of 
 his own accord and for the good of the church to descend from 
 the throne of St. Peter if the two claimants to the papacy, who 
 had been deposed and condemned as heretics by the Council 
 of Pisa, would in a manner and at a time which he would 
 determine in accordance with the members of the council, 
 renounce the titles which they had usurped. 1 This declaration, 
 and another which John afterwards submitted, were con- 
 sidered insufficient, and a document drawn up by members of 
 the council and transmitted to the pope by Sigismund was 
 rejected by him. He declared that the wording of the docu- 
 ment presented to him was almost identical with that of 
 the document containing the renunciation of Gregory XII., 
 between whose case and his own there was, Pope John main- 
 tained, a very considerable difference. Finally, on March I, 
 John XXIII. accepted and signed a document 2 which con- 
 tained a formal renunciation of the papal throne. He 
 declared that of his own free will and for the sake of the peace 
 of the church, he entirely renounced all claims to the papal 
 throne, and that he made no other condition except that 
 Peter of Luna and Angelo Correr, known in their obediences 
 as Benedict XIII. and Gregory XII., should do likewise. 
 This renunciation was received with universal rejoicings, and 
 when John XXIII. on the following day solemnly confirmed it 
 by his oath in the cathedral before the members of the council 
 and the emperor, all present burst into tears. 
 
 Baldassare Cossa — as he now again became — though " en- 
 trapped," as he would have expressed it, and daunted for a 
 moment, was by no means at the end of his resources. It has 
 already been mentioned that Cossa had on his journey to 
 Constance met Duke Frederick of Austria, and that a thorough 
 understanding had sprung up between them. This was of 
 greatest importance to the pope, as the territory of the Habs- 
 
 1 Von der Hardt, Magnum oecumenicum Constantiense Concilium, T. ii. 
 P. viii. p. 233. 
 
 a Printed by Von der Hardt, T. ii. P. iv. p. 45. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 229 
 
 burg prince extended to the immediate vicinity of Constance. 
 Frederick, who had become a mortal enemy of the house of 
 Luxemburg, was by no means unwilling to frustrate the plans 
 of Sigismund and to render the council abortive. Probably 
 immediately after his renouncement, Cossa determined to 
 leave Constance and to fly to Schafhausen, the nearest city 
 within the territory of Duke Frederick. He was, however, 
 obliged to act with great caution. It was rumoured at Con- 
 stance that he intended to leave the city, and this rumour was 
 intensified by the fact that he refused to conform to the 
 formalities necessary to render his renunciation absolute, and 
 thus obstructed the proceedings of the council. This caused 
 great indignation among the members of that assembly, 
 and at one of its meetings the Bishop of Salisbury is said to 
 have declared that Cossa deserved to be burnt at the stake. 
 According to Dietrich of Niem, Cossa made another offer of 
 money to Sigismund, and on being questioned by the emperor 
 with regard to his future plans formally protested that he had 
 no intention of leaving Constance before the council was dis- 
 solved. The cunning Italian did not think it necessary to 
 add that, according to his belief, his own departure would 
 necessarily entail the dissolution of the council. 
 
 On March 20 Baldassare Cossa effected his escape. He 
 had settled in accord with Duke Frederick that a tournament, 
 under the auspices of the duke, should on that day be held 
 outside the walls of Constance. While all the citizens were 
 watching the proceedings, Cossa made his escape, riding in 
 disguise to Ermattingen, whence a boat that was waiting con- 
 veyed him to Schafhausen. Duke Frederick followed him as 
 soon as he was able to leave the place of tournament without 
 attracting attention, and joined him at Schafhausen. Their 
 departure caused a panic at Constance, and it seemed probable 
 for a moment that the council would break up. The papal 
 soldiers who guarded Hus left the city shortly after their 
 master, but Sigismund, as will be mentioned later, did not use 
 
2 3 o THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 this opportunity to set the prisoner free. In consequence of 
 the energy of Sigismund, aided by the influence of John 
 Gerson, Chancellor of the University of Paris, a rupture was 
 averted, and the council continued its sittings. At the 
 memorable meeting of that assembly on March 30, the superior- 
 ity of a general council over the pope was proclaimed, 1 and it 
 was also declared that all future decrees of Pope John XXIII. 
 should be invalid. Through the influence of Sigismund the 
 council also took proceedings against Duke Frederick of 
 Austria, on whom Sigismund pronounced the imperial ban. 
 He also declared war on him, and proclaimed that all should be 
 free to acquire any portion of Frederick's territory which they 
 might conquer. The Swiss, who had by a recent treaty 
 pledged themselves under oath not to attack Frederick, were 
 informed by the council that, as they had pledged themselves 
 to a heretic, the oath was invalid, and that they were justified 
 in waging war against the Duke of Austria. It is beyond my 
 purpose to enter into details concerning the campaign that 
 followed. Frederick was defeated everywhere, and was 
 obliged to proceed to Constance and there make his humble 
 submission to the emperor. Pope John XXIII. fled from 
 Schafhausen before the surrender of the town to the imperial 
 forces. He first proceeded to Laufenburg, and then to Frei- 
 burg in Breisgau, from where he addressed a letter to the 
 council proposing an agreement. The terms he offered were, 
 however, rejected. From Freiburg Cossa went to Breisach, 
 and here, in his usual tortuous manner, entered into negotia- 
 tions with the envoys sent to him by the council. Meanwhile, 
 however, Duke Frederick had submitted to the emperor, and 
 had among other stipulations agreed to give up all support 
 of Baldassare Cossa. The latter returned to Freiburg, and 
 now gave up all attempts of resistance. Accompanied by the 
 representatives of the council, and guarded by 300 Hungarian 
 
 1 This declaration of the Council of Constance was often mentioned when 
 the question of papal infallibility was under discussion. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 
 
 231 
 
 soldiers sent by Sigismimd, he proceeded to Radolfzell, there 
 to await his final sentence. He was here informed of the 
 decree published by the council on May 25, which, after 
 enumerating all his crimes, declared him to be " an abettor of 
 simoniacs, a mirror of infamy, an idolator of the flesh and one 
 whom all who knew him considered a devil incarnate," and 
 proclaimed his deposition from the papal throne. 1 Cossa 
 offered no further resistance, and gave up the insignia of 
 papacy without any opposition. From Radolfzell he was 
 conveyed to Gottlieben, a castle about eight miles from Con- 
 stance, which for some time served also as a prison for Hus. 
 As he was suspected of intriguing with his Italian friends in 
 Constance, Sigismund placed him in the custody of Louis 
 Count Palatine, by whose order he was removed to the castle 
 of Heidelberg. He remained there up to the termination of 
 the Council of Constance. He soon made his peace with the 
 Roman Church, and submitted to Pope Martin V., by whom 
 he was again created a cardinal. He retired to Florence, 
 where he died on December 22, 1418. His tomb in the Bat- 
 tisterio by Michelozzo and Donatello is a noble work of the 
 early Italian renaissance. It is striking to contrast his end 
 with that of Hus. While the diavolo cardinale died surrounded 
 with all honours and was buried in a magnificent tomb that is 
 still admired by all visitors to Florence, Hus died by that 
 hideous and painful death which mediaeval Christianity seems 
 to have borrowed from Nero, while his ashes were scattered 
 and thrown into the Rhine. 
 
 Before returning to Hus, who remained imprisoned in and 
 near Constance during the momentous events that occurred 
 in that city, it will be necessary to refer to events in Bohemia 
 that had considerable influence on the fate of Hus. The 
 pious congregation at Bethlehem and the Bohemian patriots 
 and church-reformers generally had been anxious for the 
 safety of Hus from the moment that he had crossed the 
 
 1 The decree of the council is printed by Von der Hardt. 
 
 4- 
 
 ■ 
 
232 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 boundaries of his native land. Many previous treacherous 
 acts of Sigismund, particularly those that were connected with 
 his brother Venceslas, were in the memory of all. In conse- 
 quence of the intense interest in the fate of Hus that was 
 general among the citizens of Prague, theological reflection and 
 discussion became their constant and all-absorbing occupation. 
 Only a few weeks after the departure of Hus a religious inno- 
 vation was introduced, which, though only a return to a very 
 ancient tradition, yet greatly irritated the opponents of church- 
 reform. Lawrence of Brezova writes, 1 " In the year of the 
 incarnation 1414, the reverend and noble Magister Jacobellus 
 of Stribro (Mies), bachelor of holy theology, with the support 
 of other priests, began to administer the venerable and divine 
 sacrament of eucharistic communion in the two kinds, that is 
 to say, in the species of bread and of wine, in the famed and 
 magnificent city of Prague." The new custom was first 
 adopted in the churches of St. Adalbertus in the new town and 
 St. Martin-in-the-Wall, St. Michael, and the Bethlehem chapel 
 in the old town. The influence of this step on the fate of Hus, 
 and yet more on the subsequent Hussite movement, was very 
 great. It has long and often been discussed why the question 
 of communion in the two kinds, or utraquism as it soon began 
 to be called, acquired such great importance in Bohemia. The 
 formerly general supposition that the tradition of communion 
 in the two kinds continued from the time when Bohemia and 
 Moravia first received Christianity from the East has, in conse- 
 quence of the recent works of Bohemian scholars, particularly 
 of Professor Kalousek, 2 become very improbable. It is also 
 certain that Jacobellus — in many respects a pupil of Matthew 
 of Janov — did not derive from Matthew his utraquistic teach- 
 ing. Matthew indeed wrote and spoke in favour of frequent 
 communion but did not mention communion in the two kinds. 
 
 1 Laurentii de Brezova, " Historia Hussitica " (Fontes Rerum Bohevricarum, 
 vol. v. p. 338). 
 
 * Particularly in his O historii Kalicha v dobach predhnsitskych (Story of 
 the Chalice in Prehussite Times). 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 233 
 
 It has already been stated that both these demands were 
 closely connected in the minds of the Bohemian people, to 
 whom it appeared unjust that the priests — among whom were 
 many of the vilest men in the land — should claim to receive 
 holy communion more frequently and in a more complete 
 manner than pious laymen. It is on the whole most probable 
 that the deep study of the evangelical words pronounced at 
 the institution of the sacrament convinced Jacobellus of the 
 lawfulness of utraquism. 
 
 The custom of administering communion in the two kinds 
 began at Prague about the time when Hus was dangerously 
 ill at the Dominican monastery, and he was not immediately 
 informed of it. The news reached Palec more rapidly and he 
 accused Hus of being responsible for the teaching of utraquism. 
 The latter was probably then too ill to understand the drift 
 of Palec's words, particularly as the question of utraquism had 
 not been discussed before his departure from Prague. Early 
 in January 1415 Hus's health began to improve and he was 
 about this time moved to a less unsanitary cell in the Dominican 
 monastery. To the papal commissioners who visited him he 
 declared that the articles of accusation against him were 
 largely drawn from passages quoted wrongly from his writings, 
 and that the articles also attributed to him statements which 
 he had never made. The commissioners merely answered that 
 the articles were the work of his Bohemian enemies. Michael 
 de causis was meanwhile more indefatigable than ever. He 
 was more constantly in the prison than even the gaolers, acting 
 as spy, and also abstracting the letters sent or received by Hus. 
 To incite the commissioners against Hus he gave them totally 
 untruthful information concerning him, calculated to render 
 him odious. Thus when visiting Hus one of the commis- 
 sioners said: " Thou possessest 70,000 florins; " x another, 
 " Thou hast founded a new law; " yet another, " Thou then 
 
 1 This at that time signified an enormous sum; according to Dr. Flajshans, 
 about 4,000,000 Austrian crowns (^200,000). 
 
234 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 hast taught all these articles." Hus could but answer: " Why 
 do you wrong me? " x The ignoble Michael de causis was 
 allowed to accompany the commissioners on their visits to 
 Hus and even grossly to insult him in their presence — a fact 
 which alone proves what a wretched parody of justice the 
 whole trial was. There is little doubt that this licence granted 
 to Michael was largely the result of the vast sums of money 
 collected and distributed by the Bishop of Litomysl. Palec, 
 though also demanding that Hus should be immediately exe- 
 cuted, behaved with more reserve than Michael. Stephen 
 Palec was a narrow-minded bigot, but not an unprincipled 
 scoundrel like Michael de causis. 
 
 One of the Bohemian letters — they are always more 
 impressive than the Latin ones — written by Hus at this time 
 and dated January 19, 1415, gives a good insight into his 
 feelings. The letter, addressed to the citizens of Prague, runs 
 thus : " May God deign to be with you, that you may resist the 
 evil, the devil, the world, and the flesh. Dearest, I beg you — 
 sitting in prison, of which I am not ashamed, for I suffer in 
 good hope for the Lord God, who graciously afflicted me with 
 a severe illness, but has now restored me to health and who 
 permitted that those should become my enemies to whom I 
 did much good and whom I loved much — I beg you 2 to pray 
 to God for me that He may deign to be with me; for it is 
 through Him alone and through your prayers that I hope to 
 1 remain in His grace unto my death. If He deigns now to call 
 ! me to Him, be it according to His holy will; if He deigns to 
 restore me to you, then also be His will fulfilled. Indeed I 
 require much help, but I know that He will not subject me to 
 any suffering or temptation except for my own, and for your 
 good, so that, having been tested and having remained stead- 
 fast, we may obtain great reward. Be it known to you that 
 
 1 Flajshans, Mistr Jan Hus, pp. 415-416. 
 
 2 Hus's style is here rather involved. It is, however, so characteristic of 
 the writer that I have thought it best to translate the letter literally. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 235 
 
 2\k 
 
 that letter, which I sent to you after starting on my journey, 
 has become public, and has been translated wrongly into 
 Latin. They have also produced so many articles and accusa^, — - 
 tions against me that I have much to write answering them 
 all here from prison. There is no one who can help me except 
 our merciful Lord Jesus who said: I will give you a mouth 
 and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to 
 gainsay nor resist. 2 Remember, dearest, that I have zealously 
 worked with you, and that I always hope for your salvation, 
 now also when I am in prison and much tormented." 
 
 On March 20, as already mentioned, Pope John XXIII. 
 escaped from Constance in disguise. Hus appears at that 
 time to have become somewhat more hopeful, perhaps because 
 a few friends had been allowed to visit him — a great solace to 
 a man whose health at this moment was again failing and 
 who had lived for months surrounded only by enemies and 
 spies. The aged Master Christian of Prachatice and John of 
 Jesenice, two of Hus's comrades during the long-protracted 
 struggle against the simonists at Prague, visited him, not heed- 
 ing the great danger which they incurred. Hus no doubt 
 informed them of the treachery on the part of the council of 
 which he had been the victim, and they both succeeded in 
 escaping from Constance during the troubles that followed the 
 flight of Cossa. Jerome of Prague also appeared for a short 
 time at Constance, though Hus had begged him not to do so. 
 He departed again almost immediately. Here, as ever, the 
 presence of Jerome was very harmful to Hus. Another visitor 
 was Lord Venceslas of Duba, the trusted friend and protector 
 of Hus. He burst into tears on seeing him, and informed him 
 
 1 In this letter — written in Bohemian — Hus had stated that he had left 
 Prague without a letter of safe-conduct. We do not know what form this 
 statement took when translated into Latin by Michael and Palec. Hus was 
 travelling, accompanied by representatives of Sigismund who approved of his 
 not waiting at Prague for the arrival of the letter. Some modern apologists 
 of Sigismund have, following the example of Hus's persecutors, maintained 
 that the safe-conduct became invalid because Hus did not carry it on his 
 journey. 
 
 1 St. Luke xxi. 15. 
 
236 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 of the steps which the nobles of his country were taking for 
 his defence. These attempts at intervention on the part of 
 Hus's countrymen have already been mentioned, and I shall 
 have again to refer to them later. Duba may also have 
 informed Hus of the intended flight of Cossa, as his intention 
 of escaping from Constance was mooted in the city several 
 days before the event actually took place. This would inspire 
 hope in the minds of both Hus and Duba. Cossa departed, 
 Sigismund was undisputed master of the city of Constance, 
 and it was entirely in his power to liberate Hus. On March 
 24, Palm Sunday, Hus wrote to his friends at Constance 
 informing them that his guards had left him. On the same 
 evening an armed force of a hundred and seventy men, sent 
 by the Bishop of Constance, seized Hus and conveyed him to 
 the bishop's castle of Gottlieben. 1 Immediately after the 
 departure of Cossa, Sigismund, fearing that Hus might escape 
 him, conferred with the most important members of the council, 
 and it was decided that Hus should be placed in the custody 
 of the Bishop of Constance. That Sigismund failed to use 
 this opportunity of liberating Hus greatly disappointed the 
 Bohemians, and has also caused the surprise of some modern 
 writers. A closer study of the character of Sigismund would 
 show that he had firmly resolved that Hus should never leave 
 Constance, or at least never return to his native land. 
 
 The imprisonment at Gottlieben was for Hus in every way 
 a change for the worse. The tower at Gottlieben, still known 
 as the " Hussenthurm," in one of the highest cells of which he 
 was confined, was indeed, from a sanitary point of view, pre- 
 ferable to the Dominican monastery at Constance. But Hus 
 now for the first time endured all the horrors of a mediaeval 
 prison. He was chained to a post, at day time by the hands 
 only, at night also by the feet, and suffered continually from 
 hunger and thirst. His German guards were allowed to treat 
 him with the utmost cruelty, while the Italian soldiers of 
 
 1 On the Rhine below Constance, now in the Swiss canton of Thurgan. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 237 
 
 Cossa had treated him with cordial, if contemptuous, kindness. 
 It is certain that it was intended, according to the methods of 
 the Inquisition, entirely to break his spirit by what was prac- 
 tically torture. It was hoped that he would thus be induced 
 to confess anything and everything which it was desirable 
 that he should confess. He had hitherto been allowed to 
 write and to receive letters, but all this was stopped at Gott- 
 lieben. We know, therefore, little of what occurred there, and 
 a veil has perhaps mercifully been thrown over Hus's stay 
 at Gottlieben. 
 
 The powers of the commissioners appointed by Pope John 
 XXIII. were considered as having ended with the flight of 
 that pontiff. The council, in which the party of the cardinals 
 now had the upper hand, appointed Cardinals D'Ailly, Filastre, 
 and Zabarella to act as commissioners, and continue the 
 examination of Hus. Of these men D'Ailly was the most 
 prominent, and his marked hostility to Hus has often been 
 noted. The active part taken by the Cardinal of Cambray in 
 the condemnation of Hus is indeed the best known part of his 
 career. As Dr. Tschackert, the biographer of D'Ailly, writes: 
 " D'Ailly now showed that historically memorable activity 
 which throws on the not otherwise very bright record of his 
 life a shadow that is all the darker, the brighter appears the 
 memory of him whose death at the stake he helped to bring 
 about." 1 The reasons for D'Ailly's hostility to Hus are 
 numerous. The dispute between nominalists and realists no I 
 doubt played a part, but Hus's repeated eulogy of the poverty 
 of the clergy must have been particularly obnoxious to D'Ailly. 
 This very important motive seems to have been kept in the 
 background by many historians. D'Ailly was noted for his 
 greed for money. His eager endeavours to secure benefices 
 and to amass riches exposed him to the sometimes very severe 
 comments of his contemporaries. 2 
 
 1 Dr. Tschackert, Peter v. Ailly, p. 225. 
 
 1 See the " tractatus Bonifacii (Ferrer) prioris Carthusiae majoris " in 
 
238 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 The new commissioners visited Hus several times at 
 Gottlieben. They found him weak through hunger and suffer- 
 ing, broken in spirit, meek, and patient. It cannot be con- 
 sidered generous on the part of D'Ailly that he should, when 
 Hus at his trial gave a somewhat spirited reply, have taunted 
 him with the remark, " You spoke more meekly when you 
 were in the tower." The council, now freed from Baldassare 
 Cossa and by no means desirous of entering on the disagree- 
 able subject of church-reform, devoted all its energy to the 
 extirpation of heresy. Before finally coming to a conclusion 
 with regard to the fate of Hus, they published a declaration 
 enumerating forty-five articles taken from the works of 
 Wycliffe which had been condemned as heretical by the 
 council held in Rome in 1412. As it could be proved that 
 similar and in some cases identical statements were con- 
 tained in the works of Hus, this in the opinion of all 
 signified the condemnation of Hus. Hus had indeed, as 
 has been frequently mentioned, declared that he did not 
 identify himself with Wycliffe, that he did not accept all 
 his views, and that he might have understood some of them 
 in a sense different from that accepted by the council. Any 
 one who has even a slight acquaintance with the writings 
 of Wycliffe, " his voluminous writings in scholastic Latin, 
 crabbed, harsh, and intricate to the last degree," as Dr. Bigg 
 writes, will consider this very probable. Hus may have 
 wished to state this before the council, but was never given a 
 fair hearing there. Any remark made by him that appeared 
 inconvenient was always interrupted. 
 
 I must now refer to the last attempts, previous to the trial, 
 made by the Bohemians to save their countryman. The 
 nobles of Moravia met at Brno (Briinn) on May 8, 141 5, and 
 sent a spirited remonstrance to Sigismund. They stated * 
 
 Martene et Durand, Thesaurus, II., p. 1436. The writer, a firm adherent of 
 Pope Benedict XIII., may have been somewhat prejudiced against D'Ailly. 
 1 Palacky, Document a. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 239 
 
 that they must again complain of the treatment of "John 
 Hus, a just man and preacher, a faithful and praiseworthy 
 furtherer of the Holy Gospel, of whom no evil is known in 
 these lands. Yet," they continued, " this dear master and 
 Christian preacher has been imprisoned because of false and 
 foul calumnies spread by evil men, slanderers and enemies of 
 God's word. Through the dishonourable calumnies against 
 this man, all the lands of the Bohemian crown and the Slavic 
 nation x have been guiltlessly defamed. He (Hus) went freely 
 without any compulsion to the universal council at Constance, 
 and wished as a good and faithful Christian to free himself and 
 his country from unjust accusations before a general council 
 of the whole Christian world. He received from your Majesty 
 a letter of safe-conduct, though so good a man did not require 
 one." After further remarks concerning the safe-conduct, the 
 letter continues thus: " But also we hear that when the pope 
 fled, as well as those who guarded him (Hus), he was taken 
 from his prison — it is best known to God by whose order — 
 and transferred to a more cruel prison belonging to the Bishop 
 of Constance, where he has been cruelly and in an unchristian 
 fashion fettered by the hands and feet and denied even that 
 amount of justice which it would be seemly to grant to a 
 heathen." The letter ends with the words: " We trust that 
 your Majesty will grant your full attention to this matter, as 
 is fitting for the kind and gracious heir and successor to our 
 land." A similar letter was sent from Prague four days later 
 by the assembled nobles of Bohemia. Both letters bear the 
 signatures of almost all the men then prominent in Bohemia 
 and Moravia — if we except the dignitaries of the church. The 
 letters, written in Bohemian, were translated into Latin by 
 Palacky as long ago as 1869, but they have not been much 
 noticed by historians. The Bohemian nobles at Constance — 
 besides those who had accompanied Hus, a few others had 
 arrived, wishing to be near him in the hour of danger — 
 
 1 Or " language." The Bohemian word jazyk has both significations. 
 
240 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 resolved also to make a last attempt to save the life of their 
 countryman. Their step was not without danger; they had 
 no power to act as representatives of King Venceslas, who 
 declined all relations with the council. Other Bohemians, 
 noted members of the university, had been driven out of 
 Constance by the emissaries of Michael de causis, and some 
 had with difficulty escaped with their lives. The nobles were 
 but too well aware of the treachery innate in Sigismund, 
 though they may have thought that he would at least during 
 the lifetime of Hus endeavour to avoid a general uprising in 
 Bohemia. Associated with the Bohemians were a few Polish 
 noblemen. They were — in distinction from the Bohemians — 
 present as representatives of the King of Poland, therefore 
 shielded by diplomatic immunity and restricted by the 
 customary reserve of diplomatists. Yet they did not hesitate 
 to intervene in favour of a member of the kindred Bohemian 
 nation who in Poland also was by many already considered 
 as a saint. 
 
 Mladenovic gives a detailed account of the intervention of 
 | the nobles of Poland and Bohemia in favour of Hus. 1 " While 
 he (Hus)," Mladenovic writes, " was lying in fetters in the fort 
 (Gottlieben), the noble lords, knights, and squires of the 
 Bohemian and Polish nations were moved by their love of 
 truth, and of the honour and fame of the illustrious kingdom 
 of Bohemia, which had now become a laughing-stock, and an 
 infamous object of shame to its enemies, even to strangers of 
 the meanest birth. They therefore resolved to recover and 
 restore its ancient glory, of which they were heirs, and they 
 determined to insist that John Hus, once their preacher and 
 instructor, now deprived of all human aid, should at least 
 have the opportunity of publicly expressing his opinions." 
 On May 13, the nobles drew up a statement which was to 
 
 1 Relatio, pp. 256-272. Only a brief account of the prolonged negotiations, 
 in consequence of which at least the semblance of a public trial was granted 
 to Hus, can be given here. 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 241 
 
 be brought before the council. They complained that Hus, I 
 " who had never been convicted or condemned or even heard," ; , 
 should have been imprisoned. They demanded that he 
 should be publicly heard that he might render account of his 
 faith. A passage near the end of the document caused some 
 sensation. It stated that enemies of the illustrious kingdom 
 of Bohemia had said that the sacrament of the most holy 
 blood of the Lord had been carried about there in flasks, that 
 cobblers had confessed the faithful and had administered the 
 sacrament. The nobles begged that these calumnies should 
 not be believed, and that the delators should be named, that 
 they might receive condign punishment from the King of 
 Bohemia. The last words contained a direct accusation 
 against Michael de causis and the other Bohemian informers, 
 as well as against their leader, the Bishop of Litomysl. 
 
 This statement was by Peter of Mladenovic read to the 
 assembled council, that is to say, to the members of the four 
 " nations " into which the council had some time previously 
 been divided to limit the influence of the Italian partisans of I 
 Baldassare Cossa. It was received in silence, except when the 
 passage concerning the calumniators of Bohemia was read out. 
 Bishop John of Litomysl, rising up immediately, exclaimed in 
 his own language: " Ha! ha! tot'se mne dotyce a mych." ■ 
 In a letter addressed to the council on May 16, the iron 
 bishop protested against the accusation that he was a 
 calumniator of his country, and declared that the communion 
 of laymen in the two kinds had led or at least would lead to 
 many abuses — a statement with which we meet constantly 
 during the utraquist controversy in Bohemia, which only 
 ended in 1620. 
 
 The council sent an evasive answer written by the Bishop \ 
 of Carcassone, and the nobles of Bohemia protested against 
 the statements of John of Litomysl in a letter that was prob- 
 ably also from the clever though prolix pen of Mladenovic. 
 
 1 " Ha! ha! This regards me and my friends." 
 
242 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 They maintained that none of the outrages mentioned by 
 Bishop John had actually occurred. It is a fact that, though 
 matters changed after the treacherous murder of Hus, no act 
 of sacrilege had at that time been committed in Bohemia. 
 The Bohemians also again appealed to the Emperor Sigismund, 
 ian act that does more credit to their ingenuousness than to 
 their sagacity. Sigismund, who, by a decree of April 8, had 
 revoked all letters of safe-conduct previously granted by him, 
 now shielded himself entirely under the authority of the 
 council and did not reply to the appeal of the Bohemians. 
 
 None the less the Bohemians, encouraged by the news that 
 their countrymen at Prague and Brno had protested against 
 the imprisonment of Hus, attempted to appeal again to the 
 council. Mladenovic, again acting as spokesman, delivered a 
 lengthy speech before the members of the council assembled 
 , in the refectory of the minorite monastery. After again 
 referring to Sigismund's letter of safe-conduct, he made the 
 important suggestion that Hus, who had been neither con- 
 victed nor condemned, should be delivered from the fetters 
 and chains in which he was now cruelly imprisoned, and 
 should be placed in the custody of some bishops, or worthy 
 men, appointed by the council, who would examine him and 
 confer with him, when he had recovered his health. The 
 nobles of Bohemia were meanwhile prepared to provide 
 sureties — men who would not break their faith for anything 
 in the world, and who would guarantee that Hus would make 
 no attempt whatever to escape from Constance before his 
 case was judged. 
 
 To this new proposal the council returned an immediate 
 answer. On the very day of the speech of Mladenovic — May 31 
 — the patriarch of Antioch, in the name of the delegates of the 
 council, declared that with regard to the alleged misrepresenta- 
 tion of Hus's statements, those acquainted with his language 
 would decide. As the men thus referred to were the Bishop 
 of Litomysl, Palec, and Michael de causis, his bitterest enemies 
 
HUS AT CONSTANCE 243 
 
 and most venomous calumniators, the injustice was flagrant. 
 The patriarch further stated that the members of the council 
 would not liberate Hus if a thousand sureties were brought 
 forward, for it would be against their conscience to place such 
 a man, whom they could not trust, in the hands of sureties. 
 The delegates of the council were, however, willing to accede to 
 the petition of the lords and to grant Hus a fair and public 
 hearing. " What and how constituted the hearing was, and 
 how far it was kindly " — the good Mladenovic adds — " will be 
 seen when I describe the doings of the tribunal." 
 
 The Bohemian lords had undoubtedly obtained a success l 
 — the only one they achieved during their arduous, dangerous, 
 and from the first hopeless, campaign in favour of Hus. Hus 
 was, at least, to appear before his judges. Though the pro- 
 ceedings at his trial were a mere parody of justice, and he 
 was scarcely ever allowed to speak, his appearance was in 
 itself a mute protest against the tyranny of a corrupt hierarchy. 
 
 1 Of the many writers on the trial of Hus none has better understood this 
 than the late Mr. Wratislaw. He writes {John Hus, p. 261): " Instead of 
 a secret inquisition and secret murder, we have the record of a public trial 
 and a judicial homicide, in which we are at a loss to discover any valid or 
 reasonable ground of condemnation." The book of Mr. Wratislaw, written 
 nearly thirty years ago, is still valuable though it has become somewhat 
 antiquated. 
 
CHAPTER VIII 
 
 THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 
 
 Though the council had been obliged to grant Hus a public 
 hearing, it did so most reluctantly and with the firm intention 
 that he should be declared guilty and under all circumstances 
 prevented from returning to Bohemia — on this Sigismund laid 
 great stress. During a deliberation of the council, which 
 immediately preceded the trial, it was resolved that, should 
 Hus not retract, he should be handed over to the secular 
 authorities to receive condign punishment. By a legal fiction 
 the church avoided ordering the execution of the sentence. 
 Death at the stake was the penalty for heresy according to a 
 law of the Emperor Frederick II., who, as Dr. Lenz writes in 
 his clever defence of the conduct of the council, 1 " cannot be 
 considered a friend of the popes, and still less an ultramon- 
 tane." Though the matter will have to be mentioned again 
 later, it should here already be stated that Sigismund had 
 pledged his honour to allow Hus to return to Bohemia from 
 Constance, whatever sentence might have been passed on him 
 there. The secular authority to whom Hus should have been 
 handed over was his own sovereign, King Venceslas, not the 
 burgomaster of Constance. The possibility of Hus's retracting 
 had also been taken into consideration. It was decided that 
 in that case Hus should, in punishment of the scandal which 
 he had caused, be imprisoned for life in a Swedish monastery, 
 in a cell that was to be walled up, leaving only a small opening 
 through which food and drink were to be handed to the 
 prisoner. 2 
 
 1 Uceni mistra J ana Husi (the Teaching of Master John Hus), p. 361. 
 • Dr. Flajshans, Mistr Jan Hus, p. 361. 
 
 244 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 245 
 
 On the morning of June 5 Hus was conveyed from thel 
 Tower of Gottlieben to the monastery of the Franciscan order f 
 at Constance, which was to be the last of his prisons. The 
 members of the council who were to interrogate Hus, with 
 Cardinal D'Ailly as their head, assembled in the refectory of 
 the Franciscan monastery, and many other members were also 
 present. The accusations against Hus were read out before , 
 he was admitted into the hall. As Mladenovic writes in a 
 passage which I have already quoted, many statements neveri 
 made by Hus were attributed to him and many passages', 
 quoted from his writings had been falsified. We meet with ' 
 this complaint frequently, and it appears to have been one of 
 the principal grievances of Hus. He began now to see that 
 the trial was a mere formality by means of which Sigismund 
 wished to appease the increasing irritation of the Bohemians. 
 A significant incident which occurred at the very beginning 
 of the trial was at any rate sufficient to dispel whatever illu- 
 sions Hus and his companions may still have preserved. 
 Before Hus appeared in the hall the document stating the 
 accusations against him, which have been so often mentioned, 
 and ending with his condemnation had been prepared and was 
 shown to some of the members of the assembly. A young 
 Bohemian named Oldrich who was present 2 succeeded in 
 obtaining a glance at the document and read in it the passage 
 which contained the condemnation of Hus and several state- 
 ments of importance for the trial. A forged letter was referred 
 to, in which Hus was purported to have written that, should 
 he retract his teaching at Constance, such a retraction was to 
 be considered as obtained by force and therefore invalid. 3 It 
 
 1 Between the cathedral and the church of St. Stephen. The building is 
 now used as barracks. 
 
 2 Lenfant, Histoire du Concile de Constance (p. 199) and Von der Hardt 
 (T. iv. pp. 196, 306) state that Mladenovic himself discovered the document. 
 This is contradicted by Mladenovic's own report, quoted above. Mladenovic 
 cautiously gives only the initials of the names of the persons concerned. 
 
 1 " Quale mendacium! Omnipotens Deus." Mladenovic writes with not 
 unnatural indignation. 
 
246 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 was intended by this cunning device to prevent Hus's regain- 
 ing his liberty, even should he retract the statements to which 
 objection was made; this, as he repeatedly declared, he was 
 prepared to do, if contrary evidence were produced. Oldrich 
 immediately informed Mladenovic of what he had seen, and 
 the latter reported to Lord Venceslas of Duba and John of 
 Chlum that the sentence on Hus had already been drawn up. 
 The Bohemian nobles appealed to Sigismund. No one was 
 more anxious than was the King of Hungary that Hus should, 
 under all circumstances, be prevented from returning to 
 Bohemia. He was not, however, under the circumstances, 
 able to show his true feelings, and indeed feigned anger and 
 indignation. He sent Louis Count Palatine and Frederick 
 Burgrave of Nuremberg to the members of the council, ordering 
 them not to condemn Hus immediately, but first to grant 
 him a hearing. 
 
 Hus was now introduced into the hall. He had previously 
 sent to Lords Duba and Chlum the original manuscripts of 
 his book De Ecclesia, and of his writings against Palec and 
 Stanislas of Znoymo. The articles that were now read out 
 contained many extracts from these works, but whether these 
 quotations were genuine, and to what extent they were the 
 work of Palec and Michael was not examined during the so- 
 called trial. Hus contented himself with declaring that if 
 there was anything evil or erroneous in his writings, he was 
 ready humbly to amend it. After the articles, the depositions 
 of the witnesses were read out. Hus then attempted to speak, 
 but was immediately interrupted by loud cries " as with one 
 voice." Those of his friends who had been unable to enter 
 the hall, but remained outside, heard him " turning now to the 
 right, now to the left, now forward, now backward, answering 
 those who were crying out at him and assailing him." When 
 he wished to point out ambiguities contained in the act of 
 accusation and to declare that the accusers had interpreted 
 certain statements contained in his writings in a manner 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 247 
 
 different from that which he had intended, even louder cries 
 arose. Some screamed: " Abandon all sophistry, say Yes or 
 No; " others began to deride him. The tumult became yet 
 greater when Hus attempted to quote the holy fathers of the 
 church. All cried: " This is of no importance ! this is not to 
 the question! " When Hus, seeing that the assembly had 
 determined to prevent his being heard, ceased speaking, all 
 cried out to him: " Behold, thou art silent, thou hast admitted 
 thy errors! " l Writing to Lord John of Chlum in the evening 
 of June 5, Hus says: " All cried out at me, as did the Jews 
 against Jesus." Still hoping that he might be treated more 
 fairly at another meeting, he writes not quite hopelessly at the 
 end of the same letter: " I doubt whether they will allow me 
 to quote the views of St. Augustine on the praedestinati and 
 praesciti, or on evil prelates." The proceedings on the first 
 day of Hus's trial were so scandalous a that it was determined 
 to suspend the sitting and continue the trial on June 7. 
 
 On June 7, the second day of the trial, a total eclipse of 
 the sun took place. It was particularly noticed by the pious 
 citizens of Prague, who believed that it foreshadowed the 
 doom of their beloved master. 3 Darkness also covered the 
 city of Constance, and lights had to be lit in the refectory 
 when the trial was resumed. A large body of Hungarian 
 mercenaries had been placed in the refectory by Sigismund's 
 
 1 This account is abridged from the narrative of Mladenovic, who was 
 present at the trial of Hus. 
 
 1 The proceedings of the Council of Constance were often very turbulent 
 — not only on the occasion of the trial of Hus. They sometimes resembled 
 the sittings of certain modern parliaments. Thus Pope John XXIII., when 
 complaining to the King of France of the conduct of the emperor, accused 
 Sigismund of having sent to the meetings of the council men of low rank, 
 who interrupted the cardinals and prelates. Then " sibilabatur et fiebat eis 
 (the prelates) tanta injuria quod oportebat ipsos obmutescere et abire confuse " 
 (Tosti, History of the Council of Constance). 
 
 •Lawrence of Brezova writes: "Item VII. die mensis Junii, qui erat 
 feria VI. post Bonifacii hora XI. ecclipsatus est totus sol ita quod non 
 poterant missae sine luminibus celebrari in signum quod sol Justiciae Christus 
 in cordibus praelatorum multorum ad mortem Magistri Johannis Hus de 
 proximo per concilium mortificandi anhelantium fuit obscuratus." (Fontes 
 rerum Bohemicaritm, v. 338.) 
 
248 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 order. The emperor still feared or feigned to fear that Hus 
 would escape him. Articles of accusation against Hus were 
 again read out, and the first subject discussed were the diffi- 
 cult questions connected with the sacrament, the remanence 
 of bread, and transubstantiation. Hus seems to have been 
 allowed a somewhat greater liberty of speech than on the first 
 day of the trial. It was stated that Hus had in his sermons 
 in the Bethlehem chapel repeated Wycliffe's teaching on the 
 question of transubstantiation. 1 Cardinal D'Ailly, who pre- 
 sided, believed that it would be easy for him, who was famed 
 as one of the most brilliant dialectitians of his day, to confound 
 Hus, of whose intellectual powers he appears to have had a 
 mean opinion. To him — and the opinion has been revived by 
 some modern writers — Hus appeared as a man of little educa- 
 tion, who only copied and repeated Wycliffe's views. As 
 already mentioned, recent research has proved that Hus was 
 a man of learning, not unversed in scholastic controversy. He 
 certainly proved it on this occasion. When Hus stated that 
 he believed in transubstantiation, D'Ailly asked him in the 
 terminology of scholasticism whether he believed in " uni- 
 versal " {universalia a parte rei). Hus affirmed that he did 
 so, and the cardinal now wished to force him to draw the 
 consequence that if " universals " were admitted the trans- 
 formation of the substance of the consecrated bread (transub- 
 stantiatio) could not be maintained; for if Hus taught the 
 doctrine of transubstantiation, he would have to admit that 
 together with the cessation of the individuality {singulare) 
 of the consecrated bread, its universale also ended. Hus, 
 with great perspicacity, refuted the insidious arguments of 
 D'Ailly, by stating that he considered transubstantiation as 
 an exceptional case in which, together with the singulare, 
 the universale also ceased to exist; in all other cases the 
 
 1 Nothing is more complicated, and indeed contradictory, than Wycliffe's 
 teaching with regard to transubstantiation and communion. The accusation 
 was intentionally vague. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 249 
 
 singulare continued to exist {in cdiis singularibus sub- 
 jectatur)} Hus's defence was undoubtedly successful, and 
 he heartily expressed his joy in a letter written on that evening. 
 His enemies, however, continued their attacks with undaunted 
 energy. No matter appeared irrelevant which was likely to 
 throw suspicion on Hus. His former English antagonist, 
 John Stokes, again appeared on the scene. He stated that he 
 had while at Prague read a treatise which was attributed to 
 Hus and which contained many errors concerning the sacra- 
 ment. Nothing was known of this treatise, nor indeed whether 
 it existed. Hus was able firmly and truthfully to declare that 
 he was not the author of this treatise. These attacks by 
 means of vague accusations and insinuations would probably 
 have continued, had not one of the English members of the 
 council exclaimed: " Why are these irrelevant matters intro- 
 duced, that do not concern the faith ? He (Hus) thinks rightly 
 concerning the sacrament of the altar, as we have heard." 
 
 The scholastic duel between Hus and Cardinal D'Ailly was 
 the only occasion during the trial in which the conflict be- 
 tween nominalists and realists came to the fore. The absolute 
 recklessness with which it was attempted to attribute to Hus 
 ideas and statements which were quite alien to him prove the 
 animosity of the nominalists against him. It was stated that 
 Hus had said rr< that there were more than three persons in the 
 trinity {sic) and that one of them was John Hus." One of 
 the nominalist writers formally brought this accusation against 
 Hus. 2 The nominalism of writers of this school led to prac- 
 tical, though prudently veiled, scepticism, which considered it 
 possible to maintain every conceivable thesis with an appear- 
 
 1 Mladenovic, pp. 276-285. See also Hus's letter written on June 7 
 (Palacky, Documenta, pp. 106-108). Tschackert, Peter von Ailly (pp. 226-230) 
 gives a short, very lucid account of the scholastic discussion between Hus 
 and D'Ailly. 
 
 1 " Hus concessit istam (thesin) quod Johannes Hus esset persona in 
 divinis et quod plures essent personae in divinis quam tres." (Mansi, xxvii. 
 p. 758.) This matter was formally brought before the council at its meeting 
 on July 6. 
 

 250 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 ance of truth. As no accusations against Hus could be 
 truthfully proved, D'Ailly, cleverly availing himself of the 
 statements of the informers, Palec and Michael, attacked Hus 
 with the sophistry of the nominalist school. 
 
 It is, however, easy to exaggerate the influence of the well- 
 worn controversy between nominalists and realists on the fate 
 of Hus. Hus used scholastic dialectics as a skilful fencer uses 
 
 - his sword, to parry the attacks of an implacable enemy. His 
 heart was elsewhere, and this his enemies well knew. An 
 opulent and immoral clergy and a vicious and ambitious 
 emperor were equally determined to bring to the stake the 
 humble priest who had dared to praise poverty, virtue, and 
 self-sacrifice. 
 
 After this controversy the judges began to summon further 
 witnesses. They were mainly Bohemians whom, as has 
 already been mentioned, the Bishop of Litomysl and his allies 
 had brought from their country to bear witness against Hus. 
 Many had come to Constance unwillingly, probably on receipt 
 of a considerable bribe, and hardly knew what they were 
 expected to testify. The principal purpose of these deposi- 
 tions was to prove the entire dependence of Hus on Wycliffe. 
 As the writings of the English divine had some time previously 
 been declared to be heretical, the identification of Hus with 
 Wycliffe necessarily involved the condemnation of Hus. The 
 latter indeed endeavoured to define the difference between his 
 own views and those of Wycliffe on several subjects, but was 
 now again interrupted by loud cries. He was, however, able 
 to declare in words that I have already quoted, that he did 
 not wish to preach or follow the erroneous teaching of Wycliffe 
 or of any one else, that Wycliffe was not his father or indeed 
 a Bohemian, and that if he had disseminated errors, it was 
 
 I the duty of the English to see to this. When the article 
 
 : referring to Hus's appeal to Jesus Christ was read out, it was 
 received by the assembly with loud laughter and derision. 
 
 ■On the whole, eight articles were read out on this day. Many 
 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 251 
 
 contained distorted versions of remarks that Hus had made, 
 often many years previously, when conversing with his friends 
 at Prague. Words of praise of Wycliffe spoken by Hus were 
 interpreted as implying his complete acceptation of all the 
 tenets of the English divine. The trial or rather the reading 
 out of the articles of accusation against Hus was then sus- 
 pended, and it was decided that the proceedings should continue 
 on the following day. 
 
 At the end of the sitting an incident occurred which proves 
 both D'Ailly's great animosity against Hus, and the fear which 
 he and the other opulent prelates entertained that Hus might 
 yet escape unless it were possible to render him obnoxious to 
 the temporal powers. Before the assembly separated, the 
 Cardinal of Cambray made the following statement: a " When 
 I was riding from Rome (to Constance), some prelates from 
 Bohemia met me on the road, and when I asked them what 
 news they had they answered: ' Most reverend father, we 
 bring evil news ; all the clergy is being despoiled of its prebends 
 and possessions.' " Then, addressing Hus, the Cardinal of 
 Cambray continued: " Magister John, when thou wert brought 
 into the palace (of the bishop) and we asked thee how thou 
 hadst come here, thou didst say that thou hadst come here of 
 thy free will and that if thou hadst not wished to come, neither 
 the King of Bohemia, nor the lord King of the Romans could 
 have forced thee to come." The master answered: " Yes, I 
 said that I had come here of my free will, and that if I had not 
 wished to come, there were so many and so great lords in the 
 kingdom of Bohemia, who love me and to whose castles I could 
 have retired concealing myself there, that neither that king 
 nor this one could have forced me to come." The cardinal 
 shook his head, and, his face somewhat altered by indignation, 
 said: " See, what audacity." Then while the others mur- 
 mured, Lord John of Chlum said: "He speaks the truth; 
 what he says is true. I am but a poor knight in our kingdom, 
 
 1 Mladenovic, Relatio de M. J. Hus causa. 
 
252 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 but I would keep him for a year, so that he could not be seized. 
 Also are there many and great lords who love him, and who 
 have strongholds in which they could protect him against both 
 kings." It is needless to point out that these remarks both on 
 the part of Hus and of Lord John were most injudicious. 
 They had said exactly what the astute cardinal had wished 
 
 ; them to say. Sigismund, whose vanity was inordinate, wished 
 
 ) to appear at Constance as an absolute emperor, and nothing 
 could wound him more severely than this revelation of the 
 
 , weakness of the Luxemburg dynasty in Bohemia. Though 
 D'Ailly was perhaps not aware of this, Sigismund was from 
 the first determined to silence Hus permanently. His bitter- 
 ness against the Bohemian church-reformer, however, no doubt 
 now became greater. His parting words to Hus on leaving 
 the refectory were therefore most ungracious. He strongly 
 advised Hus to recant, declaring that he would grant no pro- 
 tection to a heretic; rather would he be the one to fire the 
 stake to burn such an offender. 
 
 The third day of the trial, ultima audientia dicta, veriusque 
 
 I derisio, 1 as Mladenovic writes, was the eighth of June. An 
 / enormous mass of evidence against Hus had been collected by 
 Michael de causis and Stephen Palec, and a huge number of 
 articles had to be read out. Twenty-six articles extracted 
 from Hus's treatise De Ecclesia were first read to the assembly. 
 They had previously been shown to Hus, and his replies had 
 also been noted down. It was not difficult for the accusers 
 to prove that Hus had spoken and written strongly against 
 the administration and organisation of the Roman Church- 
 such as they were in his day. This evil administration he had 
 declared to be responsible for the terrible prevalence of simony 
 and immorality among the clergy — a fact which even the most 
 ardent opponent of church-reform could not deny. It was 
 less easy to convict Hus of heretical statements with regard to 
 
 1 Mr. Wratislaw has well translated this by " the last so-called hearing, 
 or rather jeering." 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 253 
 
 matters of dogma, though the accusers were by no means 
 scrupulous in their system of attack. Many statements con- 
 tained in Hus's book had been altered and distorted to make 
 them appear more invidious. 1 The one point with regard to 
 which the accusers of Hus had some foundation for their state- 
 ment, that his teaching differed from that of the Roman 
 Church, was the difficult and obscure question of predestina- 
 tion. Hus, indeed, maintained that his opinions were in 
 accordance with those of St. Augustine, but the school of 
 theologians which exercised most influence at the council was 
 secretly, though not openly, antagonistic to many views 
 of that saint. In Article 19 it was stated that Hus had 
 said that " the nobles of the world should compel the priest- 
 hood to observe Christ's law." This was on the whole in 
 accordance with Hus's views, but he pointed out that he had 
 stated that the church militant consisted of the priests, who 
 should preserve the law purely, the nobles of the world, who 
 should compel them to observe Christ's regulations, and the 
 vulgar, who must, according to Christ's law, serve the other 
 ranks. It did not escape D'Ailly, the most acute as well 
 as the most learned of Hus's antagonists, that these views 
 were likely to gain for Hus numerous adherents among the 
 sovereigns and nobles, many of whom disapproved of the 
 extreme opulence and power of the priesthood. D'Ailly 
 determined again to denounce Hus as an enemy of the 
 temporal authorities and, as will be seen almost immediately, 
 succeeded in doing so. Article 21 again referred to Hus's 
 appeal to Christ, a matter that evidently rankled in the 
 minds of his opponents. The mention was again received 
 with cries of derision. 
 
 1 It would lead too far to go into this matter. It may, however, to give 
 but one example, be mentioned that Article 16 accused Hus of having 
 declared that " Papa non quia Petri vicem tenet, sed quia magnam habet 
 dotationem, ex eo est sanctissimus." Hus's reply ran thus: " Verba mea 
 hie mutilita sunt et corrupta. Sic enim scripsi: Non enim quia vices tenet 
 Petri et quia habet magnam dotationem ex eo est sanctissimus, sed si Christum 
 sequitur in humilitate, mansuetudine, patientia, labore et magno charitatis 
 vinculo, tunc est sanctus." (Von der Hardt, T. iv. p. 317.) 
 
254 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 When the reading of the first series of articles had ended, 
 the Cardinal of Cambray remarked that yet more heretical 
 statements could have been found in the treatise De Ecclesia. 
 The next articles, seven in number, referred to statements 
 contained in Hus's treatise entitled Responsio ad scripta Mag. 
 Stephani Pake. The extracts, made, no doubt, by Palec him- 
 self, were in many cases falsified and distorted. Mladenovic, 
 indeed, heads his account of these articles by the words: 
 " Articles extracted from the treatise against Master Stephen 
 Palec (but rarely faithfully)." x The accusations are very 
 similar to the preceding ones, and indeed to all the accusations 
 made against Hus at the council. It was repeated that he 
 had attacked the authority of the pope and the church, that 
 he had taught the doctrine of predestination, and that he had 
 stated that unworthy priests could not validly administer the 
 sacrament. As regards the last-named point, it is sufficient 
 to state that Hus had frequently, both by word and in writing, 
 expressed the contrary view. The first of these articles gave 
 rise to a somewhat prolonged discussion. The article accused 
 Hus of having stated that " if the pope, a bishop, or a prelate 
 was in the state of mortal sin, he was not pope, bishop, or 
 prelate." Hus's answer was certainly imprudent and devoid 
 of worldly wisdom. He said: ' Yes, and he who is in the 
 state of mortal sin cannot either rightly be a king before God, 
 as is shown by the Book of Kings, chap. iv. v. 16, where God, 
 through Samuel, said to Saul: 'As thou hast rejected my 
 word, I reject thee from being king.' " 2 This statement did not 
 remain unnoticed by the enemies of Hus. Von der Hardt and 
 Mladenovic give almost identical accounts of the discussion 
 that now ensued. Sigismund was looking out of a window of 
 the refectory, having as his companions the Count Palatine 
 
 1 " Articuli extracti ex tractatu facto contra M. Stephanum Palec (sed 
 rarus (sic) vere)." 
 
 * The passage referred to, though not quoted verbally by Hus, is really in 
 the book of i Samuel, chap. xiv. v. 26. Hus was not allowed the use of a 
 Bible in prison, and though he was exceptionally well-read in Scripture, we 
 sometimes meet with little mistakes. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 255 
 
 and the Burgrave of Nuremberg. They talked much of John 1 
 Hus, and the king finally said that there never was a more 
 pernicious heretic. But when the prelates heard the words 
 which Hus had spoken they all exclaimed, " Call the king "; 
 but the king, who was talking about Hus near the window, did 
 not hear them. Then those who presided called to the men 
 who were nearer the king saying, " Bring him (the king) here 
 that he may hear what concerns him. Then when the 
 emperor 1 had been called, John was ordered to repeat what 
 he had said about unworthy kings. When he had done so 
 the emperor said, " John Hus, no one lives without sinning." 
 Then the Cardinal of Cambray, greatly irritated, said: "Is it] 
 then not enough that, despising the ecclesiastical state, thou 
 endeavourest to degrade it by thy writings and thy tenets? 
 Now thou attemptest also to eject the kings from their state! " 
 Palec then began to quote some laws by means of which he 
 wished to prove that Saul was a king even after he had heard 
 these words of Samuel, and that David had therefore forbidden 
 that he should be slain, not because of holiness of life, which 
 he possessed not, but because of the sanctity of his anoint- 
 ment. Then when Hus quoted the words of St. Cyprian, who 
 said: "Vainly does he claim to belong to Christianity who 
 nowise imitates Christ in his conduct," Palec answered: " See 
 what foolishness! in what way is it to the purpose to allege 
 that because a man is not a true Christian he is therefore not 
 a true pope, or bishop, or king? For the learned know that 
 (the words) pope, bishop, king, signify an office, but Christian 
 a merit. Thus it is clear that a man may be a true pope, 
 bishop, or king though he is not a true Christian." The 
 seventh article accused Hus of having stated that the con- 
 demnation of articles derived from Wycliffe's writings had 
 been irrational and unjust. Cardinal D'Ailly said: " John 
 Hus, you said that you would not defend any error of Wycliffe. 
 
 1 The contemporary writers on the Council of Constance call Sigismund 
 indiscriminately emperor, king. King of the Romans, King of Hungary. 
 
256 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Yet it appears from your writings that you have publicly 
 defended his articles." Hus answered: " I say the same 
 thing which I said before; that I do not wish to defend the 
 errors of Wycliffe, or of any one else. But it appeared to me 
 contrary to my conscience simply to approve of the con- 
 demnation of the articles while no exposition of the arguments 
 of the other side had taken place. Therefore did I not approve 
 of the condemnation of the articles." It deserves notice that 
 on this important question, which was frequently raised before 
 and during the trial, Hus remained perfectly consistent, and 
 indeed expressed his point of view almost in the same words. 
 
 Finally, six articles extracted from Hus's work, Responsio 
 ad Scripta M. Stanislai de Znoymo, were read out. They 
 covered the same ground as the former accusations. It was 
 only at the sitting of the council on the day of the execution 
 of Hus that the accusation of having declared that he was a 
 fourth person of the divinity was formally raised against him. 
 The members of the council, who knew that Hus's condemna- 
 tion was a foregone conclusion, listened to the lengthy pro- 
 ceedings with increasing impatience. Laughter and derisive 
 remarks on Hus became more and more frequent. 1 
 
 When all the articles containing the accusations against 
 Hus had been read out, Cardinal D'Ailly said, addressing Hus: 
 ' Thou hast heard how great is the heinousness of the accusa- 
 tions that have been brought against thee. It is thy duty to 
 reflect now on what thou wilt do." The cardinal then pointed 
 out that two ways were open to him. He must submit him- 
 self humbly to the judgment and sentence of the council, 
 which, in consideration of Sigismund and his brother the King 
 of Bohemia, would treat him leniently. This no doubt re- 
 ferred to the plan of confining Hus for life in a distant monas- 
 tery. Should he, however, not consent to this submission, 
 
 1 In Von der Hardt's full account of the proceedings we meet constantly 
 -^particularly towards the end — with notes such as: " Et cum hoc diceret, 
 deridebatur," " Hie dixerunt " — the members of the council — " Ecce jam 
 prophetizat," etc. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 257 
 
 and still wish to defend some of his tenets, then a hearing 
 would not be refused to him, but he "would Tact thus at his 
 greatest peril. Hus replied: " I do not wish to maintain any 
 errors, but will humbly submit to the decrees of the council; 
 but I cannot, not to offend God and my conscience, say that I 
 held erroneous opinions, which I never held, and which I never 
 had at heart. I beg only that hearing may be granted me 
 that I may express my views regarding the accusations that 
 have been made against me." Hus then enumerated several 
 important points on which he had either not been allowed to 
 speak at all, or had been interrupted when attempting to do 
 so. We here again meet with the same contradictory views 
 concerning the purpose of the council that are evident from 
 the time of Hus's arrival at Constance to the moment of his 
 death. Hus believed that he would be allowed freely to ex- 
 pound and defend his opinions, while the members of the 
 council considered that he had been summoned to Constance to 
 recant whatever heretical views had been rightly or wrongly 
 ascribed to him, and then to submit to whatever punishment 
 should be awarded to him. Hus's reply, which did not ex- 
 press immediate and unconditional surrender, was received 
 with general indignation, and loud cries summoned him to 
 submit. D'Ailly, and afterwards the Cardinal of Florence 
 (Zabarella), continued to reason with Hus, urging him to 
 follow the advice of the council. Sigismund also strongly/ 
 advised him to recant heretical views, even if he had never 
 held them. This, of course, appeared the greatest of sins to 
 a pious and straightforward priest, such as was Hus. He, 
 who firmly believed that nothing he had said or written was! 
 contrary to God's word could never consent to appear as a 
 professed heretic to his countrymen, who had so warmly 
 welcomed his teaching. Hus's answer to Sigismund was almost * 
 identical with that which he had given to the Cardinal of 
 Cambray. The indignation of the members of the council 
 became yet greater. " An old bald-headed bishop from 
 
258 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Poland " x declared that canon law precisely indicated the 
 treatment that should be meted out to heretics, and a "fat 
 priest sitting at the window in precious robes, who appeared 
 to be a Prussian," 2 exclaimed with a loud voice: " Let him 
 not be allowed to recant, for even if he recants, he will not 
 keep to it." 3 Hus, however, did not recant, nor was it in 
 consideration of his reiterated and consistent statements 
 possible for him to do so. Palec, wishing to envenom the 
 already prevalent animosity against Hus, now began to anim- 
 advert on his attitude on the occasion of the execution of the 
 three young men who had taken part in the demonstrations 
 against the misuse of indulgences. 4 No promise was made '.to 
 Hus assuring him that he would be allowed freely to expound 
 his views, and he was reconducted to prison by the Bishop of 
 Riga, in whose custody he had been ever since his return from 
 Gottlieben to Constance. On leaving the hall Hus met John 
 of Chlum, one of the Bohemian noblemen who were then at 
 Constance. Chlum gave him his hand and endeavoured to 
 comfort him. Hus, as Mladenovic tells us, was deeply touched 
 that he did not disdain to salute him who was rejected by 
 almost all and spurned as a heretic, and to give him his hand. 
 At the end of the sitting an incident occurred that deserves 
 to be told in the words of Mladenovic, who was present. He 
 writes: " After his (Hus's) departure, all who were present, 
 prelates and cardinals, wished to leave and had already risen. 
 Then the soldiers who were on guard in the background also 
 retired, and our men (i.e., the friends of Hus) went near the 
 window, and Lord John of Chlum, Lord Venceslas of Lestna 
 and P. 5 the bachelor of arts, still remained within. These 
 men the king, it appears, did not notice, but thought that 
 
 1 Mladenovic. a Ibid. 
 
 8 This refers to the untruthful accusation already mentioned, according to 
 which Hus had written that should he recant at Constance, his recantation 
 was to be considered as obtained by force, and therefore invalid. 
 
 *See p. 157. 
 
 5 i.e., Peter of Mladenovic, the writer. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HITS 259 
 
 they had retired when the master was conducted back to 
 prison. Then the king said: ' Reverend fathers, you have 
 already heard the many things that are in his (Hus's) books, 
 those which he has confessed, those which have been suffi- 
 ciently proved against him ; each single one of those would be 
 sufficient to condemn him. Therefore, if he will not recant 
 these errors, and abjure them and declare himself opposed to 
 them, let him be burnt, or you will yourselves deal with him 
 according to your (canon) law, as you know. And be it 
 known to you that even if he promises to recant, and even if 
 he does so, you must not believe him, neither will I, for if he 
 returned to the kingdom (of Bohemia) and to his furtherers, 
 he would spread these and other errors, and a new heresy 
 would arise, worse than the former one. You must therefore 
 entirely forbid him to preach, and prevent his returning to his 
 friends, that he may not spread any further heresies. And 
 his articles that have been condemned here, you must send to 
 my brother in the Bohemian land, and — oh, the sorrow! — 
 also to Poland, and other lands where he has secret disciples, 
 and many furtherers; and wheresoever men are found who 
 hold such views, let the bishops and prelates punish them, 
 that the branches be torn out together with the root; and let 
 the council write to the kings and princes begging them to 
 favour among their prelates most those who have at this holy 
 council worked most strenuously at the destruction of heresy. 
 Know also that it is written that every word (sentence) de- 
 pends on two or three witnesses, but here the hundredth part 
 would suffice to condemn him. And you must also quickly 
 make an end of his secret friends and furtherers, for I shall be 
 leaving shortly, and specially (must you make an end of) this 
 one, this one,' x then resuming his speech, ' this one who is 
 detained here.' They then said, ' Jerome.' And he: ' Yes, 
 Jerome.' ' We shall make an end with this man in less than 
 
 1 Mladenovic represents Sigismund as hesitating in his speech — perhaps 
 not remembering the name of Jerome. 
 
260 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 a day (the prelates said) ; it will be easier, for this one,' allud- 
 ing to Hus, ' is the master, and this Jerome is his disciple.' 
 Then again the king (said) : ' Assuredly, I was still young 
 when this sect arose and began in Bohemia; and behold how 
 greatly it has grown and multiplied since! '* After these 
 words they all joyfully left the refectory." 
 
 No conjectures, however sagacious, concerning Sigismund's 
 intentions with regard to Hus can show them more clearly 
 than Sigismund's own words do here. As Dr. Flajshans very 
 truly writes: ' These few words, spoken in an unguarded 
 moment, cost Sigismund the Bohemian crown." 
 
 After the ending of the third day of Hus's trial, it was 
 obvious to all that his condemnation and execution would 
 take place in a few days. No one was so thoroughly aware of 
 this as Hus himself, and his parting letters to his friends, 
 which will be mentioned presently, are among the most 
 precious of those that have been preserved. 
 
 If some delay yet occurred before his execution, it was 
 because some still hoped that it might be possible to induce 
 Hus to recant. His French enemies indeed, such as Gerson 
 and D'Ailly, probably preferred that the Bohemian church- 
 reformer should be publicly burnt at the stake, but Sigismund, 
 who kept his own intentions on the Bohemian throne in 
 view, hesitated. Strong remonstrances, couched in ever more 
 energetic language — of which I have here only been able to 
 mention a few — continued to reach him from Bohemia and 
 Moravia. Though he may still have thought that the death 
 or disappearance of Hus would break the strength of the 
 Hussite movement, he necessarily perceived that the public 
 martyrdom of the hero of the nation might very possibly 
 cause a revolutionary outbreak. It was, on the other hand, 
 certain that, should Hus recant in any form, he would entirely 
 lose his prestige with the Bohemian people. If after such a 
 
 1 These words refer to the movement in favour of church-reform that 
 arose in Bohemia. Some writers incorrectly see in them an allusion to 
 Wycliffe and the Lollard troubles in England. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 261 
 
 recantation Hus were quietly removed to a secluded monastery 
 in distant Sweden, Sigismund's plans on Bohemia would be 
 greatly furthered. The council so deeply indebted to him 
 would be quite willing to bring against King Venceslas and 
 Queen Sophia the accusations of heresy that were already 
 being prepared. 
 
 It would not, however, be fair to suggest that all the 
 members of the council were devoid of pity for the pious and 
 God-loving Bohemian priest. Among those who secretly felt 
 sympathy for Hus was a prominent prelate whose name is not) 
 known to us. Von der Hardt's statement, 1 that Hus's secret 
 friend was John of Brogni, cardinal-bishop of Ostia, is almost 
 certainly incorrect. This prelate, whom Hus merely describes 
 as " pater," entered into correspondence with him. The kind- 
 hearted priest strongly endeavoured to persuade Hus to re- 
 nounce the opinions which had been condemned — not only 
 those he had actually expressed, but also those that had been 
 wrongly ascribed to him. Among other arguments, the 
 " father " impressed on Hus that it was not he personally, but 
 his superiors and the entire council which would bear the 
 responsibility should he abandon the opinions which he had 
 formerly held. 2 As Dr. Lechler has well pointed out, the ] 
 question whether Hus should yield to the authority of others, 
 or rely on his own conscience, was the all-important one. 
 " Hus had," Dr. Lechler 3 writes, " either to subject his own 
 conscience to that of others, to that of very weighty men cer- 
 tainly as they included the members of a great council of the 
 church, or to follow resolutely and fearlessly the dictates 
 
 1 The form of recantation submitted to Hus is thus described: " Revoca- 
 tionis forma a Johanne Ostiensi, cardinali Vivariensi vice-cancellario Husso 
 proposita." (Von der Hardt, iv. 329.) 
 
 2 " Non moveat vos istud, quod condemnetis veritates quia non vos, sed 
 ipsi damnant, qui sunt majores vestri, et etiam nostri de praesenti. Attendite 
 hocverbum: ne innitaris prudentiae tuae; multi scientilici et conscienciosi 
 viri sunt in concilio; fili mi audi legem motris," (" Pater," M. Joanni Hus, 
 Palacky, Documenta). 
 
 * Dr. Lechler, Johann von Wiclif, vol. ii. p. 217. Dr. Lechler writes from 
 the point of view of a Protestant divine. 
 
\, 
 
 262 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 of his own conscience. The same question confronted him 
 which afterwards confronted Luther when he appeared before 
 Cajetan, at Augsburg, and again when he appeared before the 
 emperor and the imperial diet. The same question again 
 arose before the Protestant estates of Germany, when they ap- 
 peared at Spires in 1529, and more recently before the bishops, 
 priests, and members of the Roman Church, when the dogma 
 of the infallible ministry of the pope was introduced. 
 Herein," Dr. Lechler continues, " lies the greatness of Hus, 
 I that, in spite of his humility and childlike nature, in spite of 
 his great self -distrust, he did not allow himself to be intimi- 
 dated by the unanimous opinion of a great'council representing 
 so large a part of the learning, intellectual power, and eccle- 
 siastical authority of the time, that he preferred to bear the 
 shame of being considered an obstinate heretic, and even to 
 suffer the pangs of death at the stake, rather than consent to 
 a recantation which he knew to be a falsehood." 
 
 Hus therefore declined, though in a courteous and grateful 
 fashion, the suggestions of the kind " father." His letters in 
 these, the last weeks of his life, are numerous and very precious. 
 Now certain that his end is very near, he takes leave of his 
 friends and gives his last advice and consolation to his dis- 
 ciples. 1 These letters clearly portray his thoughts and feelings 
 in the time that immediately preceded his martyrdom. It is 
 therefore of interest to transcribe some parts of these letters. 
 In one of the earliest of these letters addressed " to his 
 Bohemian friends," Hus refers somewhat bitterly to the 
 conduct of Sigismund. The letter is therefore important, as 
 Sigismund's part in the condemnation of Hus has often been 
 misrepresented and misunderstood. Hus writes: " As 
 regards Peter, 2 I am pleased. I do not keep his letters, but 
 
 1 These letters, written some in Bohemian, some in Latin, have been 
 frequently translated into English, the Bohemian ones from German or Latin 
 translations. I have previously translated fragments of them in my 
 Bohemia, a Historical Sketch, and A History of Bohemian Literature. 
 
 1 i.e., Mladenovic. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 263 
 
 destroy them. Do not let them send me sheets containing six 
 pages of paper, 1 for I fear they may cause trouble to the 
 messenger and others. I also pray in the name of God that 
 all the lords should entreat the king to allow me to be heard 
 once more, that I may answer the accusations, as indeed the 
 king promised at the last meeting of the council. It will be 
 greatly to his shame if he overlooks this promise. But I 
 presume that his word is as trustworthy as it was with regard 
 to the safe-conduct, and in Bohemia they already told me to 
 beware of his safe-conduct. Others said: ' He himself will 
 deliver you into the hands of his enemies.' Lord Mikes 
 Divoky 2 said to me in the presence of Magister Jesenic: 
 ' Magister, know for certain that you will be condemned.' He, 
 I think, knew the king's intentions. I thought that the king 
 (Sigismund) understood God's law and the truth, but I find he 
 understands them very little. He condemned me before my 
 enemies did. Had he but followed the example of the heathen 
 Pilate, who, having heard the accusations, said: ' I have 
 found no fault in this man,' or had he but said: ' Behold, I 
 have given this man a safe-conduct. If he will not submit to 
 the decision of the council, I will send him back to the King of 
 Bohemia with your (the council's) decision and evidence, that 
 he (the King of Bohemia) and his clergy may pronounce judg- 
 ment on him ; ' for he (Sigismund) let me know through Henry 
 Lefl and others that he would grant me sufficient hearing, and, 
 if I did not submit to the sentence, send me safely back." 
 
 On June 10 — two days after the second hearing — Hus 
 wrote the letter which of all his letters has obtained, and 
 rightly obtained, the greatest fame. 3 It is addressed " To the 
 
 1 In Latin, sextemi. The sending of large sheets of paper probably aroused 
 the suspicions of the gaolers and spies. 
 
 1 Lords Mikes of Divoky and Henry Lefl, mentioned later in this letter, 
 were courtiers of King Sigismund. 
 
 * It has been frequently translated, though generally not from the 
 Bohemian original. I translated — of course from the original — portions of 
 this letter in my Bohemia, a Historical Sketch, and History of Bohemian 
 Literature. I here give the letter in its entirety. 
 
264 
 
 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Whole Bohemian Nation." 1 Hus writes: " Master John Hus, 
 in good hope a servant of God, hopes that the Lord God will 
 grant to all true Bohemians who love and will love the Lord 
 God, to live and die in His grace, and to reside for ever ii 
 celestial joy. Amen. 
 
 " Faithful in God, men and women, rich and poor! I be£ 
 and entreat you to love the Lord God, praise His word, gladly 
 hear it and live according to it. Cling, I beg you, to the 
 divine truth, which I have preached to you according 
 to God's law. I also beg that if any one has heard either 
 in my sermons, or privately, anything contrary to God's 
 truth, or if I have written anything such — which I trust to 
 God is not the case — he should not retain it. I further beg 
 also that if any one has seen levity in me in word or deed, he 
 should not retain (remember) it; but let him pray to God for 
 me that God may forgive. I beg you to love, praise, and 
 honour those priests who lead a moral life, those in particular 
 who work for the word of God. I beg you to beware of crafty 
 people, particularly of unworthy priests of whom our Saviour 
 has said that they are clothed like sheep, but are inwardly 
 greedy wolves. I beg the nobles to treat the poor people 
 kindly and rule them justly. I beg the burghers to conduct 
 their business honestly. I beg the artisans to perform their 
 duties conscientiously and joyfully. I beg the servants to 
 serve their masters and mistresses faithfully. I beg the 
 teachers to live honestly, to instruct their pupils carefully, to 
 love God above all ; for the sake of His glory and the good of 
 the community, not from avarice and worldly ambition 
 should they teach. I beg the students and other scholars to 
 obey and follow their masters in everything that is good, and 
 to study for the (sake of the) praise of God, for their own 
 salvation, and that of others. I beg all to thank Lord Ven- 
 ceslas of Duba, otherwise of Lestna, Lord John of Chlum, 
 Lord Henry of Plumlov, Lord William Zajic, Lord Myska, 
 1 " Veskeremu Narodu Ceskemu." 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 265 
 
 and the other nobles of Bohemia and Moravia, as well as 
 the faithful lords of the Polish kingdom, and to gratefully 
 remember their zeal; for as brave defenders of God and 
 upholders of the truth they often withstood the whole council, 
 speaking and replying in favour of my liberation; render 
 thanks particularly to Lord Venceslas of Duba and to the 
 Lord of Chlum, and believe what they will tell you; x for they 
 were present at the council on several days when I defended 
 myself. These men know which Bohemians 2 falsely accused 
 me of many infamous deeds, how the whole council railed 
 against me, and how I answered the questions that were 
 addressed to me. I beg you also to pray for his Majesty the 
 Roman and Bohemian king, 3 and for his queen, and for the 
 lords, that our beloved God may abide with them in His grace 
 now, and afterwards guide them to eternal bliss. 
 
 " I write this letter to you in prison and in fetters, ex- 
 pecting to-morrow the sentence of death, full of hope in God ? 
 resolved not to recede from the divine truth, nor to recant the 
 errors which false witnesses have invented and attributed to 
 me. How God has acted towards me, how he has been with 
 me during all my troubles — that you will only know when by 
 the grace of God we shall meet again in heaven. Of Master 
 Jerome, my beloved comrade, I hear nothing except that he 
 is in prison, as I am, expecting death and that because of his 
 faith, which he bravely expounded to the Bohemians. It was 
 those Bohemians who are our bitterest enemies who delivered 
 us up for imprisonment to our other enemies. I beg you to 
 pray to God for these men. I also beg you all, but especially 
 the Praguers, to befriend the Bethlehem chapel, as long as God 
 permits that the divine word be preached there. The devil 
 has been greatly incensed against this spot, and has incited 
 
 1 i.e., on their return to Bohemia after lias's death. 
 ! The Bishop of Litomysl and his agents. 
 
 * King Venceslas, who to the end of his life claimed to be King of the 
 Romans as well as King of Bohemia. 
 
266 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 against it the parish priests and canons, knowing that his (the 
 devil's) kingdom is disturbed by the preaching at that spot. I 
 hope that God will deign to preserve the chapel, and that others 
 will preach and will obtain there greater success than was 
 possible to an imperfect man such as I am. I also beg you to 
 love each other, not to allow good men to be oppressed, and to 
 grant to all that which is due to them. Written on Monday, 
 the night before the feast of St. Vitus, after the feast of the 
 good angels " (June 10). 
 
 Several of the letters of Hus, which follow this one in 
 chronological order, refer to events in Bohemia which occurred 
 after the master's departure, and which have already been 
 mentioned here. 1 The council, the majority of whose members 
 were Italians, does not appear to have had much knowledge of 
 the state of affairs in Bohemia; but since the deposition of 
 Pope John, Sigismund had entirely assumed the direction of 
 the assembly. Never deficient in vanity and presumption, he 
 claimed to act fully as representative of the papacy up to the 
 time that a new pontiff should have been elected. 2 It was 
 undoubtedly through his influence that the question of com- 
 munion in the two kinds in Bohemia was brought before the 
 council and there fully discussed. The theologians who were 
 consulted, though not denying that communion in the two 
 kinds had been instituted by Jesus Christ, condemned its 
 revival by Jacobellus in Bohemia. 3 The matter was finally 
 settled at a meeting of the council on June 15. A statement 
 was read out by the Archbishop of Milan declaring that, 
 " Though Christ had at the Last Supper administered the 
 venerated sacrament of communion in the two species of 
 
 1 See p. 232. 
 
 2 It is beyond the purpose of this book to examine whether Sigismund 
 appointed bishops in Germany during the vacancy of the papal see; that he 
 claimed the right to do so is certain. 
 
 » " Hi (theologi) ergo post multos congressus et frequentes deliberationes 
 teste Gersone tandem sex conclusionibus formatis recente a Jacobello inter 
 Bohemos resuscitatum Eucharistiae usum condemnarunt." (Von der Hardt, 
 T. iv. p. 331.) 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 267 
 
 bread and wine, yet nevertheless the laudable authority of the. 
 holy canons and the approved custom of the church have 
 established that communion should be administered only to 
 those who are fasting. Similarly, though in the primitive 
 church, the faithful received communion in the two kinds, yet 
 it was afterwards decreed that priests only should receive 
 communion in the two kinds, and the laymen in the species of 
 bread only. As therefore this custom was wisely introduced 
 by the church and the holy fathers, and has long been observed, 
 it is to be considered as a law, which cannot be contested or 
 changed except by the authority of the church. Therefore no 
 priest shall, under penalty of excommunication, administer 
 communion to the people in the two kinds. Those who have 
 committed this offence shall, if they do penitence, be re-ad- 
 mitted into the bosom of the church. Those who harden their 
 hearts and refuse to do penance shall be considered as heretics, 
 and the aid of the secular arm shall be demanded for their 
 punishment." 1 
 
 The historical importance of this decree cannot be over- 
 rated. Communion in the two kinds became the watchword 
 of the Hussite Bohemian Church up to its extinction in 1620 
 In the place of a battle-flag the Bohemian priests carried 
 a monstrance containing the sacrament — which it became 
 customary to call the " ark " — before the troops when they 
 engaged in battle. 2 
 
 1 Abridged from Von der Hardt, T. iv. p. 334. 
 
 - The fact that communion in the two kinds, " utraquism," as it was called, 
 acquired so great an importance among the Hussites, induced the Bohemians 
 to endeavour to connect Hus himself as closely as possible with its intro- 
 duction. They would certainly have proved their case, could we believe in 
 the authenticity of a letter which is included in most collections of the letters 
 of Hus. In this letter Hus writes: " Exhort all to profess their faith and to 
 receive communion in the two kinds, that is the body and blood of Christ." 
 The letter, which is undated and addressed, " Sacerdoti cuidam," is printed 
 by Palacky also, but he strongly doubted its genuineness and believed that 
 it was of later origin and belonged to the time when the Bohemians wished 
 to prove that their great leader and martyr was entirely the originator of 
 the doctrine on which they laid most stress. The letter is not found among 
 the early MSS. of Hus but is included in the Nuremberg edition of his works. 
 It is also possible that the letter is partly genuine and that the passage 
 
268J THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 The administration of communion in the two kinds was 
 ; only introduced by Master Jacobellus of Stribro 1 after Hus 
 had left Prague, and he does not appear at first to have given 
 much attention to the matter. In the first letter, addressed 
 to the " Friends at Constance " (it is undated, but belongs 
 probably to the beginning of the year 1415), in which Hus 
 refers to this subject, he expresses no positive opinion, but 
 I writes that Scripture and the custom of the primitive church 
 appear favourable to utraquism. After the Roman Church 
 had by the decree of June 15 established a new dogma with 
 regard to a matter on which freedom of opinion had previously 
 existed, Hus expressed himself more positively. On June 21 
 he addressed a letter on this subject to Gallus (in Bohemian, 
 Havlik), preacher at the Bethlehem chapel. Havlik was 
 one of those priests who opposed Jacobellus when he first 
 established utraquism. Hus writes : " Beloved brother Gallus, 
 preacher of the word of Christ ! Do not oppose the sacrament 
 of the chalice of the Lord which Christ established through 
 Himself and through His apostle; for no word of Scripture is 
 opposed to it, only custom which, I ween, sprang from negli- 
 gence; for we must not follow custom, but Christ's example 
 and the truth. Already has the council, alleging custom, 
 condemned the use of the chalice at the communion of laymen 
 as a heresy, and he who practises it is to be punished as a 
 heretic unless he comes to his right mind (conforms to the 
 decree of the council). What wickedness! Behold, they 
 condemn Christ's enactment as heresy! I therefore beg thee 
 in the name of God no longer to oppose Jacobellus, lest dissen- 
 sion arise among the faithful — a thing over which the devil 
 would rejoice. Be then, dearest, prepared to suffer when 
 administering communion in the two kinds. Cling bravely to 
 
 advocating utraquism was added later. Mr. Mares in his work, Listy Husovy 
 (Letters of Hus) , includes the letter and believes it to be a work of Hus. On 
 the whole it is probable that the theory according to which Jacobellus was the 
 originator of utraquism is the correct one. 
 
 1 In German, Miess; that town being little known, German writers have 
 often called Jacobellus " of Meissen." 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 269 
 
 Christ's truth, reject unworthy fears, confirm the other 
 brethren in the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. The argu- 
 ments in favour of communion with the chalice thou wilt find 
 in what I have written in Constance. Greet the faithful in 
 Christ." 
 
 Several of Hus's last Bohemian letters addressed " to the 
 faithful Bohemians " (vernym Cechum) are of the highest 
 interest. Following on the condemnation of utraquism de- 
 creed by the council on June 15, that assembly had on June 
 23 decreed that all Hus's writings should be burnt. This in- 
 cluded Hus's works written in his own language, which most 
 of the members of the council were unable to understand. 
 The informer Palec may have acted as translator, but it is 
 more probable that he only submitted to the council extracts 
 selected by him which afforded a sufficient pretext for the 
 destruction of the books. Hus refers to this matter in several 
 letters; in one dated June 24, and probably intended to be 
 read to the congregation at Bethlehem, he writes: " Beloved, 
 I exhort you not to tremble or to be struck down by fear 
 because they have condemned my books to be burnt. Re- 
 member that they burnt the prophecies of Jeremiah, which 
 God had ordered him to write; yet did they not escape that 
 which he had prophesied; for after they had been burnt God 
 commanded that they (the prophecies) should again be written 
 down and more words added. This was done. He (Jeremiah), 
 being in prison, dictated, and the saintly Baruch, his secretary, 
 wrote down his words; as is written in Jeremiah, chapter 
 xxxv. or lv. 1 Similarly is it written in the books of the 
 Machabees that the law of God was burnt and that they tor- 
 tured those who possessed it. Then in the time of the New 
 Testament they burnt the holy men, together with the books 
 of God's law. Thus the cardinals condemned the books of 
 
 1 As was already remarked by Mladenovic in a MS. note, the passage 
 referred to by Hus is in Jeremiah, chap, xxxvi. Hus was not allowed a 
 Bible in prison. 
 
270 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 St. Gregory, which are named Moralia, 1 and they would have 
 burnt them all, had not God, through his (Gregory's) one 
 disciple, Peter, saved them. Also St. John Chrysostomus 
 was condemned as a heretic by two councils of priests, but the 
 gracious Lord God, after the death of St. John, revealed their 
 falsehood. Having these things before your eyes, let not fear 
 prevent you from reading my books, nor induce you to give 
 them up to be burnt. Remember what our gracious Saviour 
 said as a warning (Matthew, chapter xxiv.), that before the 
 day of judgment there will be great tribulation such as was 
 not from the beginning of the world to this time, so that, were 
 it possible, even the elect would be lead into error, but because 
 of the elect these days will be shortened. 2 Bearing this in 
 your minds, dearest, persevere bravely, for I hope to God that 
 the following 3 of Antichrist will fear you and leave you in 
 peace, and that the Council of Constance will not come to 
 Bohemia; for I believe that many who are at this council will 
 die before they have extorted these books from you; many 
 members of this council also will disperse like storks through- 
 out the lands, and only when winter comes will they know 
 what evil deeds they did in summer. Consider that they (the 
 members of the council) branded their chief as a heretic. 
 Answer now, ye preachers who preach that the pope is an 
 earthly God, that; he cannot sin, that he cannot commit 
 simony, that, as the jurists 4 affirm, the pope is the head of the 
 entire holy church, which he rules very wisely, that he is the 
 heart of the holy church, which he spiritually nourishes, the 
 fountain from which all power and goodness flow, the sun of 
 the holy church and the faultless refuge to which all Christians 
 should fly. But now, behold, this head has been struck off. 
 
 1 The book referred to is the Exposition of St. Job or Moralia, by Pope 
 Gregory I., surnamed the " Great " (590-604). 
 
 * Here also Hus is obviously quoting from memory. 
 
 * In Bohemian, skola=school. 
 
 * i.e., those priests, very numerous in the time of Hus, who studied juris- 
 prudence rather than theology. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 271 
 
 The earthly God is in bonds, and he is openly convicted of sin, 
 the fountain has become dry, the sun has become dim, the 
 heart has been plucked out, the refuge has fled from Constance 
 and has been abandoned, so that none can flee to it. The 
 council has condemned him (Pope John XXIII.) as a heretic 
 because he sold indulgences and bishoprics, and other bene- 
 fices, and among those who condemned him were many who 
 had themselves bought such things from him, and others who 
 had trafficked in them. Thus John, Bishop of Litomysl, was 
 present, who twice bid for the archbishopric of Prague, but 
 others outbid him. Oh, why did they not first remove the 
 beam from their own eye? Truly their (canon) law says: 
 ' If one has obtained some dignity by means of money, let him 
 be deprived of it.' Therefore should the seller and buyer, and 
 he who deposits money, 1 or acts as agent, be publicly con- 
 demned. St. Peter condemned and accursed Simon because 
 he wished to buy for money the power of the Holy Ghost. 
 These (the members of the council) condemn indeed and curse 
 the vendors, but they themselves continue buyers and givers 
 of earnest-money. There is a bishop at Constance who bought 
 (benefices) and another who sold, and the pope received money 
 for giving his consent. It is thus also in Bohemia (and 
 Moravia), 2 as is known to you. Oh, had but the Lord Jesus 
 said at the council : ' He among you that is without the sin of 
 simony, let him condemn Pope John! ' It seems to me that 
 they would have run away, one after the other. Why then 
 did they kneel before him, kiss his feet, call him holiest father, 
 knowing that he was a heretic, a murderer, one guilty of 
 nameless sin — of all of which offences he was convicted ? Why 
 did the cardinals choose him as pope, knowing that he was an 
 evil murderer, one who had killed the holy father ? 3 Why did 
 
 1 Earnest-money, that was paid down before the sale of a benefice was 
 completed. 
 
 * The brackets are in the original. 
 
 * Hus refers to the widely-spread rumour that John XXIII. had poisoned 
 Pope Alexander. 
 
272 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 they allow him to commit simony when he had become pope 
 — they who had been appointed his counsellors, that they 
 should counsel him wisely? And are not those guilty who 
 together with him committed simony? Why then, till he 
 (Pope John XXIII.) fled from Constance, did none dare say 
 anything to him but ' holiest father? ' Then indeed they 
 were still afraid of him. But when the secular power with the 
 consent or by the will of God seized him, then they conspired 
 against him, concerting among themselves to prevent his 
 being freed. Assuredly the wickedness, sinfulness, and shame 
 of Antichrist became manifest in this pope and in the other 
 members of the council. Already may God's faithful servants 
 understand the words of the Saviour when he said : ' When ye 
 therefore] shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of 
 by Daniel the prophet (whoso readeth let him understand).' * 
 The great abomination is pride, avarice, simony. By desola- 
 tion are meant honours that are devoid of modesty and other 
 virtues, as we see plainly when looking at those who hold offices 
 and honours. Oh, could I but describe these sins that the 
 faithful may shun them. Gladly would I do so, but I hope to 
 God that he will grant after me men who are braver than those 
 of the present day, who will show better the wickedness of 
 Antichrist, 2 and lay down their lives for the truth of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, who will, I pray, grant you and me eternal happi- 
 ness. Amen. Written on the day of St. John the Baptist in 
 prison, and in fetters, mindful that John also was in prison and 
 in fetters and was decapitated for God's truth." 
 
 A letter of Hus written two days later, also addressed to 
 " the faithful Bohemians," again refers to the decree ordering 
 the burning of his Bohemian writings. The letter also con- 
 tains an allusion to the terrible state of depravation prevailing 
 
 1 St. Matthew xxiv. 15. 
 
 2 This passage is one of those in which Hus speaks prophetically of those 
 who were to continue his struggle for church-reform. These remarks are 
 probably the foundation of the legend — to be noted later — according to 
 which Hus had predicted the coming of Luther. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 273 
 
 in Constance in consequence of the presence of so many eccle- 
 siastics. Such matters have often been overlooked by writers 
 of all parties. Yet they deserve attention. It was the burn- 
 ing indignation kindled in the minds of clean-living and re- 
 spectable men by such scandals that produced the movement 
 in favour of church-reform far more than any differences of 
 opinion on matters of dogma. In this letter (June 26), which 
 need not be translated entirely, Hus writes: " It has occurred 
 to me to inform you how the council, haughty, avaricious and 
 full of all iniquity, has condemned my Bohemian books, which 
 it had neither heard nor seen, nor, had it heard them, would 
 j have understood ; for there were at the council Italians, 
 Frenchmen, Englishmen, Spaniards and Germans, and men of 
 j other nations. The only ones who would have understood 
 ithem were John, Bishop of Litomysl and the other Bohemian 
 instigators, with the chapters of Prague and the Vysehrad, 1 
 I who originated the insults to God's truth and to our Bohemian 
 Shome, 2 which (country) I, trusting in God, hold to be the most 
 pious land, zealous for the divine word and for morality. Oh, 
 had you but seen this council, which calls itself the most holy 
 [council and claims infallibility! you would have beheld great 
 ;abomination, of which I have heard the Suabians say, that in 
 thirty years their city Constance or Kostnice 3 will not be 
 [purged of the sins which the council committed in their town ; 
 Isome say that the council has scandalised all; others spat out 
 when they beheld the foul deeds." 
 
 On the following day — June 27 — Hus sent a letter of fare- 
 well to the University of Prague with which he had been so 
 :losely connected during his studies and during his prolonged 
 truggle against the enemies of church-reform. In this letter, 
 vritten in Latin according to the custom of the learned of that 
 
 1 The monks of Prague and the Vysehrad, who owned many of the largest 
 states in Bohemia, became bitter enemies of Hus, as soon as he began to 
 ■reach against avarice and simony. 
 
 ■».«., by defaming Bohemia as a heretical country. 
 
 3 The Bohemian name of the town of Constance. 
 
 S 
 
274 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 time, Hus exhorts the masters, bachelors, and students of the 
 university to love each other, to root out schisms, to strive 
 above all for the glory of God, bearing in mind how he (Hus) 
 had always striven to further the progress of the university for 
 the honour of God, how he had sorrowed over discord and 
 excesses among the students, how he had wished to join in 
 union the members of the illustrious Bohemian nation. " And 
 behold," Hus continues, " some of those who were dearest to 
 me, 1 for whom I would have laid down my life, have assailed 
 me with insult and calumny, have brought on me much bitter- 
 ness and a bitter death. May the omnipotent God forgive 
 them, for they know not what they do. I pray for these men 
 with a sincere heart, that God may spare them. Meanwhile, 
 beloved in Jesus Christ, stand by the acknowledged truth, 
 which conquers all and grows ever stronger unto all eternity. 
 Be it also known to you that I have recanted no article nor 
 abjured one. The council also wished that I should declare 
 false all the articles, and any one, which they might extract 
 from my writings. I refused to do so unless their falseness 
 could be proved from Scripture ; should any one of the articles 
 have been falsely interpreted I abhor such an interpretation 
 and commend its correction to Jesus Christ, who knows my 
 sincere innermost intentions, not interpreting them in an evil 
 sense, such as was not in my intention. You also I exhort in 
 the Lord to reject whatever evil sense may be given to any of 
 the articles, but to retain the truth. Pray to God for me and 
 greet one another in holy peace." , 
 
 The last letter of Hus which has been preserved is dated 
 June 29. Written in Bohemian, it contains a short farewell 
 to Hus's friends in Bohemia, to whom it is addressed. Hus 
 writes: " May God be with you and grant you eternal reward 
 for the good which you have done to me and still do, though 
 my body will soon be dead. Do not allow Lord John (of 
 
 1 Hus alludes to those priests who had formerly been his friends, but 
 afterwards became spies and informers against him. 
 
THE TRTAL AND DEATH OF HUS 275 
 
 Chlum), that true and noble knight, my benefactor, to incur 
 any danger, I beg you in the name of God, dear Sir Peter the 
 mintmaster and Lady Anna. 1 I beg you also to live well and 
 obey God according to my teaching. To the queen, 2 my most 
 gracious mistress, express my thanks for all the benefits which 
 she has bestowed on me. Greet your household and the other 
 faithful friends, whom I cannot all name. I beg you also to 
 pray for me to the Lord God, within whose holy grace we shall 
 by His help meet. Amen. I write this letter expecting my 
 death-sentence in prison and in fetters, which, as I hope, I 
 endure for the sake of God's law. I beg you in the name of 
 the Lord God not to allow the good priests 3 to be ill-treated." 
 
 A quaint postscript follows the letter ; it runs thus : 
 
 " Peter, 4 dearest friend, keep my fur coat in memory of me. 
 
 " Lord Henry Lefl, live in good friendship with your wife. 
 I thank you for your benefits; God will requite them to you. 
 
 " Faithful friends, Sir Lider and Lady Margaret, also 
 Master Skuocek, 5 Mikeska, 6 and others, may God grant you 
 eternal reward for the trouble you have taken for me and the 
 benefits you have conferred on me. 
 
 " Faithful and beloved Magister Christian, 7 may God be 
 with thee. 
 
 " Magister Martin, my disciple, remember that which I 
 have faithfully taught thee. Master Nicholas, Peter, priest 
 of the queen, 8 and other magisters, be zealous for the word of 
 
 1 This passage is not very clear. Peter of Svojsin, Bohemian mintmaster, 
 and his wife, Lady Anna of Frimburg, were friends of Hus and of church- 
 reform. They also had influence at the court of Venceslas. Hus begged 
 them to be helpful to his protector, Lord John of Chlum. 
 
 "- i.e., Queen Sophia. 
 
 3 i.e., those priests who were opposed to simony. 
 
 * Probably Peter Mladenovic, " Petre amice carissime pellicium tibi serva 
 in mei memoriam." The words are in Latin in the Bohemian letter. 
 
 5 Nothing is known of the persons mentioned here. 
 
 * Called also Marik Kacer, formerly vice-chancellor of the Bohemian 
 kingdom. 
 
 7 Master Christian (or Kristan) of Prachatice, one of the leading Bohemian 
 church-reformers. 
 
 8 Probably Hus's successor as confessor of the queen. 
 
276 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 God. Priest Havlik, preach the word of God. And I beg you 
 all to remain steadfast in God's faith." 
 
 There is no doubt that after the hearing on June 8 Hus 
 hoped to be allowed to appear again before the council and 
 expound his views more thoroughly than he had hitherto been 
 allowed to do. The council, on the other hand, was already 
 enraged by the slight and unsuccessful attempts he had been 
 allowed to make to define his views. It was determined no 
 longer to defer the formal condemnation and sentence. The 
 council believed that sufficient evidence against Hus already 
 existed. Few members of the assembly probably troubled to 
 wade through Hus's voluminous Latin works, and those 
 written in his own language were only understood by his own 
 countrymen and persecutors. Yet by means of so-called 
 articles quoted, often unfairly, from Hus's various works, it 
 was thought that full proof of heresy had been established. 
 If Hus was none the less allowed to live nearly a month after 
 the third day of the hearing, this must be attributed to the 
 attempts made to induce him to recant. I have already 
 referred to the reasons why some of Hus's opponents would 
 have preferred such a recantation to a public execution, and 
 have already mentioned the steps taken by the " father " for 
 that purpose. Another attempt to induce Hus to recant was 
 made on July 5, the day preceding the one fixed for his last 
 appearance before the council, and also for his death, should 
 he still remain impenitent. This last attempt at mediation 
 was made directly through the influence of King Sigismund, 
 who was, of course, better acquainted with the state of affairs 
 in Bohemia than were the members of the council. Two 
 Bohemian noblemen, John of Chlum and Venceslas of Duba, 
 visited Hus, accompanied by four bishops and several priests. 
 When Hus had been led out of his prison in the Franciscan 
 monastery, Lord Venceslas addressed him in frank and manly 
 words, which contrast very favourably with the crafty, in- 
 sincere, and treacherous manner in which the council dealt 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 277 
 
 with Hus. Duba said: " Behold, Master John, we are lay-; 
 men and cannot give advice. Consider then if thou feelest 
 thyself guilty of any of the things of which thou art accused. 
 If so, do not hesitate to accept instruction and to recant. But 
 if thou dost not feel guilty of these things that are brought 
 forward against thee, be guided by thy conscience, do nothing 
 against thy conscience, nor lie before the face of God; rather 
 hold unto death to the truth as thou hast understood it." 
 Hus answered humbly and in tears: "Be it known to you""^ 
 that if I knew that I had written or preached anything against 
 the law and the holy mother the church, I would humbly 
 recant it ; may God be my witness to this ; but I always desire 
 that they should show me doctrines that are better and more 
 credible than those which I have written and taught. If 
 such be shown me, I will gladly recant." Then one of the 
 bishops who was standing near answered, saying: " Wilt thou 
 then be wiser than the whole council? " But the master said 
 to him: " I do not claim to be wiser than the whole council, 
 but, I beg you, give me the meanest (minimus) man at the 
 council that he may instruct me in better and more effective 
 doctrine, and I am prepared immediately to recant." In 
 answer to these words the bishops said: " Behold, how 
 obstinate he is in his heresy." Then, after ordering him to be 
 led back to his prison, they went away. 1 
 
 The following day — July 6 — had been fixed on for the 
 execution, or as the Bohemians deemed it, the martyrdom of 
 Hus. The council, to give more solemnity to the proceedings, 
 met at the cathedral on this occasion. Sigismund sat on a 
 throne near the high altar in full state, surrounded by all his 
 courtiers. The members of the council were present almost 
 without exception, and the rest of the vast cathedral was filled 
 with spectators, among them almost all the Bohemians who 
 were then at Constance. It was probably in view of their 
 expected presence that Sigismund had made extensive military 
 
 1 Mladenovic. 
 
 V 
 
278 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 preparations. He had assembled at Constance a large force 
 of Hungarian mercenaries, who as hereditary enemies of the 
 Bohemians were ready to obey even the most severe orders 
 which they might receive. Archbishop Wallenrod was deputed 
 to conduct Hus from his prison to the cathedral. Hus was 
 " dressed in black with a handsome silver girdle, and wore his 
 robes as a magister." As soon as he had left the prison, the 
 couch on which he had slept during his last days was burnt 
 and the ashes were thrown into the Rhine. The fame of his 
 sanctity had already spread so widely that it was feared that 
 the Bohemians would endeavour to collect relics of the 
 martyr. When Hus, with the archbishop and his gaolers, 
 arrived at the cathedral, he was not at first admitted into the 
 interior of the building, where high mass was being celebrated. 
 A wooden partition had been erected at the gate of the 
 cathedral, behind which Hus waited till the religious cere- 
 monies had been concluded. Hus was then admitted into the 
 interior of the cathedral. After passing the sixth column in 
 the nave he knelt down and prayed fervently for several 
 minutes. 1 The judicial proceedings — if we can venture to 
 give them that name — now began immediately. After the 
 | Bishop of Constance had seriously admonished all present not 
 ' to disturb the proceedings, the Bishop of Lodi preached a short 
 sermon in which he laid stress on the danger of heresy, and 
 also expressed strong disapproval of simony. He no doubt 
 knew that numerous members of the assembly were accused 
 of being simonists, and that this had greatly contributed to 
 strengthen Hus as a preacher of church- reform. Henry de 
 Piro, the lay administrator, or, as it was termed, " procurator " 
 of the council, then proposed that the proceedings against Hus 
 should now be brought to a conclusion, that he might be 
 delivered over to the secular authorities for punishment. One 
 
 1 The spot — I know not on what authority — is still shown to visitors to 
 the cathedral. They are also told that the spot on the pavement where Hus 
 knelt always remains dry even when the rest of it is very moist. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 279 
 
 of the bishops was then instructed to read out the articles 
 containing the heresies of which Hus was accused. Sixteen 
 of them were passages derived from the writings of Wycliffe 
 which Hus had incorporated in his works, thus assuming re- 
 sponsibility for them. Hus accepted the responsibility, but 
 he begged to be allowed to explain the sense in which he had 
 interpreted Wycliffe's words. All who have even a slight 
 knowledge of the writings of the English divine know how 
 difficult and often ambiguous they are. Hus's prayer was 
 none the less refused. He was, indeed, on this day granted 
 hardly any hearing and treated with greater brutality than 
 when he previously appeared before the council. Thirty 
 articles chosen from Hus's own works were then read out. 
 They dealt, as had the former ones, mainly with the questions 
 of predestination, of the sacrament — concerning which state- 
 ments which he had never made were again falsely attributed 
 to Hus, — of the church, and of the limits of the papal power. ' 
 Hus again attempted to speak, but in spite of the admonition 
 of the Bishop of Constance, he was interrupted by loud cries. 
 When the article which referred to predestination 1 was read 
 out, Hus wished to explain with what limitations he accepted 
 that doctrine. He had always maintained that his teaching 
 on that subject was identical with St. Augustine's. Hus here 
 incidentally referred to the treatment he had received on the 
 part of the council. He again stated that he had come to 
 Constance of his own free will and with a letter of safe-conduct 
 from Sigismund. He looked in this moment at the emperor, 
 who, it was noticed, blushed. The council now determined to 
 silence Hus at any price. Cardinal D'Ailly, whose special 
 bitterness against Hus has been noted by many writers, said 
 to him: " Be silent now, you will afterwards reply to all the 
 articles at the same time." Hus answered: " How can I 
 answer them all at the same time, when I cannot even think of 
 
 1 It ran thus: " Unica et sancta universalis ecclesia quae est praedestina- 
 torum universitas," etc. (Mladenovic). 
 
280 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 them all at the same time? " When somewhat later, during 
 the reading of the articles, Hus again attempted to explain 
 his meaning, the Cardinal of Florence, Zabarella, said, rising 
 from his seat: " Be silent, we have already heard thee suffi- 
 ciently; " then addressing the beadles who surrounded Hus, 
 he said to them: " Force him to be silent." Hus then knelt 
 down and said with a loud voice: " I beg you, in the name of 
 God, to grant me a hearing, that those who are present may 
 not think that I hold heretical opinions. After that deal with 
 me as you see fit." The prohibition, however, was main- 
 tained. Hus then for a time ceased to address the council, 
 wishing to avoid that physical violence be used against him 
 by the beadles and mercenary soldiers within the precincts of 
 the cathedral. He continued to kneel, and prayed with eyes 
 lifted heavenward, commending, as Mladenovic writes, his 
 cause to God, the justest of judges. 
 
 After the articles followed the depositions of the, mostly 
 Bohemian, witnesses against Hus. One of the accusers, a 
 doctor of divinity, stated that Hus had declared " that he was 
 and would be a fourth person in the divinity." 1 It is not 
 known who this doctor was, but suspicion certainly points to 
 Stephen Palec, next to Michael de causis the most impudent 
 and the most unscrupulous of the enemies of Hus. This 
 accusation of blasphemy of the deepest dye roused Hus to 
 make one more attempt to record a protest. " Let that 
 doctor," he said, " be named who has deposed this against 
 me." The bishop who was reading out the articles answered: 
 " It is unnecessary that he should be named." It is, however, 
 probable that Hus was allowed to answer at some length. 2 
 The mercenaries who surrounded him, contrary to the orders 
 which they had received, used no violence against him. The 
 
 1 " Quomodo ipse se quartam fore et esse personam in divinis posuisset." 
 The importance of this accusation has been overlooked by many writers 
 on Hus. 
 
 a This appears very probable, as Mladenovic, referring to Hus's remarks, 
 writes : Magister inter alia dixit. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 281 
 
 last accusation against Hus appeared so monstrous that even 
 uneducated men felt the cruelty of preventing the accused 
 from replying. Hus said, among other things: "Be it far 
 from me that I should call myself the fourth person of the 
 divinity; such a thought could find no place in my mind. But 
 I consistently affirm that the Father, the Son, and the Holy 
 Ghost are one God and one entity and a trinity of persons." 
 It should be mentioned that almost all modern writers belong- 
 ing to the Roman Church, Hefele in particular, have admitted 
 the absolute falsehood of this infamous accusation. Hus was, 
 lastly, accused of having appealed to God, a proceeding which 
 was declared to be heretical. In a brief statement which Hus 
 was allowed to make he declared that he firmly maintained 
 that there could be no surer appeal than that to Jesus Christ, 
 the Lord, who is not influenced by evil gifts, nor deceived by 
 false witnesses, but who judges all according to their merits. 
 
 When all the articles derived from Wycliffe's and from 
 Hus's own writings and the statements of the witnesses had 
 been read out, it became certain that the council intended to 
 terminate the trial of Hus without further delay. He was not 
 allowed to reply to the vast amount of accusations that had 
 been brought against him; it would indeed, as Hus pointed 
 out, have been impossible to do so at one continuous sitting. 
 A declaration that Hus had sent to the council on July 1 was, 
 however, read out. 1 He declared that, fearing to offend God 
 and to commit perjury, he could not recant all the articles, nor 
 indeed any of those that had been wrongly attributed to him 
 by false witnesses, who had accused him — and he called on 
 God as witness of this — of preaching, asserting, and defending 
 views that he had never held. He further declared that if 
 any statement which was really contained in his writings 2 
 was heretical, he detested and abhorred it, and was ready to 
 recant it. 
 
 1 The document is printed in full in Von der Hardt, T. iv. p. 389. 
 1 This refers to the statement constantly repeated by Hus, that his writings 
 had been incorrectly quoted. 
 
282 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Sentence on Hus was then immediately passed. Two 
 decrees were read out by " a bald and old Italian priest." The 
 first ordered all Hus's writings, both in Latin and in his own 
 language, to be destroyed. Hus said: "Why do you con- 
 demn my books, when I have always wished and asked for 
 other better books that shall refute them (mine), and I still 
 wish it ? But up to now you have shown me no writings in 
 contradiction to my own, nor have you proved that these 
 contain any heresies. As to my Bohemian writings, which 
 you have never seen, why do you condemn them? v * The 
 second sentence dealt with the person of Hus. He was de- 
 clared to be a true and manifest heretic, who was to be de- 
 livered over to the secular authorities for punishment. It has 
 already been mentioned that, in accordance with an ancient 
 custom, the church did not itself pronounce the sentence of 
 death. Hus then knelt down, and praying with a loud voice 
 said: " Lord Jesus Christ, forgive all my enemies, I entreat 
 you, because of your great mercifulness. You know that 
 they have falsely accused me, brought forth false witnesses 
 against me, devised false articles against me. Forgive them 
 because of your immense mercifulness." When they heard 
 this, many of the members of the council and particularly 
 the foremost ecclesiastical dignitaries derided him. 1 The 
 ignominious ceremonies known as the degradation and decon- 
 secration were then performed. Hus was dressed in full eccle- 
 siastical vestments and the chalice and paten were placed in 
 his hands. Then the ecclesiastical vestments were removed 
 and the chalice and paten again taken from him. While this 
 was being done, the Archbishop of Milan, who with five bishops 
 officiated at this function, said: " Oh, cursed Judas, who hast 
 left the realms of peace and allied thyself with the Jews, we 
 to-day take from thee the chalice of salvation." Hus replied 
 that he hoped to drink of the chalice in the heavenly kingdom 
 
 1 " Et cum hoc dixisset, multi et praesertim sacerdotum principes 
 deridebant ilium " (Mladenovic). 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 283 
 
 on that very day. When these ceremonies had ended, the 
 bishops said: " We commit thy soul to the devil." Hus 
 answered: " And I commit it to the most sacred Lord Jesus 
 Christ." A high paper cap was then as a sign of derision 
 placed on the head of the martyr. On it were written the 
 words: Hie est heresiarcha. Sigismund then requested Louis 
 Count Palatine * to hand over Hus to the beadles of the city of 
 Constance. A large armed force, consisting of some of the 
 townsmen of Constance, Sigismund's Hungarian mercenaries, 
 and troops in the service of the Count Palatine and other 
 German princes — about 3000 men in all — accompanied Hus. 
 A large crowd, including many Bohemians, among them 
 Mladenovic, joined the mournful procession, though Sigis- 
 mund, hoping as far as possible to exclude the Bohemians, 
 had given orders that the city gates should be closed as soon 
 as Hus had passed. From the cathedral Hus was led through 
 the churchyard — where his books were just being burnt — 
 along the street now known as the " Huss Strasse," past the 
 house of the widow Fida, and through the Schnetz gate to the 
 place of execution. That spot, 2 about a quarter of a mile 
 from the Schnetz gate, is now marked by a stone with an in- 
 scription, and has become a favourite place of pilgrimage for 
 Hus's countrymen. The account of the last moments of the 
 martyr can best be given in the words of Mladenovic, 3 who 
 was present. He writes: " When he (Hus) had arrived at the 
 
 1 Lenfant (Histoire du Concile de Constance) relates that when the elector 
 Palatine Otho Henry, the last of his line, died childless, he said that God 
 punished the sins of the forefathers even in the third and fourth generations, 
 and that he had been punished because his great-great-grandfather, the 
 Count Palatine Louis, had, by order of the emperor, conducted Hus to the 
 stake. 
 
 2 Contrary to what has been often stated, the spot is not in the immediate 
 vicinity of the Rhine. 
 
 * That indefatigable Bohemian scholar, Mr. Patera, some years ago dis- 
 covered and published a previously unknown contemporary Bohemian 
 account of the death of Hus. I had intended to compare it with the account 
 of Mladenovic, but, finding that this would interfere with the course oi the 
 narrative, I have preferred to give as an appendix a translation of the whole 
 of the account. 
 
V 
 
 284 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 place of torture he began, on bent knees, with his arms ex- 
 tended and his eyes lifted to heaven, to recite psalms with 
 great fervour, particularly, ' Have mercy on me, oh God,' and 
 ' In thee, oh Lord, do I put my trust.' He repeated the verse: 
 ' Into thy hand I commit my spirit,' and it was noticed by his 
 friends that he prayed joyfully and with a beautiful counte- 
 nance. Now the place of torture was among gardens in a 
 field on the road that leads from the city of Constance in the 
 direction of the castle of Gottlieben, between the gate and the 
 moat at the outworks of the city. Some laymen who stood 
 near the spot said : ' We know not what he has formerly said 
 or done, but we now see and hear that he prays, and speaks 
 holy words ! ' Others said : ' Assuredly it were well that he 
 should have a confessor, who would hear him.' But a priest 
 who was riding past, clad in a green doublet that was lined with 
 red silk, said : ' He may not be heard, neither may a confessor 
 be granted to him, for he is a heretic' Master John, however, 
 while still in prison, had made confession to a doctor (of 
 divinity), who was a monk, 1 and had been heard by him, and 
 had received absolution, as he mentions in one of the letters 
 which he sent to his disciples from prison. While he (Hus) 
 was praying, as mentioned before, the crown of blasphemy, as 
 it was called, fell from his head. He noticed that three devils 
 were painted on it and smiled. And some of the mercenaries 
 who stood near said : ' Let it be again placed on his head, that 
 he be burnt together with his masters, the devils whom he 
 served! ' 
 
 " Rising from his prayers by order of the lictor (soldier, or 
 town-official), Hus said with a loud and intelligible voice, so 
 that he could be well heard by his disciples: 'Lord Jesus 
 Christ, I will bear patiently and humbly this horrible, shameful, 
 and cruel death for the sake of Thy gospel and the preaching of 
 Thy word.' When he was led past the spectators, he ad- 
 dressed them, begging them not to believe that he had ever 
 
 1 " Cuidam doctori monacho." 
 
THE BURNING OF JOHN IMS, I4.I3 
 SCATTERING OF HUS's ASHES 
 
 [ run Reichental's Chronicle of the Council of Const; 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 285 
 
 held, preached, or taught the tenets which had been ascribed 
 to him by false witnesses. He was then stripped of his clothes 
 and tied with cords to a stake, and his arms were turned back- 
 ward to the stake. When his face was at first turned to the 
 east, some of the spectators said: ' Let him not be turned to 
 the east, for he is a heretic, but to the west; ' and it was done 
 thus. When a rusty chain was placed round his neck, he 
 said, smiling, to the lictors: ' Our Lord Jesus Christ, my Re- 
 deemer, was bound with a harder and heavier chain, and I, 
 poor wretch, fear not to be fettered with this chain for His 
 sake.' Now the stake consisted of a thick pole, which they 
 had sharpened at one end and driven into the ground in this 
 field ; under the feet of the master they placed two faggots and 
 some loads of wood. When attached to the stake he retained 
 one of his boots, and a fetter on one of his feet. They then 
 heaped up round his body wooden faggots mixed with straw so 
 that they reached up to his chin." Mladenovic then refers to 
 the last attempt — it was little more than a formality — made 
 by the imperial marshal, Pappenheim, to induce Hus to recant, 
 and then describes the martyrdom. " When the lictors," he 
 writes, " lighted the pile, the master first sang with a loud 
 voice, ' Christ, son of the living God, have mercy on us,' and 
 then again, ' Christ, son of the living God, have mercy on us.' 
 When a third time he began singing, ' Who art born of the 
 virgin Mary,' the wind soon blew the flames into his face; 
 then, still silently praying and moving his lips, he expired in 
 the Lord. The space of time during which, after having 
 become silent, he still moved before dying was that required 
 to recite two, or at most three paternosters." Mladenovic 
 then describes the detestable outrages that were committed 
 on the remains of the body of Hus l to prevent their being 
 preserved as relics by his countrymen. 
 
 That the execution of Hus would have world-wide conse- 
 
 1 These ignoble outrages are described more fully by Von der Hardt, 
 T. iv. p. 450. 
 
286 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 quences seems to have been foreseen by many of his con- 
 temporaries, and legends soon arose round the memory of the 
 martyr. Thus it was said that an old woman had brought 
 faggots to add to the funeral pile, and that Hus had then 
 spoken the words : sancta simplicitas. It was also said that 
 Hus — and this legend was undoubtedly based on remarks of Hus 
 that have been mentioned in this work — had predicted that he 
 would have a successor who would be successful in the attempt 
 in which he had failed — the general reform of the church. 1 
 
 Few events in history have given rise to more controversy 
 !than the trial and execution of Hus. In offering an opinion 
 on this matter, it is necessary to distinguish between the con- 
 duct of the council and that of Sigismund. According to the 
 ruling of the Roman Church, it was the duty of the council, as 
 there was then no pope, to declare heretics all who differed 
 from the teaching of the church, and to hand over such men 
 to the temporal authorities. The latter were empowered by a 
 decree of the Emperor Frederick II. to order them to be burnt. 
 No faith could or should be kept with heretics. 2 Anything 
 that resembled a bona-fide trial was, therefore, out of ques- 
 tion. No legal representative could be granted a heretic. He 
 had merely to appear before the council, recant everything he 
 was accused of having said, and receive condign punishment. 
 Gerson, one of the principal actors in the tragedy of Constance, 
 strongly upheld this standpoint, 3 and it is that also of the 
 earlier Roman writers on the death of Hus. Their attitude is 
 certainly manlier and more straightforward than that of later 
 defenders of the council, who falsely accused Hus of having 
 attempted to fly from Constance, of having preached and said 
 mass publicly at Constance, etc. It is true that, even if we 
 
 1 The tale that Hus had said that they would indeed burn the goose 
 (" hus " signifies goose in Bohemian), but that afterwards a swan would come, 
 whom they would not burn, is founded on the totally erroneous supposition 
 that " Luther " signifies " swan " in Bohemian. 
 
 * " Ad poenam quoque pertinet et odium hereticorum quod fides illis data 
 servanda non sit " (Simancha Inst, cath., pp. 46, 52, quoted by Lord Acton). 
 
 s See Schwab, Johannes Gerson, particularly p. 583. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 287 
 
 admit the standpoint of the council, the attempts to interrupt 
 Hus by cries and insults when he endeavoured to speak 
 remain indefensible. 
 
 We have, however, to consider a further point which has 
 recently attracted considerable attention : Was Hus a heretic ? 
 In other words, did he hold any doctrine that was opposed to 
 the teaching of the Church of Rome in the development which 
 it had attained at the beginning of the fifteenth century? It 
 has here been repeatedly stated, and cannot be sufficiently 
 often reaffirmed, that the principal cause on which Hus staked 
 his life was that of church-reform. An intensely pious and 
 rigidly virtuous priest, he viewed with what to worldly men 
 may appear a puerile feeling of horror and indignation the un- 
 speakable degradation of the Bohemian clergy. It has been 
 necessary in this book, destined for the general public, to 
 withhold much evidence on this point. The fact that the 
 ruling powers of the Roman Church made no attempt to dis- 
 countenance the vices of its clergy, together with the study of 
 Wycliffe's works, then led Hus to adverse criticism of the 
 ecclesiastical organisation of the church, and of papacy in 
 particular. Though there were, as already mentioned, in the 
 fourteenth and fifteenth centuries writers who maintained the 
 overwhelming power and authority of the pope as strongly 
 and as unconditionally as has been done recently, yet freedom 
 of opinion on such matters still existed at the time of Hus, 
 and he cannot be called a heretic for expressing views con- 
 trary to those of Rome on questions which only the councils of 
 Trent and the Vatican have declared to be matters of dogma. 
 It is certain that many of the accusations against Hus were 
 absolutely false. This applies not only to the monstrous 
 statement that Hus had pretended to be a fourth person 
 within the divinity, but also to such accusations as that Hus 
 had declared the sacrament to be invalid when administered 
 by an unworthy priest. Hus had in his writings frequently 
 and distinctly expressed the contrary opinion. The question 
 
288 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 therefore arose whether a revision of the judgment on Hus, 
 such as took place in the case of Joan of Arc, would not be 
 possible. Professor Kalousek of the Bohemian University of 
 Prague, one of the most distinguished historians of Bohemia, 
 as long ago as in 1869, addressed a pseudonymous letter to one 
 of the newspapers of Prague suggesting such a revision. The 
 matter at the time attracted considerable attention, and 
 several distinguished Roman Catholic priests published replies 
 to the letter. In a lengthy and very fair work on the teaching 
 !of Hus, Dr. Anton Lenz, one of the most eminent Bohemian 
 divines, though doing full justice to the moral qualities, the 
 integrity, and piety of Hus, yet maintains that he was a heretic, 
 and that the council was justified in declaring him to be one. 
 It cannot, however, be denied that among the heretical views 
 which Dr. Lenz in his able book attributed to Hus, some refer 
 to matters which the Roman Church had not at that time 
 declared to be dogmas. Another Bohemian priest, Dr. Francis 
 Sulc, has published x a Latin and Bohemian version of the 
 famed thirty articles against Hus, and has printed with each 
 article the recognised teaching of the Roman Church on the 
 subject in question. To one who has no pretence to write as 
 a theologian it certainly appears that on certain questions, 
 that of predestination in particular, Hus's teaching did differ 
 from that of the Roman Church, even in the development 
 which it had reached in the fifteenth century. The question 
 is, however, a very difficult one, and Professor Kalousek has in 
 a recent lecture truly stated that much further study of the 
 life and the works of Hus is required. Even quite recently 
 valuable works of the Bohemian church-reformer that were 
 hidden away in formerly inaccessible libraries have been made 
 public. It is hardly necessary to add that, in view of the 
 present current of opinion in the Roman church, a rehabili- 
 tation of Hus is now much more improbable than at the 
 time mentioned above. 
 
 1 Privately printed at the press of the Bishop of Kralove Hradec 
 (Koniggratz). 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 289 
 
 Opinion will always differ with regard to the question 
 whether Hus should be considered as the last of the mediaeval 
 reformers who wished only to purify the church and restore it 
 to its primitive simplicity, or as a forerunner of the g 
 church-reformers of the sixteenth century. Extreme writers 
 of both parties have unanimously adopted the latter supposi- 
 tion. Moderate writers — who it is unnecessary to say are few 
 in number — have alone sometimes expressed doubts. That 
 Hus was a forerunner of Luther has been constantly main- 
 tained by ultramontane writers, and they extend to him the 
 unconditionally adverse judgment which they pronounce on 
 the German reformer. On the other hand, most German 
 Protestant writers on the Hussite movement, such as 
 Krummel, Lechler, Neander, have also declared Hus to be the 
 precursor of the German reformation, and have praised him 
 as such. Dr. Harnack alone has expressed a contrary opinion. 1 
 Luther himself undoubtedly considered Hus as his forerunner. 
 In a well-known passage of his letters, written when he had 
 just begun to study the works of Hus, he remarks: " We have 
 all been Hussites without knowing it." On many occasions 
 Luther expressed his admiration for Hus in a manner not dis- 
 similar from that in which the great Bohemian lauded Wycliffe. 
 Thus in the introduction to his edition of Hus's letters, the 
 German reformer calls him optimum et piisimum virum — to 
 quote but one of many instances. 2 Elsewhere Luther writes: 
 " If this man was not a noble, strong, and dauntless martyr 
 and confessor of Christ, then will it indeed be hard for any 
 man to obtain salvation." 
 
 1 " Die wiclifitisch — hussitische Bewegung . . . muss als die reifste 
 Ausgestaltung der mittelalterlichen Reformbewegungen gelten. Allein es 
 wird sich zeigen dass auch sie zwar vieles gelockert und vorbereitet, jedoch 
 keinen reformatorischen Gedanken zum Ausdrucke gebracht hat: auch sie 
 halt sich auf dem augustinisch — franciscanischem Boden " (Dr. Harnack, 
 Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, vol. iii. pp. 412-413). 
 
 2 It is a proof of Luther's great admiration for Hus that when sending a 
 wedding-present to his friend Nicholas Specht he chose a portrait of " the 
 saintly John Hus." (Letter to Nicholas Specht, December 12, 1538— The 
 Letters of Martin Luther. Selected and translated by Margaret A. Currie.) 
 
 T 
 
\/ 
 
 290 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Hus's countrymen have never taken much interest in these 
 questions. To them he has always been a fearless enemy of 
 simony, profligacy, and the unlimited power of the clergy, and 
 a brave champion of his country and its nationality. To 
 quote words I wrote more than ten years ago: x " If neglecting 
 for a moment the minutiae of mediaeval theological contro- 
 versy, we consider as a martyr that man who willingly sacrifices 
 his individual life for what he firmly believes to be the good of 
 humanity at large, who ' takes the world's life on him and his 
 
 'I own lays down,' then assuredly there is no truer martyr in the 
 
 '{world's annals than John of Husinec." 
 
 Very different from the judgment which should be passed 
 on the attitude of the council with regard to Hus is that which 
 we must pass on Sigismund. The council had made no promise 
 of safety to Hus, and was acting in accordance with the teach- 
 ing of the church when it urged Sigismund not to keep faith 
 with a heretic. Sigismund, on the other hand, had in the 
 most formal and solemn way assured Hus that he would be 
 allowed to safely proceed to Constance, to be heard there 
 freely, and whatever sentence should be passed on him, to 
 return unharmed to Bohemia. 2 It is difficult to conceive 
 baser treachery than that of Sigismund with regard to Hus. I 
 must refer the reader to an earlier chapter of this book 3 for the 
 motives that induced Sigismund to entice Hus to Constance, 
 whence — this the King of Hungary had from the first decided 
 — he was never to return to his own country. Yet Sigismund's 
 conduct has found defenders, and not only among the extreme 
 adherents of the Church of Rome. One of Sigismund's 
 strongest partisans indeed does not, or did not, belong to any 
 Christian community. It is stated that Sigismund, as a 
 member of the Roman Church, was obliged to obey its com- 
 
 1 A History of Bohemian Literature, p. 141. 
 
 "The distinguished Roman Catholic priest, Dr. Lenz, whom I have 
 repeatedly quoted, writes: " Sigismund broke his word by not handing over 
 Hus to the King of Bohemia after he had been condemned. He was not 
 justified in carrying out the sentence of the council on the unhappy master." 
 
 * See Chapter VI. 
 
THE TRIAL AND DEATH OF HUS 291 
 
 imand not to keep faith with a heretic, and that he had even 
 I exceeded his powers by granting a safe-conduct to Hus. This 
 argument might have had some force at other periods of the 
 history of the church, but at this one it certainly had none. 
 Personal violence had been used against Pope Boniface VIII. 
 and more recently a pope had been besieged at his castle of 
 Avignon. Sigismund himself had imprisoned Pope John 
 XXIII. Even among those who were faithful believers in the 
 teaching of Rome, the popes and prelates had at that time 
 fallen into disesteem and even contempt. Sigismund would 
 certainly not have hesitated to ignore the demands of Pope 
 John XXIII., and afterwards of the council with regard to Hus, 
 had he thought it in his interest to do so. It is true that he 
 shielded himself by invoking the authority of the church when 
 his treachery caused general indignation in Bohemia. It has 
 also been stated that the safe-conduct granted by Sigismund 
 only assured the safe arrival of Hus at Constance. This, how- 
 ever, is in direct contradiction with the wording of the safe- 
 conduct as well as with the fact that Hus started from 
 Prague without this document. It has also been argued in 
 defence of Sigismund that, if the safe-conduct given to Hus 
 had guaranteed his immunity, his trial would have been 
 illusory, as no punishment could have been inflicted. This 
 argument is also founded on a misconception. Had the safe- 
 conduct not been violated, Hus would have been conducted 
 back to his country, and punished according to the decision of 
 his sovereign, King Venceslas of Bohemia. That this by no 
 means necessarily meant immunity will be clearly understood 
 by all who remember that Venceslas had once before 
 threatened Hus with death at the stake. 
 
 The contemporaries of Sigismund, and the Bohemians in 
 particular, were almost unanimous in condemning Sigismund 's 
 misdeed. When the news of the execution of Hus reached the 
 Bohemian court, King Venceslas said: 'They ought not to 
 have treated him in this manner as he had a safe-conduct." 
 
2Q2 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 The king also expressed great indignation at the behaviour of 
 the Bohemian priests, who by their false accusations and 
 depositions had greatly contributed to the condemnation of 
 Hus. 1 The Bohemian people never forgave Sigismund, " the 
 dragon of the apocalypse," as they called him, his treachery, 
 and this feeling contributed largely to the intense bitterness 
 and cruelty of the Hussite wars. 
 
 It is needless to say that during the last painful months of 
 his life Hus had little time for literary activity. Except a few 
 minor treatises, there belong to this period only a large number 
 of letters. I have already copiously, though not, I think, in 
 consideration of their value, too copiously quoted these letters. 
 
 1 Sctiptores rcrum Bohemicarum, ed. Palacky, vol. iii. pp. 20-21. 
 
CHAPTER IX 
 
 HUS AS A BOHEMIAN PATRIOT 
 
 While the great part that Hus played as a church-reformer is I 
 widely known, his great importance as a Bohemian patriot is 
 almost unknown beyond the borders of his native land. Many 
 Bohemians who are firm adherents of the Roman Church there- 
 fore feel great sympathy for Hus, admiring not only his saintly 
 character, but also his devotion to his country and its 
 language, to the development of which he so largely contri- 
 buted. As has already been mentioned, Husinec, the birth- 
 place of the great church-reformer, lies in a district in Western 
 Bohemia which is near the Bavarian frontier and where the 
 German nationality marches with the Bohemian one. No 
 doubt, in consequence of this proximity, the national feeling is 
 very strongly developed in this part of the country. Though 
 little is known of his early youth, it is certain that Hus was 
 brought up as a strong Bohemian patriot. Though so saintly 
 a man as Hus was incapable of hatred of Germans or of men of 
 any country, the injustice of the system which placed in the 
 hands of foreigners — mostly men hostile to the Bohemian 
 nation — most of the dignities of the university and the largest 
 part of the ecclesiastical patronage, filled him with great and 
 justifiable indignation. In one of his earliest sermons, which 
 has already been mentioned, 1 Hus spoke very strongly on the 
 humiliating and subordinate position of the Bohemians in 
 their own country. Like the Bohemian patriots of all periods 
 — for they have retained this characteristic up to the present 
 day — Hus was devotedly attached to the national language. 
 The constant contact with Germany and the fact that many 
 
 1 See p. 73. 
 293 
 
294 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Bohemians, particularly nobles, married German wives, 
 always endangered the purity of the Bohemian language, and 
 furthered the introduction of many German words. Skilfully 
 seeking an analogy in the records of the Old Testament, Hus 
 has enlarged on this subject in one of his most characteristic 
 sermons. 1 " It is written," he says, " in the book of the good 
 Nehemiah : 2 ' I saw Jews that had married wives of Ashdod, 
 of Ammon, and of Moab : and their children spake half in the 
 speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews language, 
 but according to the language of each people. And I con- 
 tended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, 
 and beheaded some. I cursed them in the name of God, say- 
 ing, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor 
 take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves. I 
 said: Did not Solomon King of Israel sin by these things? 
 yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was 
 beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel: 
 nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin. 
 Shall we then being disobedient commit a mortal sin, and 
 transgressing against our God marry strange wives? ' 
 
 " You see then that this good priest (Nehemiah) forbade the 
 Jews to marry heathen women, even if they accepted their 
 faith, and that for two reasons: firstly, that these women 
 should not lead them away from God and to idols, as they led 
 Solomon, that king beloved of God and wise; secondly, that 
 the Hebrew language should not perish. Thus he (Nehemiah) 
 says that he heard children who knew not even Hebrew, but 
 spoke in a half-heathen speech. And therefore he smote them 
 badly, whipped them, and the men he slew. Thus also should 
 the princes, lords, knights, patricians, citizens prevent their 
 people from committing unchastity, and particularly adultery. 
 
 1 Vyklad desateta Boziho prikazanie (Exposition of God's Ten Com- 
 mandments), Erben's edition of Hus's Bohemian works, vol. i. chap. iv. 
 pp. 132-133. 
 
 2 Nehemiah, chapter xiii. 23-27. Hus's quotation differs slightly from 
 the English version of the gospel. 
 
HUS AS A BOHEMIAN PATRIOT 295 
 
 They should not permit this, but should whip them and beat 
 them — I will not say slay them, though this holy man beheaded 
 them; for in later times Christ the merciful king would not 
 allow the adultress to be immediately sentenced to death. 
 Thus also should we behave that the Bohemian language 
 perish not. If a Bohemian marries a German, the children 
 must immediately learn Bohemian and not divide their speech 
 in two (speak partly Bohemian, partly German). For this 
 division causes but jealousy, dissension, anger, and quarrels. 
 Therefore did the Emperor Charles, King of Bohemia, of holy 
 memory, order the citizens of Prague to teach their children 
 Bohemian, to speak it, and to plead at law in Bohemian in 
 the town hall, which the Germans call ' Rothaus.' And just 
 as Nehemiah, when he heard Jewish children speaking partly 
 in the speech of Ashdod, and not knowing Hebrew (well), 
 whipped them and beat them, thus would those citizens of 
 Prague deserve a whipping, as well as those other Bohemians 
 whose speech is half Bohemian and half German — men who 
 use such German words as Hantuch, Knedlik, Shorz, Hausz- 
 knecht. 1 And who can describe how greatly they have 
 confused (rendered unintelligible) the Bohemian language? 
 Therefore a true Bohemian who listens to them, and hears 
 them speak, understands not what they say. Thence spring 
 ill -.will, envy, dissensions, quarrels, and dishonour to 
 Bohemia." 
 
 This curious passage shows how strongly developed the 
 feeling of racial antipathy between Bohemians and Germans 
 was at the beginning of the fifteenth century. How fully Hus 
 felt with his countrymen is proved by the fact that so pious 
 and kind-hearted a man did not hesitate, following the example 
 of the Hebrew prophet, to place the marrying of a foreign wife 
 
 1 I have preserved£Hus's spelling of the one or two German words given 
 above. The Bohemian language is so little known in England that it would 
 be useless to translate this passage in full. Hus gives a list of Bohemian 
 words, and adds the corrupted word derived from the German which had 
 taken its place in popular parlance. 
 
296 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 on the same level as the most heinous sins. How little the 
 popular feeling among the Bohemians has changed in the 
 period of nearly five centuries that divides us from the time of 
 Hus is proved by the fact that almost all political interest in 
 Bohemia in the present day centres in the " question of 
 languages," the Sprachenfrage, as the Germans call it. 
 
 Hus's endeavours to strengthen and develop his native 
 language were, however, by no means limited to the purely 
 negative task of opposing the encroachments of the German 
 tongue. He well knew that his own language, to become 
 exclusively the language of the state and of the scholars of 
 Bohemia, required development and improvement in many 
 respects; even as regards such elementary matters as ortho- 
 graphy great disorder prevailed; no generally accepted rules 
 existed. In the scanty written documents and in the language 
 of the people there still remained many traces of the different 
 dialects from which the Bohemian language originally sprang. 
 Hus first attempted to establish a universally recognised 
 written language for the whole extensive district — including 
 Moravia and Silesia as well as Bohemia proper — in which the 
 Bohemian language is spoken. He first attempted a task in 
 which the revivers of the Bohemian tongue in the nineteenth 
 century were finally and definitely successful. 1 These men 
 were indeed greatly indebted to Hus, as well as later to the 
 writers of the Bohemian brotherhood. While residing at 
 Prague Hus had already directed his attention to the im- 
 provement of his native language. The result of these studies 
 was his Orthographia Bohemica, which probably dates from the 
 year 141 1. 2 The Bohemians had, in distinction from many 
 other Slavic races, adopted the Latin characters, which are 
 inadequate to render many sounds peculiar to Slavic speech. 
 Many different attempts had been made to obviate this 
 
 1 See my History of Bohemian Literature. 
 
 2 Flajshans, Literami cinnost Mistra Jana Husi (Literary Activity of 
 Master John Hus), pp. 74"75- 
 
HUS AS A BOHEMIAN PATRIOT 297 
 
 " anarchy of spelling " — as Dr. Flajshans calls it — which 
 resulted from this inability. Hus, however, was the first who, 
 in his work that has just been mentioned, introduced the 
 diacritic signs which in a modified form are still used in the 
 Bohemian language. During the period in which he studied 
 and afterwards lectured at the university Hus had generally 
 spoken and written in Latin. When he was an exile, no 
 longer in close contact with his university, but had, on the 
 other hand, many opportunities of hearing the common talk of 
 the country people to whom he preached, he devoted yet more 
 attention to his native language. The earlier Bohemian 
 writers, even Stitny, had written in a somewhat pedantic 
 fashion similar to that of the ponderous writers of mediaeval 
 Latin. Hus, as he himself tells * us, formed his style on the 
 common speech of the people, which he ennobled and raised 
 to the rank of a language adapted to the expression of theo- 
 logical and philosophical thought, though the earlier merits of 
 Stitny in this respect must not be overlooked. That Hus, 
 who shared the great devotion to the holy gospel which is a 
 characteristic of all Bohemian church-reformers, should have 
 given much time and study to the Scriptures is but natural. 
 He endeavoured to make the Bible more accessible to his; 
 countrymen, and this may be considered as one of the causes 
 why he incurred the intense hatred of the opulent Bohemian 
 clergy. It appears, though the matter is somewhat obscure, 5 
 that, as early as the second half of the fourteenth century, 
 parts of the Bible had been translated into Bohemian by 
 various writers, and that these parts had been collected and 
 joined together about the year 141 o. These translations 
 were, however, of very unequal value; some were written in 
 
 1 " Let him who wishes to read (my works) know that I write in the 
 manner in which I am in the habit of speaking. ... I beg every one who 
 shall write to write not otherwise than I have written. If I have made a 
 mistake about a letter or omitted a syllable or a word, correct it. . . . Many, 
 thinking they understand better, efface that which was well written and 
 write (something) wrong instead." (Introduction to Postilla, ed. Flajshans.) 
 
 - Flajshans, Misty Jan Has, p. 276. 
 
298 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 the rough Bohemian in use about the year 1350, others in the 
 more refined language of the fifteenth century. Some teemed 
 with mistakes of the grossest description; others bore witness 
 to the learning of the masters of the university. Of these 
 some, including Hus, were acquainted with the Hebrew 
 'language. 1 Hus undertook the difficult task of revising and 
 correcting the already existent translations of the Bible, and 
 it may be said that it was mainly through him that the Scrip- 
 tures became more accessible to the Bohemian people. 2 
 
 In close connection with Hus's striving to render his 
 countrymen more familiar with the sacred documents which 
 \form the basis of Christianity, reference should be made to 
 jhis endeavours to facilitate the participation of laymen in the 
 religious rites, and more especially in church-song, which had 
 'gradually become an exclusive privilege of the clergy. This 
 part of the activity of Hus had, up to recent times, been 
 entirely neglected, and only recently scholars of the University 
 of Prague have thrown some light on matters that were 
 formerly almost unknown. 3 In consequence of the ever- 
 increasing claims of the clergy to superiority over laymen, the 
 custom — no doubt general in the time of the primitive church 
 — that the congregation should join in the singing during 
 religious services had gradually been abandoned. This caused 
 great resentment among the people, particularly among the 
 Bohemians, with whom a taste for music is innate. The early 
 Bohemian church-reformers, Milic in particular, were deeply 
 interested in this matter, and Hus here walked completely in 
 their footsteps. We find here, as in so many other cases, 
 close connection between Hus and his forerunners, while as 
 
 1 Hus's acquaintance with the Hebrew language is proved by passages in 
 the Orthographia Bohemica which has just been mentioned — and in other 
 of his works. 
 
 * Though so much study has recently been devoted to Hus by Bohemian 
 scholars, his work as a translator and editor of Scripture requires further 
 research. 
 
 3 1 must here acknowledge my great indebtedness to Dr. Nejedly, whose 
 work, Pocatky Husitskeho zpevn (the beginnings of Hussite song) is most 
 valuable. 
 
HUS AS A BOHEMIAN PATRIOT 299 
 
 regards music and art generally the somewhat puritanic 
 views of Wycliffe were directly antagonistic to those of the 
 Bohemians. This, as Dr. Nejedly writes, is a matter by no 
 means devoid of importance if we consider the arguments of 
 those who attempted to prove that Hus was a mere copyist 
 and imitator of Wycliffe. The theories on which the two 
 opponents of Rome agreed were mainly common property of all 
 mediaeval opponents of the Church of Rome, while the natures 
 and characters of Hus and Wycliffe were in most respects 
 different, even antagonistic. The somewhat pedantic and 
 matter-of-fact nature of Wycliffe, devoid of artistic instincts, 
 contrasts absolutely with the enthusiastic and fanciful char- 
 acter of Hus, who fully possessed the fondness for vocal and 
 instrumental music that is so characteristic of his countrymen. 
 Hus has in his works frequently expounded his views with 
 regard to singing in church. He declares that song is one of 
 the three forms of devotion which constitute the religious 
 services of the heavenly temple in our home (heaven). The 
 religious services of the temples of the soul and the body 
 should conform to this. The song of those who dwell in our 
 celestial home consists of praise of God and of thanksgiving. 1 
 Elsewhere Hus mentions that Christ sang a hymn of thanks- 
 giving when He proceeded with His disciples to the Mount of 
 Olives. 2 In yet another passage of his writings he advised the 
 mournful to expel the plague of sorrow from their hearts by 
 the sweetness of song. 3 Many other passages could be quoted 
 to prove the importance which Hus attached to devotional 
 music. Hus's appointment to the Bethlehem chapel afforded 
 
 1 " Sunt tria pertinentia ad officium templi coelestis in patria, quibus 
 debet se conformare officium templi in anima et officium templi corporalis 
 extra in materia, scilicet cantus, cultus et visio vultus. Cantus templi 
 coelestis habitatorum in patria consistit in divina laude et gratiarum actione." 
 Explicatio in psalmum cxviii. (Hus Opera, 1715, vol. ii. p. 456.) 
 
 2 " Et hymno dicto — id est gratiarum actione Deo — exierunt in montem 
 Oliveti." Passio Christi ex quatuor evangelistis (Hus Opera, 171 5, vol. ii. 
 p. 17). 
 
 3 " Crebra psalmodiae dulcedine nocivam tristitiae pestem de corde 
 pellat." Explicatio in epistola Jacobi {Hus Opera, 171 5, vol. ii. p. 230). 
 
300 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 him the desired opportunity. The chapel soon became 
 famed for its singing. It had, indeed, originally been built for 
 preaching, particularly in the national language, and the 
 preaching continued mainly to attract the people, as is natural, 
 if we consider the unrivalled eloquence of Hus. Yet the sing- 
 ing of hymns by the congregation soon became a very im- 
 portant feature. In his interesting work Dr. Nejedly thus 
 describes the services in the Bethlehem chapel at this period: 
 " The people assembled to hear Hus's sermons, which in- 
 spired with enthusiasm all classes represented in the congrega- 
 tion. All were greatly moved when the sermon ended, and 
 then a low mass was said. The people had previously already 
 been in the habit of singing Hospodine pomiluj ny 2 (the Lord 
 have mercy on us) and Buoh vsemohuci (Almighty God) after 
 the sermons, and now they did so also after the sermons of 
 Hus. Psychologically the enthusiastic disposition of the 
 crowd required some outlet ; it could find no better one than in 
 song. Only a low mass was permitted in the chapel after the 
 sermon, and this did not interfere with the singing and indeed 
 rather helped it. We can, therefore, consider these regulations 
 of the Bethlehem chapel as being largely the reason why the 
 people sang there more than elsewhere, and why popular sing- 
 ing in churches sprang from there. Hus well understood the 
 disposition of the crowds who listened to his sermons and 
 helped them to give vent to it in that manner which is most 
 natural to an emotional multitude, that is to say, by means of 
 song. Hus's delight in church song, even though it had a 
 , liturgic 2 character, had a strong influence on the development 
 iof devotional music of a popular character." The then 
 established system of singing in churches, the " liturgic " one, 
 as Dr. Nejedly calls it, was very faulty. Hus always declared 
 himself its determined enemy. The total reform of the 
 
 1 See my History of Bohemian Literature, p. 8. 
 
 * Dr. Nejedly describes as the " liturgic " system that which allowed only 
 priests, and men in minor orders, to sing in church while the rest of the 
 congregation remained silent. 
 
HUS AS A BOHEMIAN PATRIOT 301 
 
 Bohemian Church — the cause for which Hus lived and died — 
 was to include a reform of church-song also. The part which 
 the congregation was allowed to take in the singing at religious 
 services had, through the influence of the priesthood — desirous 
 here also to accentuate the difference between the clergy and 
 the laity — become very insignificant. The singers — monks, or 
 ecclesiastics who had only received the minor orders — showed 
 a complete want of reverence, and mechanically accomplished 
 their duties in a negligent manner that deeply offended so 
 pious a Christian as was Hus. The priests, and particularly 
 the friars, deacons, and acolytes who were paid for their ser- 
 vices, behaved in a most unseemly manner, roving about the 
 church and scoffing at the congregation. Some sang so 
 falsely that they were derided by the congregation, and a 
 Bohemian audience is always critical with regard to music. 
 Their principal fault was, however, the indecent hurry with 
 which they despatched their duties as singers. Hus blames 
 this abuse in quaint words: " Such a (singer)," he writes, 1 
 " grinds his words without using his lips or teeth, and they 
 seem as the sound of a' millstone, which thunders out : tr, tr, 
 tr! " It was Hus's endeavour to remedy such abuses and to 
 introduce in his chapel " quiet song and prayer that should be 
 pleasing both to the learned and to the simple." 
 
 It was a very important and by no means easy task that 
 Hus undertook when he attempted to replace the Latin sing- 
 ing in his chapel by songs in the national language. With the 
 exception of the one or two hymns that have already been 
 mentioned, there then existed only secular songs in the 
 Bohemian language, and these had frequently a frivolous and 
 even obscene character. Hus, who thoroughly understood 
 his countrymen, knew that singing of some sort is to them a 
 necessity. He, therefore — like some more recent church- 
 reformers — endeavoured to expel the objectionable songs that 
 
 1 Vyklad modlitby pane (Exposition of the Lord's Prayer), chap, lxxxhi. ; 
 Erben edition, i. p. 307. 
 
302 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 were popular, and replace them by others that were of a pious 
 character. He began by translating into Bohemian some of 
 the Latin hymns which the people were in the habit of hearing, 
 though of course without understanding them. As it had 
 already proved to be possible to introduce the native language 
 into the pulpit, Hus resolved to render the singing of Bohemian 
 hymns in the churches general. Here, as in all his efforts to 
 further church-reform, Hus was confronted by the violent 
 hostility of the Bohemian prelacy. The fact that, as hymns 
 were now sung in the national language, women were able to 
 take part in the singing and were permitted to do so, met with 
 great opposition and derision on the part of the enemies of 
 church-reform. They were all the more exasperated because 
 the Bohemian women from Queen Sophia downward had from 
 the first been fervent adherents of Hus. The evil life of the 
 priests was a cause of great resentment to the women of 
 Bohemia. As on so many other occasions, the monk Stephen 
 of Dolein is prominent among those who attacked the church- 
 reformers. He accused them of having, contrary to the 
 regulations of the church, sung masses and hymns together 
 with women in the common Bohemian language. 1 
 
 Hus was very indignant at this opposition. " Ha, ha," he 
 writes, 2 " where are those slanderers and babblers who en- 
 deavour to prevent the Bohemian language from being 
 honoured? " To encourage singing in the native language 
 Hus established at the Bethlehem chapel what Dr. Nejedly 
 calls a " school " in which the people were taught the new 
 devotional songs in their own language. There was, however, 
 at first a great scarcity of such songs. Only four Bohemian 
 
 1 " Et iterum recenti confictione contra ritum ecclesiae junctis vobis 
 mulieribus et Begutis (i.e. beguines) vestris in choro cantatis cum eisdem tarn 
 missas, quam alias cantilenas in vulgari Bohemico, quae societas scripturis 
 testantibus clericis non convenit. Utinam caveretis earundem societatem 
 vel in thoro! " (Stephanus Dolanensis epistola ad Husitas, Pez Thesaurus 
 Anecdotorum Novissimus, vol. iv. part 2, p. 590.) The engrained coarseness 
 of the monk Stephen is apparent here also. 
 
 1 Exposition of the Lord's Prayer (Erben's edition, vol. i. p. 313). 
 
HUS AS A BOHEMIAN PATRIOT 303 
 
 hymns, among them the Hospodinc pomiluj ny — one of the 
 oldest documents in the Bohemian language — had hitherto 
 been recognised by the Church of Rome. Through Hus's 
 influence, however, other ancient Bohemian hymns began to 
 be sung in churches, and new ones were composed, or adapted 
 from the Latin. In consequence of the generally prevailing 
 religious enthusiasm, new hymns — often the work of unknown 
 writers — suddenly appeared in Bohemia, and were, after a 
 short time, sung in all parts of the country. This was yet 
 more the case after the death of Hus, and it is only then that 
 we meet with the famous Hussite songs, of which the famed 
 " All ye warriors of God "Ms the prototype, which partook 
 both of the character of a hymn and of that of a war-song. 
 Many of these hymns, however, became known during the 
 life of Hus, and it would be very interesting to inquire as to 
 what part Hus himself played as a writer of hymns. This is 
 still a matter of controversy, and Dr. Nejedly, our principal 
 authority on the subject, refuses to express a final opinion. 
 Many of the early hymns are the work of unknown writers, 
 and a large number of these were attributed to Hus, particu- 
 larly in the hymn-books of the community of the Bohemian 
 brethren, 2 who considered themselves the true disciples and 
 successors of Hus. Brother Blahoslav, 3 born in 1523, mentions 
 as undoubted works of Hus only two hymns, those entitled, 
 " Jesus Christ, bountiful Lord " and " O living bread of 
 angels." Later writers attributed to Hus an ever-increasing 
 number of hymns. There is great probability that at least six 
 of these devotional songs are genuine works of Hus. Hus's 
 love of singing did not forsake him to the last. As previously 
 mentioned, it was while singing a hymn that he ended his life 
 in the flames. 
 
 1 See my History of Bohemian Literature, p. 151. Writing for English 
 readers I do not think it necessary to give the Bohemian names of these 
 hymns. 
 
 2 See my History of Bohemian Literature, p. 249. 
 * Ibid. pp. 232-241. 
 
304 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Hus's patriotic efforts to increase the power and import- 
 ance of his country induced him to endeavour, as far as 
 circumstances permitted, to establish relations with foreign 
 countries. As regards this subject, also, our materials are 
 scant. The racial hatred between Slav and Teuton rendered 
 amicable intercourse with Germany impossible at Hus's time, 
 though a century later the German [reformation undoubtedly 
 caused religious sympathy for a time to prevail over racial 
 antipathy. The Bohemians were, on the other hand, greatly 
 influenced and attracted by the Wyclifhte movement in 
 England. The fact that King Richard II. had married a 
 Bohemian princess, the daughter of Charles IV., undoubtedly 
 led to considerable intercourse between England and Bohemia. 
 Though the influence of Wycliffe on Hus was not so great, and 
 particularly not so exclusive, as has recently been affirmed, 
 its existence cannot be denied. Hus's reference to " blessed 
 England " when informing the Bethlehem congregation of the 
 message of Richard Wiche has already been mentioned here. 
 There is also no reason to doubt the assertion of a recent 
 Bohemian writer * that Hus wrote to Lord Cobham begging 
 him to send him copies of Wycliffe's writings. 2 
 
 The purely theological intercourse between England and 
 Bohemia led to no political consequences, even at a period 
 when religious and political controversy were more closely 
 connected than is the case at the present day. Hus's relations 
 with the Slavic countries had, on the other hand, political 
 results, which influenced even the period subsequent to the 
 death of the Bohemian reformer. The prominent part played 
 in the Hussite wars by the Poles and particularly by the 
 princes of the reigning family of Poland is foreshadowed by the 
 hitherto little known relations which Hus established with 
 
 1 Dr. Nedoma, A Hussite codex of Star a Boleslav [Alt Bunzlau]. (Pro- 
 ceedings of the Bohemian Society of Sciences, 1891.) 
 
 2 The statement is confirmed by English writers: " The Lord Cobham is 
 said likewise ... at the desire of John Huss to have caused all Wiclif's 
 works to be written out and to be dispersed in Bohemia." (John Lewis, 
 The Life of Dr. John Wiclif, 1820, p. 247.) 
 
HUS AS A BOHEMIAN PATRIOT 305 
 
 King Vladislav of Poland. The Polish king was then engaged in 
 war with the knights of the Teutonic order — one of the many 
 episodes of the eternal conflict between Slav and Teuton. 1 
 Many Bohemians, among them, according to an ancient 
 tradition, John Zizka, subsequently the hero of the Hussite 
 wars, joined, as volunteers, the army of the kindred Polish 
 nation. The war was, of course, watched with the greatest 
 interest by the Bohemians. In 1410, the King of Poland 
 obtained a decisive victory at Tannenberg over the army of 
 the Teutonic order which broke its strength for all times. On 
 receiving the news of the great victory, Hus addressed to 
 the king a congratulatory letter, which has recently been 
 published l and is of the greatest interest. According to Dr. 
 Nedoma's conjecture, Ones of Hurka, mentioned in this letter, 
 was an envoy sent by the King of Poland to Hus to inform 
 him of the great victory. We have evidence that King Vladi- 
 slav sent messengers of victory not only to all sovereigns, but 
 also to men of importance in Bohemia. 2 It is a proof that the 
 fame of Hus was already widely spread in Slavic countries 
 that such a messenger should have been sent to him as the 
 leader of the national party in Bohemia. The members of 
 that party naturally rejoiced greatly over what they consider 
 a victory of the Slavic cause. It is interesting to note that 
 Hus here refers to his wish to meet the king and to visit Poland 
 — no doubt in the interest of church-reform. It appears from 
 a remark of the Emperor Sigismund, previously quoted, 3 that 
 that movement had acquired considerable strength in Poland. 
 This planned journey of Hus was hitherto quite unknown. 
 Both in this letter, and in a second one which will be quoted 
 presently, Hus, acting truly as a peacemaker, entreats the I 
 King of Poland to live on good terms with Sigismund of Hun- 
 
 1 By Dr. Nedoma in the Proceedings of Bohemian Society of Sciences for 
 1 89 1. The letter also formed part of the codex of Stara Boleslav which has 
 already been mentioned. 
 
 2 Such a letter, addressed to Lord Henry of Rosenberg is published — in 
 a German translation — by Pubitschka. (Chronologische Geschichte Bohmcns, 
 vol. vii. p. 34.) 3 See p. 259. 
 
 U 
 
306 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 gary, though the cautious reference to his arrogance proves 
 that Hus was by no means unacquainted with the true char- 
 acter of that prince. Hus writes: " Greetings and thanks, 
 peace and victory from God the Father and from the Lord 
 Jesus Christ! Most illustrious prince and magnificent king! 
 When Ones of Hurka, your Majesty's messenger of victory 
 and of praiseworthy agreement, 1 brought certain news, he 
 gave my heart such joy that neither can my pen describe it, 
 nor my voice express it, as would be seemly. I know, how- 
 ever, most Christian king, that not the power of your magnifi- 
 cence, but that of the supreme King, the peaceful Lord Jesus 
 Christ, humiliated the proud enemies and rivals of your glory. 
 He powerfully expelled them from the seat of glory and exalted 
 the humble; therefore should both (adversaries), having before 
 their eyes the power of the peaceful King, tremble and in their 
 peril invoke His aid, and know that there is no victory but 
 through Him, whom no mortal can defeat and who is pleased 
 to grant victory to the humble, and because of their humiliation 
 finally to exalt them. He (Jesus Christ) taught us this, saying 
 frequently: ' All who exalt themselves shall be humiliated, 
 and those who humiliate themselves shall be exalted.' Both 
 things have been fulfilled. Where are now the two swords 2 of 
 the enemies? Verily have they been struck down by those 
 (swords) by which they endeavoured to terrify the humble. 
 They directed the two (swords) at kindness and at pride, and 
 behold they lost many thousands struck down unexpectedly. 
 Where are now their swords, their war steeds, their mailed 
 men, their warriors in whom they confided? Where their 
 innumerable florins or treasures? Assuredly everything 
 failed them. Proud men, they who confided not in Christ, did 
 not believe that they would be deceived. Therefore, most 
 
 1 This probably refers to a truce between the Poles and Germans imme- 
 diately after the battle. Peace was only concluded on February i, 141 1. 
 
 2 On the eve of the battle the grandmaster of the Teutonic order, Conrad 
 of Juningen, sent in derision two swords to the Polish camp, implying that 
 the Poles were insufficiently armed. 
 
 
HUS AS A BOHEMIAN PATRIOT 307 
 
 illustrious prince, wisely bearing this in your mind, adhere to 
 humility, for it exalts. Follow the example of the peaceful 
 King, the Lord Jesus Christ, strive for peace with that illus- 
 trious prince, King Sigismund, and should he in his arrogance 
 raise unjust claims — may God avert this! — let your Majesty 
 preserve the moderation of humility, lest Christian blood be 
 again spilt, and great harm to the souls befall. But I, un- 
 worthy servant of Christ, with the whole people, will not cease 
 humbly to invoke the grace of God on this concord, praying 
 that the most kind Lord may deign to grant it. I also, O 
 magnificent king, wish from the depth of my heart to behold 
 you in person, and I hope that the Lord Jesus Christ will deign 
 to grant me this, if He knows that it will in some fashion be of 
 advantage to your Majesty and to my preaching. May the 
 Almighty God deign to assist your Majesty for (the sake of) 
 our Saviour, the mediator between God and men, the Lord 
 Jesus Christ. Amen." 
 
 This letter is undated, but we may consider it certain that 
 it was written in 1410, later than the 15th of July, the day on 
 which the battle of Tannenberg was fought. On February 1, 
 141 1, King Vladislav concluded a treaty of peace with the 
 Teutonic order. His principal motive was that, shortly before, 
 King Sigismund of Hungary had attacked Poland. Hus was 
 therefore not successful in his attempt to prevent hostilities 
 between the two kings. 
 
 The only other letter of Hus to the King of Poland that is 
 known was written two years later. It is dated June 10, 1412. 
 It is closely connected with the previous letter, for Hus begins 
 by expressing his joy over the re-establishment of peace 
 between the King and Sigismund of Hungary. Hus, however, 
 expresses in this letter more clearly than in the former one his 
 hopes with regard to church-reform. He lays particular stress 
 on the suppression of simony, which he very truly considered 
 the real cause of the depravation of the clergy. A priest who 
 had often for a very high price purchased his ecclesiastical 
 
308 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 dignity by no means felt obliged to conform to rules laid down 
 by men whom he no doubt despised as absurd pietists and 
 fanatics. Hus firmly believed that simony was the principal 
 source of the evil condition of the church in his time. He 
 writes to the King of Poland: 1 "The grace of the Saviour 
 Jesus Christ (assist you) to rule your people and to attain a 
 life of glory. Most serene prince, I was filled with great 
 pleasure when I heard that your serene Highness had, by the 
 will of the Almighty Lord, come to an agreement with that 
 illustrious prince, King Sigismund, and I only pray with the 
 people that the life of you both and of your peoples may 
 continue in the path of justice. Therefore, most illustrious 
 prince, it appears most necessary in the interest both of your 
 Majesty and of his Highness King Sigismund and also of the 
 other princes that the heresy of simony be removed from your 
 dominions. But can I expect its extermination while the 
 poison has spread so widely that hardly anywhere can a 
 priesthood or a people be found that is not tainted by the 
 heresy of simony ? Who then confers a bishopric, purely for 
 the honour of God, the salvation of the people, and his own 
 salvation? Who also, considering only these three motives, 
 accepts a bishopric, parsonage, or any other benefice ? I wish 
 there were many who did not accept them merely from 
 servility, or to curry favour with men. Is not thus fulfilled 
 the word of Jeremiah, who said: ' From the smallest to the 
 greatest of them, all pursue avarice, and from the prophet to 
 the priest, all practise deceit ' ? And was the disciple of Christ 
 mistaken when he said: ' All seek their own, not the things 
 that are Jesus Christ's ' ? 2 We hear the voice of the church, 
 which moans because the gold has been obscured and the 
 finest of colours changed; for the priesthood formerly, as gold 
 made brilliant by fire and whitened by virtue, has now become 
 polluted and obscured, as saith St. Bernard. Fulfilled is the 
 
 1 Palacky, Documenta, pp. 31-32. 
 
 2 St. Paul to the Philippians ii. 21. 
 
HUS AS A BOHEMIAN PATRIOT 
 
 
 word of our Saviour: Iniquity will abound and love will wax 
 cold among the people. Woe, then, on him who at this time 
 does not mourn. Hearing these my words, most illustrious 
 prince, the simoniacal, ostentatious, luxurious, and unre- 
 strained priesthood attacks me before the people by disparag- 
 ing me, and declaring me a heretic. Should I then be silent ? 
 Woe on me, if I were silent! It is better for me to die than 
 not to oppose such wickedness, for then should I also be a 
 participator in their (the simonists') crimes, and deserve hell, 
 as they do. From this may the King of glory preserve your 
 Majesty, who rules holily over your people." 
 
 These valuable letters prove that it was Hus who at this' 
 period first established amicable relations between the two 
 kindred Slavic countries, Bohemia and Poland, hoping that 
 they would jointly destroy simony and the other terrible evils 
 from which the church then suffered. At the Council of Con- 
 stance the ambassadors of King Vladislav endeavoured, as 
 far as their diplomatic position allowed them to do so, to save 
 Hus. Vladislav continued to be on terms of friendship with 
 the Bohemian church-reformers, who at one time even offered 
 him the Bohemian crown. 
 
CHAPTER X 
 
 THE WRITINGS OF HUS — PORTRAITS OF HUS 
 
 In distinction from many writers on Hus, I have in this work 
 frequently referred to the writings of the master — both Latin 
 and Bohemian, and quoted them largely. These writings 
 alone enable us to thoroughly conceive the real nature of Hus, 
 who was entirely guided by religious and national enthusiasm, 
 while the minutiae of mediaeval theological controversy did not 
 greatly appeal to him. If he none the less became a skilful 
 scholastic dialectician who at Constance was able to hold his 
 own against very learned accusers, the reason is that such 
 skill was for him a necessity. At a period when politics and 
 religion were closely connected, the accusation of heresy was 
 the most deadly arm that could be used to destroy an 
 opponent. It was certain that those who disapproved of 
 Hus's endeavours to reform the Bohemian Church and to raise 
 the Bohemian nation to a higher political and intellectual 
 level would attempt to declare him a heretic. While some of 
 1 the Latin works, particularly the Super IV. Sententiarum, 
 bear witness to Hus's erudition, his true nature appears to us 
 more clearly in the works which he composed in his own 
 language. His Bohemian letters, though known in England 
 and France only in second-hand translations, have long been 
 read with interest, and I have in this work quoted largely the 
 equally valuable Postilla and the Expositions (Vyklady). It 
 will, therefore, be sufficient briefly to outline here the general 
 complex of the writings of Hus. This, still a difficult task, 
 would have been almost impossible before the appearance of 
 Dr. Flajshans's valuable bibliographical work. 1 Many writings 
 
 1 Literarni cinnost mistra Jana Husi (Literary Activity of Master John 
 Hus), 1900. 
 
 310 
 
THE WRITINGS AND PORTRAITS OF HUS 311 
 
 formerly attributed to Hus really had as authors Matthew of] 
 Janov, Wycliffe, Chelcicky, and others. On the other hand,' 
 many authentic works of Hus disappeared during the so- 
 called " Catholic reformation " which began after the battle 
 of the White Mountain in 1620. The Jesuits were entrusted 
 with the task of discovering and destroying every book that 
 had not been sanctioned by the Church of Rome. The posses- 
 sion of such a book became a crime, punishable by death. 1 It 
 is, therefore, probable that some works of Hus have altogether 
 perished, while others have only recently been rediscovered 
 and published. Though, therefore, even the latest biblio- 
 graphical study of Hus, that of Dr. Flajshans, can lay no 
 claim to completeness, attempts were made from a very early 
 period to collect the scattered writings of the master and 
 classify them. The first attempts to do so, however, extended 
 only to the so-called writings of Constance, mainly letters to 
 friends that were written by Hus in prison. The trusty 
 disciple and companion of Hus, Peter Mladenovic, tells us that 
 he preserved copies of the writings of the master, and he gives 
 us some slight information as to what these writings were. 
 Lawrence of Brezova 2 gives us somewhat more extensive 
 information and states that Hus, besides numerous letters, 
 wrote several small treatises while in prison. 3 These writers 
 wrote immediately after the death of Hus, but somewhat 
 later the tradition became more obscure. While, as Dr. 
 Flajshans conjectures, some works of Hus were at this early 
 period already definitely lost, works of other writers soon 
 
 1 As late as in 1755 a Bohemian forester named Thomas Svoboda was ] 
 sentenced to death at the stake because he had been found in possession of I 
 a Bible. By an act of grace he was strangled before being burnt. 
 
 * See my Lectures on the Historians of Bohemia, pp. 35-47. 
 
 * " In ipsa ergo captivitate Magister Johannes Hus virilem habens animum 
 mori potius eligebat quam cleri pestiferi scelerum enormitates approbare, 
 multasque epistolas et scripta utilissima occulte suis scribebat amicis . . . 
 ad vota amicorum et aliquorum carceris custodum tractatus pulcerrimos . . . 
 edidit puta de mandatis dei et oracione dominica, item qualiter committitur 
 peccatum mortale, item de cognicione dei, item de tribus hostibus hominis. . . . 
 Scripsit quoque tractatulum de communione utriusque speciei." (Laurentii 
 de Brezova, Historia Hussitica, ed. Goll, pp. 332-333.) 
 
312 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 began to be attributed to him. Books written by Peter 
 Chelcicky, 1 whose views certainly in many respects resemble 
 those of Hus, were supposed to be the work of the originator of 
 Bohemian church-reform, and in the hymn-books of the com- 
 munity of the Bohemian brethren, 2 who considered themselves 
 the truest continuators of the work of Hus, numerous hymns 
 by other writers were attributed to the master. Later on, 
 the greater the fame of Hus became the more devotional works 
 were ascribed to him. When the Roman creeds had been 
 forcibly re-established in Bohemia it was endeavoured by all 
 means to blacken the memory of the church-reformer. For 
 that purpose, several writings containing extreme views were 
 wrongly attributed to him. 3 
 
 It is a proof of the great fame of Hus that some of his 
 writings were among the earliest of printed works. The 
 earliest printed work of Hus of which we know the existence, 
 though no copy has been preserved, was a small treatise en- 
 titled Gesta Christi. In 1459 two and in 1495 four of the 
 letters from Constance were printed. The quaint Book against 
 the Priest Kitchen-master was first printed at Litomysl in 1509. 
 Of the last-named work a unique copy is preserved in the 
 library of the Bohemian museum; of the others little is known 
 except the fact that they existed. Martin Luther, who always 
 considered the Bohemian reformer as his forerunner, in 1536 
 ! published at Wittenberg a translation of four of Hus's 
 Bohemian letters; among them was the famed " Letter to 
 the Whole Bohemian Nation." The translation was in 
 German and Latin. A year later a larger collection of Hus's 
 letters was printed under the influence of Luther, who wrote 
 an introduction. 4 The best early editions of Hus's works, 
 
 1 See my History of Bohemian Literature, pp. 1 53-171. 
 
 2 See Chapter IX. 
 
 3 It is probable that this occurred even much earlier. Thus John Stokes 
 at the Council of Constance referred to a treatise which had been shown to 
 him at Prague as a work of Hus. Hus had no connection whatever with 
 this treatise. 
 
 4 This introduction was reprinted with the editions of the Latin works 
 published in 1558 and 171 5. 
 
THE WRITINGS AND PORTRAITS OF HUS 313 
 
 though they arc incomplete and, on the other hand, included 
 many writings that are not by the master, are those published 
 at Nuremberg. The Bohemian works were printed in 1563 
 and in 1592, the Latin ones in 1558 and again in 1715. 1 These 
 editions for many years were the standard ones, and the one 
 containing the Latin works has not been superseded up to the 
 present day. During the period of Bohemian independence 
 the Bohemian works of the master were frequently reprinted; 
 this applies particularly to the Postilla, of which an edition 
 was published at Nuremberg in 1563, and another at Prague by 
 the celebrated printer Melantrich in 1564. The latter edition, 
 which is illustrated, contains, besides the Postilla, several of 
 Hus's letters, which have always been very popular. After 
 the year 1620 such publications necessarily ceased. When 
 the Bohemians in the latter part of the eighteenth century 
 again obtained a limited amount of religious freedom, their 
 thoughts again turned to Hus. Joseph Dobrovsky, 2 in his 
 history of the Bohemian language and literature, is the first 
 Bohemian writer who again ventured to mention Hus. In 
 the third edition of his work, to which I have just referred, 
 he gives a list of the writings of Hus, which is principally in- 
 teresting as proving how very limited was the number of 
 works of Hus that were known at that time. Dobrovsky in 
 this work also gives short extracts from some of Hus's writ- 
 ings. Joseph Jungmann, in his history of Bohemian litera- 
 ture was already able to enumerate a considerably larger 
 number of works of Hus. To no other Bohemian writer of the 
 nineteenth century is the memory of Hus so greatly indebted 
 as to Francis Palacky. 3 His history of Bohemia, founded on, 
 almost unknown documents, revealed the great Bohemian as he 
 really was. In his extensive collection of documents concern- 
 ing Hus published in 1869, Palacky has printed the fullest and 
 
 1 I have used the edition of 1715 when quoting Hus's Latin works. 
 
 2 b. 1753 — 1829. See my History of Bohemian Literature, pp. 359-362. 
 * Ibid. pp. 388-403. 
 
3 i4 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 most correct version of Hus's letters, both Bohemian and 
 Latin, which exists. Professor Hofler, in his Geschichtschreiber 
 der Hussitischen Bewegung, has also published a considerable 
 number of letters of Hus. Dr. Hofler's superficiality, his very 
 slight knowledge of the Bohemian language, and his fanatical 
 hatred of church-reform and the Bohemian nation, render it 
 necessary to use his works with great caution. A large 
 number of Hus's letters, among them some not contained in 
 Palacky's collection, were published by Mr. Bohumil Mares in 
 1891. The Latin letters, however, appear only in a Bohemian 
 translation. Karel Jaromir Erben, in his edition of Bohemian 
 works of Hus, which will be mentioned presently, has included 
 fifteen Bohemian letters of the master. Some of the letters 
 were translated into English by the late Rev. A. Wratislaw, 
 who was acquainted with the Bohemian language, and I have 
 translated a few in my previous writings. I have done so on 
 a larger scale in the present work. Hus's letters have also 
 been translated into English by Mr. Mackenzie, who used the 
 French version of M. de Bonnechose, and by Mr. Workman, 
 who for the Bohemian letters used the Latin translation of 
 Professor Kvicala, as well as the not always trustworthy 
 German translation of Professor Hofler. 
 
 Though the letters have remained and perhaps always will 
 remain the work of Hus that has most admirers, other works 
 of the master were also again published in the nineteenth 
 century. This task was not always an easy one. Though 
 the Austrian government no longer attempted entirely to 
 suppress all memory of Hus among the people, the absolutist 
 authorities of Vienna still viewed with marked displeasure all 
 mention, and particularly all praise of Hus. As late as in 
 1857 the celebrated Bohemian philologist, Safarik, 1 wrote to 
 the Russian scholar Pogodin: "Nobody here dares to edit 
 Hus's works, writings against Hus would be more in request. 
 Let the dead repose. Hus ne nominetur quidem, aut uratur 
 
 1 See my History of Bohemian Literature, pp. 383-387. 
 
THE WRITINGS AND PORTRAITS OF HUS 315 
 
 denuo ! " The editors of Hus's writings had also up to 1848 
 to face the perils of a double censorship. 1 Of the two censors 
 one investigated whether a book contained anything opposed 
 to the policy of the government, while the other, an ecclesi- 
 astic, suppressed everything antagonistic to the Church of 
 Rome. In spite of these obstacles Venceslas Hanka 2 
 published in 1825 an edition of the Dcerka (daughter), one of 
 Hus's best works. The edition is not, however, complete, as 
 several passages were omitted by order of the censor. In the 
 years 1864 to 1868 Karel Jaromir Erben published three large 
 volumes containing the principal Bohemian works of Hus, 
 such as the Postilla, the different expositions (Vyklady), the 
 treatise on simony (Svatokupector) , the Dcerka, some of the 
 Bohemian letters, and a large number of other treatises. This 
 has remained and probably will long remain the standard 
 edition of the Bohemian works of the master, and it is therefore 
 to be all the more to be regretted that though censorship had 
 then already been nominally suppressed, some passages in this 
 work were altered, others suppressed by order of the govern- 
 ment. Several Bohemian works of Hus have been newly 
 edited and published within the last years. Thus Dr. Flaj- 
 shans, the foremost authority on Hus at the present time, 
 published in 1900 a very handsome illustrated edition of the 
 Postilla. Dr. Flajshans has very skilfully modernised the 
 language, thus rendering the valuable book more accessible to 
 scholars unacquainted with the Bohemian of the fifteenth 
 century. In 1907 Dr. Novotny published a small edition of 
 the treatise on Simony, which has very useful notes. The 
 Latin works of Hus have also not been entirely neglected 
 within the last years. Under the patronage of the Bohemian 
 Academy the publication of the Latin works in a new edition 
 has been begun, and it is sincerely to be hoped that this under- 
 taking will meet with the success which it fully deserves. The 
 
 1 See my History of Bohemian Literature, pp. 366-367 and 396-398. 
 
 i Ibid. pp. 403-404. 
 
316 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 editors decided wisely not to begin their publication with the 
 one or two Latin works that have hitherto been almost exclu- 
 sively known, and have indeed already included two or three 
 works of Hus that had never previously been printed. The 
 works already published are the Expositura Decalogi, De Cor- 
 pore Christi, De Sanguine Christi, Super IV. Sententiarum, and 
 the Sermones de Sanctis. The last-named work, just printed 
 for the first time, contains, as Dr. Flajshans the editor writes, 
 a collection of sermons of unequal value. Some are Hus's 
 own, while others are merely copies from the writings of St. 
 Chrysostomus and St. Bernard. 
 
 It will be seen from what I have written that the works of 
 . Hus have been greatly neglected, if we consider the world- 
 wide importance of the master. Even now it is impossible to 
 state with certainty the number of genuine works of Hus that 
 have been preserved. Josef Jungmann, writing about the 
 year 1840, enumerates thirty-eight Bohemian works of the 
 master. Jungmann, whose book treated of Bohemian litera- 
 ture, makes no reference to Latin works. Dr. Flajshans, 
 whose work which I have frequently quoted supersedes 
 Jungmann's and all other earlier bibliographical attempts, 
 enumerates seventy-four Latin, one German, and thirty-six 
 Bohemian works of Hus. 1 The ancient traditions, which saw 
 in Hus only the adversary of the Roman Church, which he 
 became by the force of circumstances, by no means by his own 
 wish, attributed all his numerous works to the last troubled 
 years of his life. This, as previously noted, is quite untrue. 
 Dr. Flajshans has for the first time seriously attempted to 
 establish at least approximately the dates of the principal 
 writings of Hus. Certainty, as the learned professor remarks, 
 is very often not obtainable. The entire obscurity which sur- 
 rounded all the master's works renders research very difficult. 
 Dr. Flajshans divides all Hus's works, both Bohemian and 
 
 1 I do not enter here into the difficult question of the manuscripts of Hus. 
 Dr. Flajshans has written fully and clearly on this subject. 
 
THE WRITINGS AND PORTRAITS OF HUS 317 
 
 Latin, into four periods. The first period, which Dr. Flajshans 
 calls the academic one, extends from the year 1402 to 140Q. 
 To these peaceful years, during which Hus was not yet in con- 
 flict with the Church of Rome, belongs the master's most im- 
 portant Latin work, the treatise Super IV. Sententiarum. 
 Other Latin works of this period are the treatises De Corpora 
 Christi and Dc Sanguine Christi. A large number of sermons 
 also belong to this period, as well as, probably, the hymns 
 attributed to Hus. To this period belong also the synodal 
 sermons (charges) delivered by Hus by order of Archbishop 
 Zajic of Hasenburg. Th e second p eriod, comprising the years 
 1409 to 141 1, is by Dr. Flajshans called the polemical one, and 
 he has thus generally indicated the purpose of many of these 
 works. Among them are the treatises Contra Anglicum J oh. 
 Stokes, Contra occultum adversarium, Hus's defence against 
 the accusation of having driven the German students from 
 Prague. 1 Other works of this period are the Orthographia 
 Bohcmica and the Expositio Decalogi, which has recently been 
 printed for the first time. The third period, called by Dr. 
 Flajshans the apostolic one (1412-1414), comprises the time 
 from the beginning of Hus's exile from Prague to his departure 
 on his fateful journey to Constance. Most of the important 
 works of the master, both Bohemian and Latin, belong to this 
 period. Among these are many of the dogmatic works, in 
 which Hus's opposition to the Roman see is more marked than 
 in the earlier ones. Many of the writings of the apostolic 
 period have previously been mentioned in this work, and it 
 will here be sufficient to enumerate a few of those that have 
 most importance. Of the Bohemian works the treatise on 
 Simony, the Dcerka (daughter), the five Vyklady (exposi- 
 tions) of the faith, the ten commandments and the Lord's 
 prayer, and the Postilla — Hus's greatest work in his own 
 
 1 The full Latin title of the treatise runs thus: " M. J. Hus literis publicis 
 diluit crimen falso sibi objectum quod Germanos ex universitate studii 
 Pragensis expulerit." The manuscript is in a very imperfect state. 
 
3 i8 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 language — should be mentioned. Of Latin works the treatise 
 De Ecclesia, one of Hus's best known but least original books, 
 belongs to this time. Though Dr. Flajshans has named this 
 period the apostolic one in distinction from the previous 
 polemical one, controversial writings abound at this period 
 also. Hus, indeed, " was ever a fighter." Of such controver- 
 sial writings the treatises Contra Pake, Contra Stanislaum de 
 Znoyma, Contra octo doctores, Contra praedicatorem Plznensem 
 are the most important. The last period, which Dr. Flajshans 
 has not very felicitiously called the apologetic one, comprises 
 the time from Hus's departure for Constance to his death. 
 This period is naturally not fertile in literary productions; 
 but it is to this period that belong the Constance Letters, the 
 most precious memorial of Hus that we possess. 
 
 As is proved by contemporary writings, the tragical death, 
 or as the Bohemians deemed it, the martyrdom of Hus, was 
 immediately considered an event of the highest importance in 
 all Europe. The subsequent Hussite wars, in which almost 
 the whole of Europe was arrayed against Bohemia, naturally 
 spread the fame of the master yet further. Portraits of Hus 
 must, therefore, have been numerous from an early time. It 
 is none the less certain that no existent portrait can lay claim 
 to be an authentic representation of the Bohemian reformer. 
 It is needless to say that the many portraits of the master 
 which have appeared almost continuously since his death have 
 great historical interest. In Bohemia, where everything 
 connected with Hus is still a matter of the greatest interest, a 
 considerable literature on the subject of Hus's appearance has 
 recently sprung up. It is here sufficient to state that the por- 
 traits of Hus belong to two types that are entirely different. 
 Generally, though not absolutely, it may be stated that the 
 older portraits represent Hus beardless, and the newer ones 
 with a large beard. The oldest representations are found in 
 the illustrated editions of Richenthal's chronicle, and they 
 represent Hus as being without a beard. It is, however, obvious 
 
 
MEDALS OF HIS FROM THE COLLECTION IX THE MUSEUM OF THE 
 CITY OF PRAGUE AND IN THE NATIONAL MUSEUM OF BOHEMIA 
 
THE WRITINGS AND PORTRAITS OF HUS 319 
 
 from the drawing of these illustrations that they did not 
 attempt seriously to portray Hus. Very many other later 
 representations of a beardless Hus have been preserved. We 
 find several such representations in a hymn-book preserved in 
 the town of Litomerice. 1 They represent, however, a very 
 young man, and have a very conventional character. 2 The 
 numerous medals of Hus which have been preserved represent 
 both types, and we find even medals that had a beardless 
 Hus on one side, and a bearded one — generally represented as 
 bound to the stake — on the other. Of the later beardless 
 representations of Hus the one contained in the edition 
 of the Postilla of 1563 is undoubtedly the best. In the 
 course of the sixteenth century the bearded representa- 
 tions of Hus, now so familiar to all, took the place of the 
 earlier type. The general acceptation of the new type at 
 a time when traditions concerning the appearance of Hus 
 must still have been widely spread, rather militates against 
 the assurance with which some recent writers have declared in 
 favour of a beardless Hus. It is certain that Hus grew a beard 
 while in prison, and after a short stay in the cathedral he was 
 immediately led to the stake on the fatal 6th of July. That 
 he was shaved immediately before his degradation from priest- 
 hood that he might present the appearance of a secular priest, 
 as secular priests were then beardless, is a conjecture for 
 which I can find no evidence. The faithful Mladenovic would 
 certainly have mentioned such an occurrence. The portrait 
 of Hus without a beard may also have been drawn in accor- 
 dance with the memory of those who had known Hus as a 
 young man. Those which I have seen certainly do not present 
 the appearance of a man over forty whom illness and anxiety 
 had certainly aged. It is perhaps in this case wise not to seek 
 for certainty where none can be found. Of the countless 
 
 1 In German, Leitmeritz. 
 
 •Messrs. Faber and Kurth have reproduced these miniatures in their 
 otherwise valueless study entitled: " Wie sah Hus aus." 
 
320 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 paintings and statues of Hus which we possess, the great 
 majority represent the master bearded, and this type has, 
 rightly or wrongly, been generally accepted. One of the 
 noblest of these portraits is the — probably slightly idealised — 
 one which is preserved at Herrenhut, the present centre of the 
 community of the Bohemian brethren. The fact that the 
 brethren consider themselves the true followers of Hus adds to 
 the value of the portrait, which has been reproduced in this 
 work. According to a very ancient tradition in Bohemia, the 
 numerous statues of Hus that existed there were by order of 
 the Jesuits declared to be representations of that somewhat 
 dubious saint, John of Nepomuk, and have thus been pre- 
 served. 1 These statues, which every traveller in Bohemia 
 will remember to have seen, certainly bear a striking likeness 
 to the representations of the bearded Hus. The same type 
 has been adopted for the statue of Hus, which forms part of 
 the Luther monument at Worms, and for the painting of Hus 
 before the Council by the Bohemian painter Brozik, which 
 now adorns the town hall of Prague. The same can be said 
 of the many other modern pictures representing Hus. 
 
 1 It should be stated that Professor Kalousek, one of the most eminent 
 of the Bohemian historians of the present day, totally denies the authenticity 
 of this tradition. 
 
CHAPTER XI 
 
 JEROME OF PRAGUE 
 
 In all early accounts of the life of Hus we find in close connec- ' 
 tion with the name of the master that of Jerome of Prague. I 
 have in former works 1 pointed out that the importance of 
 Jerome as a Bohemian church-reformer has been greatly 
 exaggerated. His connection with Hus was neither as close, 
 nor as constant as was formerly believed. This is indeed 
 natural, as Jerome was frequently absent from Bohemia for 
 considerable periods during the last and most eventful years 
 of the life of Hus. The career of Jerome contrasts in 
 many ways with that of Hus. While the latter hardly ever 
 left Bohemia before he undertook his fateful journey to Con- 
 stance, Jerome led a roving life, never remaining long in one 
 country, and sometimes departing in a manner that cannot be 
 called honourable. There can be few greater contrasts than 
 that between the saintly and truly evangelical simplicity of 
 the character of Hus, and the sophistical insincerity of Jerome, 
 who represents an early type of the humanist — with all the 
 qualities and also all the faults that characterise the humanist. 
 It is as a humanist also that he appealed to Poggio Bracciolini, 
 whose letter to Bruni (Leonardo Aretino) describing the death 
 of Jerome of Prague is one of the few documents connected 
 with the Bohemian reformation which have become somewhat 
 widely known. It is certain that Jerome was a man of great 
 erudition, and the not very numerous contemporary notices 
 referring to him lay great stress on his eloquence. On one 
 occasion, f when both he and Hus took "part in one of the many 
 
 1 Bohemia, a Historical Sketch, pp. 137, 138, and A History of Bohemian 
 Literature, p. 141, 
 
 321 X 
 
322 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 disputations then customary at the University of Prague, 
 Jerome's speech quite outbalanced that of the greater man, 
 and the enthusiastic young students conducted him home in 
 triumph. Jerome's inflammatory language was undoubtedly 
 harmful to the cause of church-reform, as well as to Hus, whom 
 many even at that time identified with the views of Jerome. 
 Probably not unaware of this, Hus, when leaving for Con- 
 stance, begged Jerome not to follow him there — a prayer that 
 remained unnoticed by the latter. 
 
 Very little is known of the early years of Jerome. He is 
 stated, though on no very certain authority, to have been of 
 noble birth, and was probably somewhat younger than Hus. 
 The frequently repeated statement that his family name was 
 " Faulfiss " is founded on a passage of ZEnaeas Sylvius's 
 Historia Bohemica, which was misunderstood. ^Enaeas 
 Sylvius mentions x among the Bohemian church-reformers a 
 man genere nobilis, ex domo quam Putridi Piscis vocant. This 
 was formerly erroneously believed to refer to Jerome. After 
 beginning his studies at the University of Prague, where he 
 did not attempt to obtain any ecclesiastical rank, Jerome 
 proceeded to Oxford in 1398. He here zealously studied the 
 works of Wycliffe, which greatly impressed him, and he made 
 copies of the Dialogus and Trialogus. Always inclined to a 
 roving life, Jerome did not remain long in England. He next 
 visited Paris, and for some time pursued his studies at the 
 university there. Here his outspoken advocacy of the views 
 of Wycliffe already began to attract public attention, and he 
 incurred the displeasure of Gerson, then rector of the univer- 
 sity. It may here be noted that in distinction from Hus, who 
 mainly strove to reform the clergy and laity of Bohemia 
 and to lead them to a truly Christian life, Jerome delighted in 
 the sophistical subtility that was fashionable among the 
 theologians and other scholars of his age. A very vain 
 man, Jerome probably rejoiced in the notoriety which he 
 
 1 Aeneae Silvii Historia Bohemica, chap. xxxv. 
 
JEROME OF PRAGUE 323 
 
 obtained in Paris. Yet he did not remain long in that city. 
 Under what circumstances Jerome left Paris is not clearly 
 known, and it should be stated that little is known of most of 
 the events of his life. The friends of church-reform revered 
 in him one who had had the honour of obtaining the friend- 
 ship of Hus, and who at the end of his life met his doom 
 bravely. They therefore preferred to palliate some not very 
 creditable incidents in his life. The partisans of Rome, on 
 the other hand, directed their attacks rather against Hus, 
 whose truly saintly life rendered him a far more dangerous 
 adversary than Jerome. It appears certain that from Paris 
 Jerome proceeded to Koln — then a university town — and 
 afterwards to Heidelberg. In 1403 he is stated to have 
 visited Jerusalem. It is at any rate certain that he returned 
 to Prague in 1407. He there immediately took part in the 
 theological controversies that were then raging at the univer- 
 sity. When, in 1408, a French embassy arrived at Kutna 
 Hora, 1 then the residence of King Venceslas, and proposed 
 that the papal schism should be terminated by the refusal of 
 the temporal sovereigns to recognise in future either of the 
 rival pontiffs, Venceslas summoned to Kutna Hora the most 
 prominent members of the university, wishing to consult them- 
 Among those summoned were Hus and Jerome. All the 
 Bohemian magisters spoke strongly in favour of the French 
 proposal, while the German members of the university strongly 
 affirmed their allegiance to the Roman pontiff Gregory XII. 
 The Bohemian magisters believed that they would be 
 graciously received by the king, who was known to be favour- 
 able to the French proposals. The astute German rector of 
 the university, Henning von Baltenhagen, however, diverted 
 the king's attention from the question of the schism, and de- 
 nounced the Bohemian members of the university as men who 
 held heretical opinions. The king became greatly incensed 
 and threatened with death at the stake Hus and Jerome, who 
 
 1 In German, Kuttenberg. 
 
324 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 had acted as leaders of the Bohemian magisters. 1 As has 
 been previously stated, the king soon changed his views and 
 again became favourable to the party of church-reform. The 
 antagonism between that party and the Archbishop of Prague, 
 however, continued. Jerome continued to uphold his views 
 with great violence, and here as in so many cases his attitude 
 was injurious to the party of church-reform. It was probably 
 in consequence of his violence that Jerome thought it advisable 
 again to leave Prague in 1410. He resumed his wandering 
 life, and appears first to have visited at Ofen the court of 
 Sigismund, King of Hungary, and afterwards German 
 emperor. Jerome, whose self-confidence — to put it mildly — 
 was very great, appears in Hungary to have exercised the 
 ecclesiastical functions, though he had never been ordained as 
 a priest. It is certain that he preached before King Sigismund 
 in the royal chapel at Ofen and violently denounced the rapa- 
 city of the clergy. He was not able, however, to remain long 
 safely in Hungary. The Archbishop of Prague wrote to Sigis- 
 mund denouncing Jerome as a heretic and adherent of 
 Wy cliff e. Jerome was imprisoned for a short time, but soon 
 allowed to leave Hungary. After having perhaps again spent 
 a short time at Prague — authentic evidence concerning 
 Jerome's many travels and adventures is very scant — he 
 appeared in Vienna. He began lecturing at the university, 
 and here also his eloquence attracted large audiences. His 
 praise of Wycliffe, however, very soon again brought him into 
 conflict with the ecclesiastical authorities. Representatives 
 of the Bishop of Passau, to whose diocese Vienna then be- 
 longed, summoned Jerome before them and cautioned him. 
 Jerome protested against the accusation of having spread 
 heretical opinions, and declared himself ready to clear himself 
 before an ecclesiastical tribunal that was to meet for the pur- 
 pose of hearing his defence. Meanwhile, he promised on his 
 oath not to leave Vienna without the permission of the eccle- 
 
 1 See Chapter IV. 
 
JEROME OF PRAGUE 325 
 
 siastical authorities. 1 Jerome, however, succeeded in escaping 
 secretly from Vienna, and sought safety in the castle of Vottau 
 in Moravia, which belonged to Lord John of Lichtenburg, 
 an adherent of the cause of church-reform. From here he 
 addressed to one of the priests at Vienna, to whom he had 
 pledged his word that he would not leave that city, a letter 
 that was certainly audacious, and that some writers have not 
 hesitated to describe as impudent. 2 He declared that he was 
 sure that the priest — whose name is not given — and his col- 
 leagues would excuse him for not heeding a promise which had 
 been extorted, if they rightly considered the circumstances. 
 He then proceeded to inform the priest, who was rector of the 
 town of Laa in Austria, that he had on his journey visited his 
 (the rector's) church, accompanied by the schoolmaster and 
 the town secretary, and ended by assuring him and his col- 
 leagues that he was ready to render them any service in his 
 power. In consequence of his flight from Vienna, the repre- 
 sentatives of the Bishop of Passau in that city pronounced 
 the penalty of excommunication against Jerome. 3 
 
 The seclusion of the castle of Vottau soon became distaste- 
 ful to the restless mind of Jerome, and we soon again find him 
 in Prague. In the discussion that arose there in 1412 con- 
 cerning the sale of indulgences, 4 Jerome took a prominent 
 part. His speeches at the university obtained great success, 
 particularly among the younger students. Shortly afterwards 
 Jerome again thought it advisable to leave Prague in conse- 
 quence of his participation in the foolish buffoonery organised 
 by Lord Vok of Valdstyn. He now proceeded to Poland — it 
 is said on the invitation of King Vladislav. His courtly 
 manners, his striking appearance, and his great eloquence here 
 also won him many friends, but he here also incurred the 
 
 1 " De non recedendo de Vienna sine nostra licentia speciali praestitit 
 juramentum " (Letter of Andrew of Grillenberg, Canon of Passau, to Arch- 
 bishop Zbynek of Prague. Palacky, Documenta). 
 
 2 Printed by Von der Hardt, T. iv. p. 683. 
 
 1 This document is printed in an abridged form by Palacky, Documenta. 
 4 See Chapter V. 
 
326 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 hostility of the Roman Church. He was particularly blamed 
 for associating with Ruthenians, who were members of the 
 Eastern Church. When the Bishop of Vilna expressed his 
 disapproval Jerome declared that the schismatics and 
 Ruthenians were good Christians, and he continued to assist 
 at the services of the Greek Church. 1 During his stay in 
 Northern Europe, Jerome received the news that Hus had been 
 summoned to appear before the council at Constance He 
 wrote to him advising him to do so, and added that he would 
 himself proceed to Constance to assist Hus. A man of a vain 
 and rather theatrical nature such as was Jerome felt tempted 
 to appear before the council, where he would meet all the 
 highest ecclesiastical dignitaries, and representatives of all 
 the temporal sovereigns and universities of Europe. Hus 
 vainly endeavoured to dissuade Jerome from coming to Con- 
 stance; he none the less arrived there on April 14, 1415. Hus 
 was at that time imprisoned at Gottlieben, but the Bohemian 
 nobles who had accompanied him warned Jerome of the great 
 danger which he encountered by remaining in the city. 
 Jerome immediately decided to escape secretly from Con- 
 stance, 2 and to return to Bohemia. He had already arrived 
 at Hirschau, only twenty-five miles from the Bohemian 
 frontier, when he was arrested by the Count Palatine John, 
 who, acting under the orders of the Emperor Sigismund, con- 
 veyed him in fetters to Constance. He arrived there on May 
 23, and was immediately imprisoned. Hus appears to have 
 been informed of these events, and though, speaking generally, 
 he did not often allude to Jerome, he mentioned him several 
 
 1 Great stress was laid on this accusation at Jerome's trial at Constance. 
 In the act of accusation — printed by Von der Hardt, T. iv. p. 679 — it is 
 stated: (Jerome) " dixit expresse quod praedicti schismatici et Rutheni 
 essent boni Christiani. Quodque idem Dominus Episcopus eidem Hieronymo 
 in faciem suam tunc restitit dicens: Quod non diceret eos esse bonos Chris- 
 tianos. Ipse vero Hieronymus in eisdem suis erroribus permansit eosdem 
 Ruthenos et fidem ipsorum perversam approbando." 
 
 2 It is this secret escape of Jerome from Constance which undoubtedly 
 supplied Richenthal with a foundation for his totally untrue tale that Hus 
 had attempted to escape from Constance in disguise. 
 
JEROME OF PRAGUE 327 
 
 times in his last letters from prison. In a Bohemian letter, 
 dated June 27, Hus writes with touching humility: " I will tell 
 you that the Lord God knows why He defers my death and 
 that of my dear brother, master Jerome; with regard to him, I 
 hope that he will die holily and guiltlessly, and that he will 
 bear himself and suffer more bravely than I, faint-hearted 
 sinner that I am." x 
 
 Hus was too holy and too saintly a man to be a good judge \ 
 of character. Jerome at first indeed displayed great fortitude, \ 
 but after the martyrdom of Hus his courage entirely failed 
 him. Hoping to save his life and regain his liberty, he 
 solemnly recanted all his former so-called heretical views. He 
 did not even hesitate to blame severely his master Hus. He 
 expressed his altered views in a memorable letter addressed to 
 the Bohemian nobleman, Lacko of Kravar. The letter, 2 little 
 known except in Bohemia, deserves translation here, as it 
 throws a strong and strange light on the character of Jerome 
 of Prague. The letter, dated September 12, 1415, runs thus: 
 " My services to you, first of all, dear noble lord, and my 
 particular benefactor. I bring to the knowledge of your lord- 
 ship that I am alive and in good health at Constance. I hear 
 that there is much excitement in Bohemia and Moravia because 
 of the death of Master Hus, as if he had been unjustly con- 
 demned and brutally burnt. Therefore I write this of my own 
 free will to you as to my lord, that you may know what you 
 should do. Therefore I beg you through this letter, maintain 
 nowise that wrong was done to him (Hus). According to my 
 belief, that was done to him which had to be done. Do not 
 believe, my lord, that I write this forced by necessity, nor that 
 I deserted him through fear. I was long kept in prison and 
 many great scholars endeavoured to lead me to other views, 
 
 1 Printed by Mares, Listy Husovy (Letters of Hus), p. 228. 
 
 2 This letter written in Bohemian, was first printed by Dobrovsky in his 
 Geschichte der bohmischen Sprache und Literatur. It was subsequently re- 
 printed in the collection entitled Vybor z Literatury ceske (Selections from 
 Bohemian Literature) , and in Palacky, Documenta. 
 
328 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 but they did not induce me to change my opinions. I also 
 believed that injury had been done to him (Hus). But when 
 the articles, because of which he was condemned, were shown 
 to me, I examined them very carefully and discussed them 
 repeatedly with more than one scholar. I then clearly under- 
 stood that of these articles some were heretical, some false, 
 others liable to cause scandal and harm. But I still continued 
 doubtful, not thinking that these articles were by the deceased ; 
 for I believed that they contained only fragments and seg- 
 ments taken from the context of his speeches, and that his 
 meaning had thus been altered. 1 And I began to wish for his 
 books, and the council gave me some manuscripts written by 
 his own hand that I might examine them. Then I, together 
 with reverent masters of the holy scriptures, again examined 
 the articles because of which he had been burnt, and compared 
 them with the books written in his own handwriting; and I 
 found in his books all the contents of the articles, fully and 
 almost in the same words. Therefore I cannot do otherwise 
 than justly declare that the deceased wrote many false and 
 hurtful things. And I, who was his friend, and with my lips 
 defended his honour against all, having found this, must 
 decline to be the defender of such errors; this I have in lengthy 
 speech declared before the whole council. Now having much 
 work to do, I cannot write more extensively, but I think that 
 with God's help I shall write extensively about the events 
 concerning me, and (these writings) I will send to your grace. 
 And now I commend myself to your favour. Written by my 
 own hand at Constance on the Thursday after the nativity of 
 the mother of God." 
 
 Dobrovsky, who discovered this important document in 
 the Carthusian monastery of Dolein in Moravia, had at first 
 some doubts as to its authenticity. Further research tends, 
 however, to prove that Jerome certainly was the author of 
 
 1 It has been previously shown that the council did actually proceed in 
 this manner for the purpose of convicting Hus of heresy. 
 
JEROME OF PRAGUE 329 
 
 this mean and Judas-like letter. Dr. Flajshans, the most 
 recent Bohemian writer on the life of Hus, admits the authen- 
 ticity of Jerome's letter, but suggests that he may have been 
 forced to write it. There can at any rate only have been; 
 moral persuasion, for there is no evidence whatever to prove 
 that torture was applied to Jerome. That the true nature of 
 Jerome should formerly have been so little known is un- 
 doubtedly a consequence of the tradition — which arose at a 
 time when little was known of Bohemia — placing Jerome on 
 the same, or nearly the same level as Hus. Even this short 
 note on Jerome is, I think, sufficient to denote the world-wide 
 difference that existed between the two men. Jerome, a man 
 not exempt from the scepticism innate in the humanist, re- j 
 canted for the purpose of saving his life and regaining his | 
 liberty. 
 
 As mentioned in his letter, Jerome shortly after Hus's 
 martyrdom, recanted the so-called heresies of which he had 
 been accused. This was done by means of a statement which 
 Jerome himself drew up and forwarded to the council. That 
 assembly, however, distrusting his motives, 1 decided to demand 
 a formal and solemn recantation in the presence of the council. 
 Jerome consented and his public abjuration took place at a 
 meeting of the council on Sepetmber 23, 1415. 2 Jerome first 
 read out the statement which he had previously sent to the 
 council, stating that knowing the true Catholic and apostolic 
 faith, he anathematised all heresies, and in particular the 
 teaching of John Wycliffe and John Hus as contained in their 
 works, tracts and sermons before the clergy and the people. 
 Having read out this statement, Jerome added that, had he 
 formerly possessed the knowledge which he now had, he would 
 never have maintained these errors. If then his liberty were 
 
 1 See the statement in Von der Hardt, T. iv. p. 497: " Pellectus per 
 concilium ad recantandum non ex animo sed metu supplicii ac spe evadendi 
 consensit tandem, formula a se conscripta et in congregatione solemni 
 praelecta." 
 
 2 Von der Hardt (T. iv., pp. 499-514) gives a full account of the proceedings 
 on that day and prints in full the documents referred to above. 
 
330 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 restored to him he would, possessing the knowledge and in- 
 struction which he had now acquired, be ruled by these pre- 
 cepts, and offer his soul as a new one to the bride of Christ, 
 that is to say the holy church. The council, however, 
 evidently continued to distrust Jerome, and insisted on his 
 making several further statements in which he anathematised 
 a large number of articles derived from the writings of 
 Wycliffe, which were all specially enumerated. He also took 
 a solemn oath henceforth to remain faithful to the true doc- 
 trine of the Catholic Church, adding that, should he fail to do 
 so, he accepted as deserved every punishment that might be 
 inflicted on him; he lastly declared that he had made all these 
 statements freely and spontaneously. 
 
 Jerome was not, however, liberated. He appears soon to 
 have regretted his recantation. On October 29, 1415, Gerson 
 read before the council a statement 1 treating of the recanta- 
 tion of heretics generally, but obviously aimed at Jerome. 
 Among other matters, Gerson stated that one who had recanted 
 heretical opinions must necessarily continue to be suspected 
 of heresy. This declaration of Gerson produced a great im- 
 pression on the mind of Jerome. He felt that he had failed 
 to obtain the confidence of those to whose cause he had 
 devoted himself. On the other hand, though he had not been 
 freed, his renunciation had rendered his imprisonment less 
 severe. It is therefore certain that echoes of the fierce resent- 
 ment and religious enthusiasm prevailing in Bohemia must 
 have reached him at Constance. He determined to act in a 
 manner which practically involved suicide. It is scarcely 
 necessary to mention how greatly classical learning and that 
 of the stoics in particular has lauded suicide, as the door 
 ever open, when all other issues are closed. These theories 
 of the ancients must have appealed to an early humanist in 
 a manner inconceivable to us whose ancestors have for five 
 centuries been steeped in Greek and Latin culture. 
 
 1 " De protestatione et revocatione in negotio fidei " (printed by Von der 
 Hardt, T. iii. pp. 39"5 2 ) 
 
JEROME OF PRAGUE 331 
 
 Not long after Gerson's declaration Jerome again gave 
 utterance to statements that were considered heretical, thus as 
 writes Theodoric Vrie, 1 scandalising the whole sacred council. 
 When reproached by members of the council, he claimed a 
 hearing before the full assembly. This was granted to him, 
 and he appeared before the council on May 30, 1416. De Vrie 
 notices his clear voice, pallid look and long black beard. 
 Questioned by members of the council with regard to the 
 heretical opinions which he had again expressed, Jerome 
 answered in a very impressive manner. He declared that he 
 by no means denied having recanted, but that he had never 
 committed a greater sin and crime than when he wrote his 
 recantation. Never also had he so greatly regretted any sin, 
 as he now regretted having rejected the opinions of those holy 
 men, John Wycliffe and John Hus, and having expressed his 
 approval of the death of those good men. A new act of accusa- 
 tion against him was now drawn up 2 which contained prin- 
 cipally the same accusations that had previously been brought 
 against Jerome. Though he who wishes to study thoroughly 
 the history of the Bohemian reformation must consider it his 
 duty to wade through the contents of this ponderous docu- 
 ment, I do not consider it necessary to refer to them here. 
 The only interesting part of the document is that which refers 
 to Jerome's connection with the " orthodox " Ruthenians, as 
 it bears witness to the intense animosity which then already 
 existed between the Roman and Greek churches. 
 
 A very striking document concerning the last days of 
 Jerome has fortunately been preserved and has rightly at- 
 tracted great attention. I refer to Poggio Bracciolini's letter 
 to Bruni (Leonardo Aretino). 3 Though Poggio was present 
 at the council as papal legate, his letter is written entirely in 
 
 1 VonMer Hardt, T. Hi., p. 182. * Ibid. T. iv., pp. 634-691. 
 
 3 " Poggii Florentini de Hieronymi Haeritici obitu et supplicio narratio." 
 (It has been frequently printed, by Von der Hardt, by Freherus — scriptores 
 rerum Bohemicarum, together with Aenaeas Sylvius, Historia Bohemica, by 
 Palacky, Documenia, etc.) 
 
332 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 the manner of an Italian humanist, and its brilliancy and 
 eloquence have bestowed on the memory of Jerome a not 
 entirely merited aureole. Poggio by no means approved of 
 Jerome as a church-reformer. He indeed states that if he had 
 said anything contrary to the teaching of the church, he de- 
 served punishment, and that the great talents that nature 
 had given him were his misfortune. It was his eloquence and 
 courage that appealed to the humanist. " I must confess," 
 writes Poggio of Jerome, " that I never saw one who in the 
 eloquence of his defence came as near to the eloquence of the 
 ancients, whom we admire so much." Later on the Italian 
 humanist writes: " His (Jerome's) voice was sweet, clear 
 and resounding. The dignity of the orator's jests now ex- 
 pressed indignation, now moved to compassion, which, how- 
 ever, he neither claimed nor wished to obtain. He stood 
 before his judges undaunted and intrepid. Not only not fear- 
 ing, but even seeking death, he appeared as another Cato. He 
 was indeed a man worthy of eternal memory in men's minds." 
 That such a mode of defence or rather defiance did not tend 
 to conciliate the members of the council is evident. Jerome's 
 speech l sealed his fate. The prelates were no doubt particu- 
 larly indignant at Jerome's allusions to the unedifying life then 
 led by most members of the clergy. 2 Jerome was as a re- 
 lapsed heretic condemned to death at the stake, and the 
 sentence was carried out on May 30, immediately after his 
 appearance before the council. Poggio thus describes his 
 death: " With joyful brow, cheerful countenance, and elated 
 face he went to his doom. He feared not the flames, not the 
 torments, not death. None of the stoics ever suffered death 
 with so constant and brave a mind, and he indeed seemed to 
 desire it. When he had reached the spot where he was to die, 
 
 1 Printed in full in Von der Hardt's account of the trial (T. iv.) 
 'Jerome stated: "Cum patrimonia ecclesiarum primum deberentur 
 pauperibus et advenis ac demum fabricis, indignum videri, dispendi ilia 
 meretricibus, conviviis, equorum copiae aut canum saginae, cultui vesti- 
 mentorum et aliis rebus indignis religione Christi " (Palacky, Documenta). 
 
JEROME OF PRAGUE 333 
 
 he devested himself of his garments, and knelt down in prayer. 
 Logs of wood were then piled about round his body, which 
 they covered up to the breast. When they were lighted, he 
 began to sing a hymn, which was interrupted by the smoke 
 and the flames. This, however, is the greatest proof of the 
 constancy of his mind, that when the lictor (town official or 
 beadle) wished to light the stake behind his back, that he might 
 not see it, he said: Come here and light the stake before my 
 eyes, for if I had feared it I should never have come to this 
 spot, as it was in my power to fly. Thus perished a man 
 eminent beyond belief. I saw his end, I contemplated every 
 one of his acts. Be it that he acted thus from faithlessness or 
 from obstinacy, you could perceive that it was a man of the 
 philosophic school who had perished. . . . Mutius did not 
 allow his hand to be burnt with more brave a mind than this 
 man his whole body. Socrates did not drink the poison as 
 willingly as this man submitted himself to the flames." * 
 
 Though Jerome perished by the same terrible death as Hus, 
 nothing can be more different than the circumstances which 
 preceded the deaths of the two men. Hus, inspired here as. : 
 everywhere by a truly Christian feeling, was ready to render up 
 his life should his duty as a Christian oblige him to do so. 
 Meanwhile, he " guarded it as God's high gift from scathe and 
 wrong." Thus he refused to go to Rome, where certain death 
 awaited him, because he believed that his conscience then 
 ordered him to live. He very clearly expressed his views on 
 this subject in a passage in the treatise De Ecclesia, which I 
 have previously quoted. He did not heed the accusation of 
 cowardice, which was in consequence raised against him by 
 his enemies, and which has been repeated by some of his 
 modern detractors. Similarly, he did not hesitate to leave 
 
 1 Though Poggio Bracciolini's account of the death of Jerome, of which he 
 was an eye-witness, is somewhat rhetorical, yet it can on the whole be con- 
 sidered as trustworthy. Other writers describe the event similarly, though 
 they lay less stress on the heroism of Jerome. Only Richenthal, not a very 
 reliable authority, states.that Jerome " screamed lowdly " while in the flames. 
 
334 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Prague when his life was menaced there by the Germans, who 
 were determined to destroy the Bethlehem chapel. His diffi- 
 culty of deciding what course to adopt in this case is shown by 
 many passages of his writings belonging to this period. When, 
 on the other hand, the council demanded that he should recant 
 heretical opinions which he had never held, he refused and 
 calmly and unhesitatingly laid down his life. He well knew 
 that had he himself admitted that he had been a heretic, his 
 life-work for the church and the state of Bohemia would have 
 been undone. Jerome, on the other hand, did not hesitate 
 both at Vienna and at Constance to preserve his life by means 
 that can hardly be called otherwise than dishonourable. 
 When life, or at least the pleasures and interests of life, ap- 
 peared to vanish, he faced and certainly bravely faced death. 
 
CHAPTER XII 
 
 THE HUSSITE WARS 
 
 It would be impossible to realise the importance of Hus in the 
 world's history if we dealt of the events of his life indepen- 
 dently of those of the subsequent Hussite wars. In a passage 
 which I have previously quoted, Palacky has pointed out how 
 comparatively unimportant would have been the place of Hus 
 in history had not the unrivalled bravery of the Bohemian 
 people and the genius of leaders such as Zizka enabled Bohemia 
 to beat back the united forces of almost all Europe, which 
 endeavoured to crush the religious movement in the country. 
 Though Palacky died more than thirty years ago, no other 
 writer has since his time more clearly grasped the real character 
 of the Hussite wars than he did. In one of his controversial 
 writings, 1 he says: " One school of historians to which I have 
 the honour to belong has maintained that the Hussite war is 
 the first war in the world's history that was fought, not for 
 material interests, but for intellectual ones, that is to say, for 
 ideas. This ideal standpoint was so seriously and so sincerely 
 maintained by the Bohemians that when victorious they never 
 attempted to replace it by a more interested policy. It is 
 true that during the war they forced foreign communities to 
 pay taxes and an annual tribute to them; but they never 
 thought of subduing them, or of extending their dominion over 
 foreign lands — a thing that under the circumstances of the 
 time would not have been difficult. I know that among the 
 modern school of German historians there are persons 2 who 
 
 1 Die Geschichte des Hussitenthiims und Profssor Constantin Hofler. I 
 have here only been able to allude briefly to this brilliant passage. Those 
 interested in the matter will find a translation of a considerable part of it 
 in my Lectures on the Historians of Bohemia, pp. 103-105. 
 
 * Palacky uses the somewhat contemptuous German word, Subjecte. 
 
 335 
 
336 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 attribute this attitude mainly to the incapacity of the ancient 
 Bohemians, and who with brutal derision attempt to deduce 
 from it their racial inferiority. I leave it to a more enlightened 
 posterity to decide what conduct is nearer to barbarism — 
 that of the disinterested victor, or that of the imperious and 
 rapacious conqueror. Two centuries later the enemies, after 
 one victory — that of the White Mountain — certainly acted 
 differently, and endeavoured in every way to use their victory 
 for the purpose of material gain. Was their conduct nobler 
 and more Christian? As to the Hussites, they never during 
 their prolonged and heroic struggle ceased to consider it and 
 to term it a struggle for the liberty of God's word. ..." 
 
 This feeling here so finely expressed by a man of learning 
 is innate in the mass of the Bohemian people; it is as strong 
 in the peasant or workman as in the Bohemian scholar who 
 has studied the annals of his country. " The Hussite battles, 
 as Dr. Gindely 1 wrote, "were fought for a national cause; 
 poets and painters chose them as their subject, the most 
 stirring popular songs date from this time; the names of the 
 leaders of this movement have lingered in the memory of the 
 people ; the name of no Bohemian king is as familiar to them 
 as that of the blind leader of the Hussite armies. 2 The violent 
 destruction of the national constitution by Ferdinand II., the 
 sufferings which the country endured during the Austrian war 
 of succession at the hand of Prussians, Bavarians and French- 
 men, events that occurred but one or two centuries ago, are 
 forgotten. On all these occasions the peasant was a mere 
 sufferer, he was deprived of his religious convictions or of his 
 worldly goods, but he never defended himself. In the Hussite 
 wars he had himself been a fighter, he had been a victorious 
 warrior, and his flail and fighting club had successfully beaten 
 back the enemies of his country and his faith. 
 
 1 Abridged from Dr. Gindely, Geschichte der Ertheilung des bohmischen 
 Majestdtsbriefes, pp. 116-117. 
 a Zizka. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 337 
 
 Though the Bohemians were, even after the execution of 
 Hus, reluctant to separate entirely from the Western Church , 
 the events that followed the death of the master led inevitably 
 to that result. The treacherous conduct of the council and 
 particularly of Sigismund, the heir to the throne, caused 
 general and vehement indignation in Bohemia. If civil war 
 did not immediately break out in the country, this must be 
 attributed to the attitude of King Venceslas, and more parti- 
 cularly of his queen. Queen Sophia openly expressed her 
 indignation at the treatment of her former chaplain, and 
 Venceslas made no secret of the displeasure which the treachery 
 of his brother, and the conduct of the Bohemian priests who 
 had so fiercely attacked Hus, caused him. No doubt forseeing 
 this, John " the iron," the wealthy Bishop of Litomysl, who 
 had been the leader of the adversaries of Hus, addressed a 
 letter 1 to King Venceslas on July n, only a few days after 
 the death of the master. He had heard, he wrote, that many 
 said that he had acted at Constance in a manner hostile to 
 Venceslas and to Bohemia; he begged the king to place no 
 faith in such reports, and declared that he had sought only the 
 king's advantage and the honour of the country. 
 
 This letter formed the beginning of an extensive corre- 
 spondence between the members of the council and Sigismund 
 on one hand, the Bohemians on the other; this correspondence 
 had, however, but little influence on the course of events. The 
 national movement soon assumed a somewhat revolutionary, 
 though as yet by no means anti-dynastic character. Some of 
 the nobles and knights connected with the court of King Ven- 
 ceslas were indeed among the leaders of the movement. To- 
 gether with a large part of the nobles of Moravia the Bohemian 
 nobles met at Prague on September 2, 1515. They drew up a 
 solemn protest, 2 which they forwarded to the council. The 
 
 1 Palacky, Documenta, pp. 563-565. 
 
 2 The document from which I extract this passage is well known under 
 the name of the Protestatio Bohemorum. It has been printed by Von der 
 Hardt, Loder, and more recently by Palacky. Loder states that his edition 
 
 Y 
 
338 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 document said: " Master John Hus was a good, just and 
 catholic man, who lived in our kingdom for many years and 
 was favourably known, because of his good conduct, pure life 
 and fame; in a truly catholic manner he taught us and our 
 subjects 1 the law of scripture and of the holy prophets, ex- 
 pounding the books of both the Old and New Testament, 
 according to the teaching of the holy doctors, of whom the 
 church approves. He preached much and left many writings, 
 and he consistently detested all errors and heresies, and con- 
 tinuously and faithfully admonished us and all the faithful in 
 Christ also to detest them ; he also by his words, writings and 
 deeds exhorted us, as far as it was in his power, to preserve 
 peace and charity. We have never heard, nor been able to 
 understand — in spite of all the attention which we gave to 
 the matter — that the said Master John Hus ever taught any 
 errors or heresies in his speeches, or preached or asserted such 
 matters in any fashion whatever, or that he scandalised by 
 word or deed us or our subjects in any way. Living piously 
 and gently in Christ he both by word and deed strove most 
 diligently to conform to the evangelical law and the teaching 
 of the holy fathers, for the edification of the holy mother the 
 church, and for the salvation of his fellow-men." This valu- 
 able document clearly expresses the opinion which the more 
 intellectual and more pious of his countrymen formed of Hus's 
 life and teaching immediately after his death. The letter ends 
 with what may again be considered a covert threat to Sigis- 
 mund. The nobles declared that any one who should affirm 
 that heresies had sprung up in Bohemia or Moravia should be 
 considered the worst of traitors unless such statements should 
 be made by Sigismund, the heir and successor to the throne, 
 whom, however, the nobles hoped and believed not to be 
 guilty of such an offence. This was undoubtedly a prelude to 
 
 was from a manuscript preserved at Edinburgh of which a copy existed at 
 Oxford. (See my Bohemia, a Historical Sketch, p. 140, n.) 
 1 i.e. the tenants on the estates of the Bohemian nobles. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 33 q 
 
 the subsequent deposition of Sigismund. This protest, which 
 bore the seals of four hundred and fifty-two nobles and knights 
 of Bohemia and Moravia, was forwarded to Constance, and 
 caused great indignation and some consternation among the 
 members of the council. 
 
 The Bohemian patriots were far too shrewd not to perceive 
 the grave danger to which their bold attitude exposed them. 
 Only three days after their letter of defiance had been sent to 
 Constance, they bound themselves by a solemn covenant l to 
 unite in the defence of freedom of thought and in resistance to 
 arbitrary and unjust excommunications. They decided to 
 send to Constance envoys who were to complain of the murder 
 of Hus. They maintained the right, and even the duty of the 
 priests on their estates to preach the word of God freely and 
 truly in accordance with the teaching of Scripture. Should a 
 priest be by his bishop hindered from acting in this manner, 
 the rector, doctors, and magisters of the theological faculty of 
 the University of Prague were to act as arbiters. Should a 
 pope at a later period be elected, lawfully and according to 
 the ancient regulations, they would send representatives to 
 him who were to complain of the injury done to Bohemia by 
 the false accusation of heresy, which had been brought against 
 the country. They finally pledged themselves to defend by 
 all means the principles contained in their declaration, and 
 resolved that a committee of three — consisting of two Bohemian 
 and one Moravian noblemen — should be intrusted with the 
 organisation of the defence of the country, should it be at- 
 tacked. The confederated nobles invited King Venceslas to 
 join them, but in consideration of his brother, whom he feared 
 even more than he hated him, he declined, probably against 
 the advice of the good Queen Sophia. Soon afterwards the 
 lords favourable to the cause of Rome, who were not numerous, 
 
 1 Known as " Pactio multorum baronum Bohemiae et Moraviae de tuenda 
 libera verbi Dei praedicatione contemnendisque excommunicationibus in- 
 justis " (Palacky, Documenta, pp. 590-595). 
 
340 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 but among whom were some of the most powerful nobles, also 
 formed a confederacy whose members pledged themselves to 
 continue obedient to the universal church and to the council. 
 Sigismund at this moment displayed a great literary 
 activity, perhaps still hoping to avert war with Bohemia. He 
 had left Constance for a time and proceeded to Paris, from 
 where he sent two letters to Bohemia, both dated March 21, 
 1416. 1 The one was addressed to the utraquist nobles. As 
 communion in the two kinds was one of the principal tenets 
 -of the national party in Bohemia, they began at this time to 
 be generally known as utraquists. The letter certainly bears 
 witness to the excessive perfidy and falseness of Sigismund, on 
 which most historians have not laid sufficient stress. Sigis- 
 mund began by stating that he deeply regretted that the 
 nobles had acted in opposition to the authority of his dearly 
 beloved brother Venceslas, who could not approve of a con- 
 federation among the nobles of his realm formed without his 
 consent. He further declared that had Hus not arrived at 
 jConstance before him, but appeared in his train, matters might 
 lhave turned out differently. This statement can hardly have 
 , greatly impressed the Bohemians, who knew that next to the 
 Bishop of Litomysl and the spies in his pay, no one was more 
 responsible for the execution of Hus than Sigismund himself. 
 Sigismund's words overheard by Mladenovic 2 stating that 
 even should Hus recant, he should not be allowed to return to 
 his country, had already become widely known. The King of 
 Hungary ended his letter by informing the Bohemians that as 
 even the princes who had previously adhered to Peter de Luna 
 (Benedict XIII.) now recognised the authority of the council, 
 Bohemia would incur great danger, should its representatives 
 venture to resist the entire power and authority of the Roman 
 Church. On the same day Sigismund addressed a letter to 
 the Romanist nobles of Bohemia, and particularly to Conrad, 
 
 1 Both these letters are printed by Palacky, Documenta, pp. 609-615. 
 
 2 See Chapter VIII. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 34I 
 
 Archbishop of Prague, and John, Bishop of Litomysl, who 
 were their most prominent representatives. He praised their 
 devotion to the Roman Church and entreated them to con- 
 tinue faithful to it. About this time, 1 Sigismund also ad- 
 dressed a letter to his sister-in-law, Queen Sophia of Bohemia. 
 He informed her that he had heard to his great regret that 
 many in the Bohemian realm had been infected by execrable 
 crime and the perversity of error, and casting from them the 
 seamless coat of Christ, which the regeneration of holy baptism 
 had conferred on them, had succumbed like men walking in 
 darkness and in the shadow of death to the seductions of vile- 
 ness and malice. A great outcry, not without sorrow, had 
 therefore arisen at the holy council of Constance, because of 
 the rumour which ever became stronger and more frequent, 
 that in these lands (Bohemia and Moravia) the clearness of 
 piety had been overclouded and the worship of the divine name 
 had been mercilessly mocked. Sigismund then expressed 
 hopes that the queen would pluck this deadly herb (of heresy) , 
 which weakened the harvest of blessings, from her fields. He 
 ended by referring to the proceedings against the queen and 
 Venceslas which were being discussed at Constance. He 
 again begged her to use her influence to extirpate heresies. 
 Should she act otherwise he feared that punishment on the 
 part of the council and the apostolical see, which he had 
 hitherto prevented by interceding against the continuation of 
 the legal proceedings, would now soon become imminent. 
 This letter, written in the turgid style which Sigismund affected, 
 is yet another proof of the insincerity which had become a 
 second nature to him. Sigismund always acted entirely in 
 union with the council, over which he indeed exercised com- 
 plete control. Whether Queen Sophia, who as her letters to 
 Pope John XXIII. and the College of Cardinals prove, was by 
 no means deficient in penmanship, answered this letter is not 
 
 1 The letter is undated. It is printed by Caro, Aus der Kanzlei Kaiser 
 Sigismunds, pp. 55-58. 
 
342 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 known to us. The council also attempted to use its influence 
 to strengthen the Romanists and at the same time vehemently 
 reviled the national party. In a letter which was sent to the 
 papal nobles a few days after Sigismund's two letters, the 
 council stated that Satan, the ancient enemy of the human 
 race, who wandering and roving round the world does not 
 cease to seek out those to whom he can communicate the 
 poison of his damnation, had so greatly inebriated Wycliffe 
 of damned memory, then Hus and other sectators with the 
 chalice of Babylon, that they had wretchedly spurned the 
 doctrines of the holy fathers and turned their minds to vanities 
 and false madness. The letter then mentioned with regret 
 that in the kingdom of Bohemia and the marquisate of Moravia 
 many men, eminent through their noble birth, had damnably 
 conspired against Jesus Christ and the Catholic faith. The 
 most important part of the letter was the last one, in which 
 the council announced a decision that greatly envenomed the 
 already perilous situation. The council stated that they had 
 appointed as legate in Bohemia and Moravia John, Bishop of 
 Litomysl, a fervent defender of the Catholic faith, whom they 
 had chosen among thousands. The nobles were begged to 
 assist him in suppressing heresy in their countries. 1 This 
 appointment of John the " iron," the arch-enemy of Hus and 
 of the national party, signified throwing down the gauntlet to 
 Bohemia. It is but fair to suppose that many moderate- 
 minded members of the council had no such an intention. 
 The absolute ignorance of Bohemian affairs, which was as 
 frequent then as it is now, is no doubt their excuse. 
 
 While this diplomatic campaign, which I have here only 
 been able briefly to outline, was proceeding, the Bohemians 
 had already appealed to force, though actual warfare only 
 began considerably later. Though the doctrine of the neces- 
 sity — in distinction from the admissibility — of communion in 
 the two kinds had only been recognised by Hus at the end of 
 
 1 Abridged from PaJacky, Documenta, p. 616. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 343 
 
 his life, great importance was attached to it by the Bohemians, 
 whose symbol the chalice became. When on the news of the' 
 execution of Hus tumults broke out in Prague, many priests 
 who refused to administer communion in the two kinds were 
 driven from the city, and their houses plundered, while utra- 
 quist priests took their places. The estates of wealthy prelates 
 also did not escape. The estates of the Bishop of Litomysl 
 were seized by neighbouring lords of the national party, and 
 the " iron " bishop was thus, as Palacky remarks with not 
 unnatural bitterness, relieved for a time of that care of worldly 
 goods which had hitherto so exclusively occupied his mind. 
 The breach between Bohemia and the Western Church was 
 necessarily widened by the appointment of the Bishop of 
 Litomysl as legate of the council. The Bohemians became 
 ever more inclined to establish a national church in their 
 country. The covenant concluded by the Bohemian nobles 
 had already pointed to the university as an authority in 
 religious matters. This principle was now generally accepted, 
 particularly as church-reformers were already beginning to 
 spread doctrines that had never been taught by Hus. On the 
 suggestion of Master Jacobellus, the principal theologians of 
 the university met in the so-called great college on August 9, 
 1417, and formulated the Hussite doctrine in the following 
 four articles : * 
 
 I. The word of God shall in the kingdom of Bohemia be 
 freely and without impediment proclaimed and preached by 
 Christian priests. 
 
 II. The sacrament of the body and blood of God shall in the 
 two kinds, that is in bread and wine, be freely administered to 
 
 1 These articles are the famed articles of Prague, which later became the 
 foundation of the compacts. Dr. Dvorsky, in a study which he sent me just 
 before his recent death, attributes them to the year 14 17, though they only 
 became known during the siege of Prague by Sigismund in 1420. Dr. 
 Dvorsky's conjecture has much probability. It seems unlikely that this 
 confession of faith should have been suddenly developed during the excite- 
 ment of a siege. Dr. Dvorsky also quotes references to the articles which 
 are of an earlier date than 1420. 
 
344 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 all faithful Christians according to the order and teaching of 
 our Saviour. 
 
 III. The priests and monks, according to secular law, 
 possess great worldly wealth in opposition to the teaching of 
 Christ. Of this wealth they shall be deprived. 
 
 IV. All mortal sins, particularly those that are public, as 
 well as all disorders opposed to God's law, shall in all classes x 
 be suppressed by those whose office it is to do so. All evil and 
 untruthful rumours 2 shall be suppressed for the good of the 
 commonwealth, the kingdom and the nation. 3 
 
 These articles contain the pith of the Hussite teaching, 
 and on them were founded the compacts by which the Roman 
 see for a time accepted at least a part of the demands of the 
 Bohemians. Though according to Dr. Dvorsky's conjecture, 
 which I have adopted, the origin of the articles dates as far 
 back as 1417, they only became generally known when they 
 were presented to Sigismund and his German allies during the 
 siege of Prague. 
 
 Unfortunately for the cause of church-reform, discord soon 
 broke out among the Hussites, as all members of the national 
 party soon began to be called. A considerable party — soon to 
 be known as the Taborites — in direct contradiction with the 
 teaching of Hus, began at an early period to reject all sacra- 
 ments except baptism and communion, the existence of purga- 
 tory, and many rites and regulations of the Roman Church. 
 Though the dauntless and unrivalled bravery of the Taborites 
 contributed largely to the brilliant victories of the Bohemians, 
 yet in these dissensions lay the germ of the future downfall of 
 the country. The fatal scission among the Hussites fore- 
 
 1 The Bohemian word is " stav," which could in mediaeval phraseology 
 be translated by " estate." 
 
 * This principally referred to the statement frequently made by the 
 Germans that Bohemia was a heretical country. 
 
 3 Brezova, in his full version of the articles, gives after each of them 
 lengthy quotations from scripture and the fathers to support them. These 
 may have been added when the articles were presented to the Germans 
 in 1420. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 345 
 
 shadows already the fateful battle of Lipan, and dimly even 
 the more fateful battle of the Bila Hora, 1 where Bohemian 
 freedom and independence perished. As all churches, even 
 those where the utraquist rites were observed, were closed to 
 the Taborites, they began to assemble in large numbers in the 
 fields and on mountains. Lawrence of Brezova, the foremost 
 among the historians of the Hussite war, writes: 2 " In the 
 year 1419 the priests and preachers of Scripture who favoured 
 the teaching of Hus and communion in the two kinds, who 
 were then called Wycliffites or Hussites, and with them people 
 of both sexes from all parts of Bohemia, both from towns and 
 villages, began to assemble on a hill near Bechyn, to which 
 they gave the name of Tabor. The priests carried the 
 eucharist before them, 3 and particularly on feast days ad- 
 ministered the sacrament to the faithful with great reverence ; 
 for the enemies of communion in the two kinds prevented the 
 common people from receiving the communion in that fashion 
 in any church of that neighbourhood. On the day of St. Mary 
 Magdalene, 4 a large number of people of both sexes, and many 
 little children, more than 40,000 people from all parts of the 
 kingdom, assembled on this hill and with great fervour received 
 the sacrament of the body of God and of the blood of God, 
 according to the order of Jesus Christ, which was preserved by 
 the primitive church. Then King Venceslas was greatly dis- 
 turbed, fearing that they would put in his place Nicholas of 
 Hus, 5 whom he had exiled from Prague because he had, accom- 
 panied by a large crowd of men, who, however, were unarmed, 
 addressed him near the Church of St. Apollinaris, begging him 
 to grant freely communion in both kinds to adults and 
 children." 
 
 The Nicholas of Hus here mentioned by Brezova had been 
 
 1 i.e. White Mountain. 
 
 1 pp. 344-345 of Dr. Goll's edition. 
 
 3 This custom became general during the Hussite wars. 
 
 4 July 22. 
 
 s Contrary to what has often been written he was no relation of Master 
 John Hus. 
 
346 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 one of King Venceslas's courtiers, but had been banished from 
 the court because he had at the head of a large band of men 
 appealed to the king requesting him to grant a general per- 
 mission to receive communion in the two kinds. By a decree 
 of Venceslas religious services according to the utraquist rites 
 had been limited to three churches in Prague. It is uncertain 
 whether Nicholas of Hus, as stated by Brezova, intended to 
 seize the crown of Bohemia, but it is certain that in the last 
 months of his life Venceslas lost all his previous popularity 
 with the Bohemian people. A weak, though well-meaning 
 man, he had now definitely to decide whether he would throw 
 in his lot with his people and resolutely face Sigismund and 
 his numerous allies, or whether he would aid his treacherous 
 younger brother in crushing the national movement and re- 
 conquering Bohemia. Finally Venceslas, intimidated by the 
 constant threats of his brother, frightened also by the demo- 
 cratic character of the Taborite movement, determined to apply 
 to Sigismund for aid, and to invite him to Bohemia. 
 
 Before the Taborites had taken any further steps, and only 
 a week after their great meeting, events at Prague brought 
 matters to a crisis. The Premonstratensian monk, John of 
 | Zelivo, an enthusiastic Hussite and a man of great eloquence 
 and ambition, had acquired great popularity among the 
 citizens of Prague. When preaching on July 30 in the Church 
 St. Mary of the snow — one of those that had been given over 
 to the utraquists — he spoke strongly of the oppression of the 
 faithful, referring to the fact that several Hussites had been 
 imprisoned by order of the German councillors of the new 
 town, and complaining also that the utraquists were excluded 
 from almost all the churches of the city. The faithful then 
 proceeded to the town hall led by Zelivo. On their way they 
 passed the church of St. Stephen and attempted to enter it. 
 The priests had closed it on the approach of the heretics, and 
 a struggle took place in which some were wounded on both 
 sides and the church was considerably damaged. Matters 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 
 
 347 
 
 became more serious when the procession reached the town 
 hall of the new town, 1 and demanded the liberation of the 
 Hussites who were imprisoned there. In answer stones were 
 thrown at them from the windows of the town hall by the 
 German councillors who were strong opponents of the national 
 movement. One of the stones struck John of Zelivo, who, as 
 had become customary, carried the sacrament in a monstrance 
 before the procession. The people, infuriated by this act of 
 sacrilege, as they considered it, attacked and stormed the 
 town hall. They found a leader in John Zizka of Trocnov, . 
 who, like Nicholas of Hus, had been a courtier of King Ven- 
 ceslas. The town-councillors were thrown from the windows, 
 and those who survived the fall were killed by the people who 
 were assembled in the market-place below. When the news 
 reached King Venceslas he was seized with an apoplectic fit, 
 and on August 16 a second fit ended his life. 
 
 The death of the king left Bohemia in a state of complete 
 uncertainty. Sigismund was undoubtedly the legitimate heir 
 to the throne, and even among the utraquists, particularly 
 among the nobles belonging to that party, some were at first 
 ready to recognise him as their sovereign, should he conform 
 to the teaching of what had already become the national 
 church. Treacherous as he always was, Sigismund had 
 hitherto generally concealed his blind adherence to Rome and 
 his hatred of the Bohemian people. He had even, on several 
 occasions, expressed his regret that Hus had been executed, 
 and stated that this would not have occurred had Hus arrived 
 at Constance with the king, and after having received the 
 letter of safe-conduct. The great mass of the Bohemian 
 people, with that instinctive intuition that sometimes cha- 
 racterises the masses, always distrusted Sigismund, to whom 
 they rightly attributed the responsibility for the death of the 
 revered master Hus. The eloquent priest John of Zelivo, 
 who had at that time great influence over the people of Prague, 
 
 1 In the present Karlovo Namesti (Charles Square). 
 
348 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 denounced Sigismund in apocalyptic language, calling him 
 the fiery seven-headed dragon of the revelation. 1 Immediately 
 after the death of Venceslas rioting broke out in Prague, many 
 churches were destroyed, and all priests who refused to accept 
 the utraquist rites were expelled from the city. With them 
 most of the German inhabitants left the town. They were 
 almost all adherents of the Roman Church, and bitter enemies 
 of the national party, which they believed to be opposed to 
 the undue predominance which they had obtained in Bohemia. 
 Sigismund was unable to proceed to Bohemia immediately 
 after his brother's death, as urgent affairs required his presence 
 in Hungary. He determined to adopt a temporising policy, 
 as long as he was unable to enter Bohemia with an overwhelm- 
 ing armed force. He therefore appointed as regent Queen 
 Sophia, whom her known sympathy with the Hussite cause 
 
 E rendered very popular. As her coadjutor he named the 
 upreme Burgrave Cenek of Wartenberg, an ambitious noble- 
 lan who was in matters of religion entirely guided by what 
 he believed to be his personal interest. Tranquillity returned 
 to Prague for a short time, but the action of the Taborites soon 
 led to new and graver disturbances. At a great meeting on 
 the Tabor hill on the day of St. Venceslas (September 28, 1419) 
 the Taborites resolved to march on Prague. Queen Sophia, 
 informed of their intention, hurriedly summoned a large force 
 of German mercenaries to her aid. Infuriated by the presence 
 of these enemies of their country and their race, the whole city 
 of Prague rose in arms. Fierce fighting began in all parts of 
 the city. 2 Aided by the Taborite forces which, led by Nicholas 
 of Hus and Zizka of Trocnov, had meanwhile arrived at Prague, 
 the citizens obtained possession of the Vysehrad, where the 
 
 1 Zelivo referred to the seven crowns which Sigismund wore and also 
 to the new order of knighthood named " the dragon " which he had just 
 instituted. 
 
 2 It is beyond the purpose of this work to give an account of the many- 
 battles and sieges of the Hussite wars. I have given some account of them 
 in my Bohemia, a Historical Sketch. Some notice of the battles in and around 
 Prague will also be found in my Prague (mediaeval town series). 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 349 
 
 defenders, King Venceslas's former bodyguard, composed of 
 friends of the national party, offered little resistance. JfAn 
 attack on the Hradcany castle, however, was unsuccessful. 
 In the course of this prolonged street-fighting, of which the 
 contemporary chroniclers give a vivid account, a large part of 
 the city was destroyed. The citizens began to desire peace, 
 and through the mediation of Cenek of Wartemberg a truce 
 was concluded. The citizens of Prague again surrendered to 
 the royal troops the Vysehrad castle; the utraquist nobles, as 
 whose spokesman Wartemberg acted, promised to support 
 their countrymen in their demand of independence for the 
 Bohemian church. The Taborites, who disapproved of this 
 compromise, left Prague and proceeded to Plzen and then to 
 the Tabor hill, where their first meetings had been held. They 
 here built the city of Tabor, which became their stronghold up 
 to the time of their final downfall. 
 
 The not very favourable terms of this armistice, the retreat 
 of the Taborites, and the expectation of Sigismund's arrival 
 caused a short-lived Romanist reaction in Bohemia. The 
 miners of Kutna Hora, strong adherents of the Roman Church, 
 seized many utraquist priests and other Hussites and threw 
 them into the shaft of one of their mines, to which they had 
 in derision given the name of Tabor. Many Romanists and 
 Germans returned to Prague and several utraquist priests 
 were expelled from their churches. The Germans greatly re- 
 joiced, and as a contemporary chronicler * tells us, " smiled and 
 clapped their hands, saying now these heretical Hussites and 
 Wyclimtes will perish and there will be an end of them." 
 
 Sigismund had meanwhile arrived in the lands of the 
 Bohemian crown, and at Brno 2 received the envoys of the cities 
 of Prague. They protested of their thorough loyalty to their 
 new sovereign, and begged only to be allowed to continue to 
 follow the rites of the utraquist church. The king returned an 
 evasive answer. He merely stated that he intended to rule 
 
 1 Lawrence of Brezova, p. 354. 2 In German, Briinn. 
 
350 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 according to the example of his father, Charles IV., whose 
 memory was still revered in Bohemia. He demanded that all 
 chains and barricades that had been erected in Prague during 
 the recent street-fighting should be removed, and that the 
 Romanist priests and monks should no longer be molested. 
 Sigismund did not, as had probably been expected, proceed 
 immediately to Prague. Disliking and distrusting all com- 
 promises, he was determined to appear in Bohemia only at the 
 head of so large a military force that the country would be 
 absolutely at his mercy. Sigismund believed that such a force 
 could most easily be raised by recurring to the time-honoured 
 expedient of proclaiming a crusade. The term crusade, 
 originally employed to designate warlike expeditions under- 
 taken to free Palestine from Mahomedan rule, had long been 
 misused to describe wars undertaken from worldly and often 
 base motives. The last crusade had been the one undertaken 
 by the subsequently deposed Pope John XXIII. against his 
 enemy the King of Naples. 1 On the advice of Sigismund, 
 Pope Martin V., whom the council of Constance had in 1418 
 chosen as pope, proclaimed a crusade against Bohemia on 
 March 1, 1420. In this document 2 the new pope declared that 
 Sigismund, his beloved son in Christ, wishing to deserve the 
 high dignity conferred on him by providence, had determined 
 to extirpate the deadly poison of the heresy of Wyclifntes and 
 Hussites, and that he (the pope) greatly extolled this plan of 
 the king and prayed for its success with eyes uplifted to 
 heaven, for whose advantage this matter was undertaken. 
 The pope therefore entreated and exhorted all kings, dukes, 
 marquises, princes, counts and barons, potentates, 3 captains, 
 magistrates and other officials and their representatives, also 
 all communities of cities, castles, fortresses, villages and other 
 localities, and all who were zealous for the name and fame of 
 
 1 See Chapter V. 
 
 2 Printed by Palacky, Urkundliche Beitrdge zur Geschichte der Hiissitenkriege, 
 pp. 17-30. I give above only a short extract from this strange document. 
 
 3 The Italian " podesta " is probably meant. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 35 i 
 
 Christianity, strongly and manfully to undertake the exter- 
 mination of the Wycliffites, Hussites, other heretics and all 
 who favoured, abetted and defended them. The document 
 ended with a promise of plenary indulgence to all who should 
 take part in the coming crusade. 
 
 This proclamation caused intense fury in Bohemia, which 
 became yet greater when the people were informed of the I 
 cruel death which one of their fellow-citizens had suffered at 
 Breslau by order of Sigismund, who, not feeling as yet strong 
 enough to crush Bohemia, had proceeded to Silesia from Brno. 
 John Krasa, a wealthy citizen of Prague, was accused of having 
 spoken with disapproval of the sentence passed by the council 
 of Constance on Hus, and of having maintained the necessity 
 of communion in the two kinds. By order of Sigismund he 
 was placed before an ecclesiastical tribunal, which condemned 
 him to be dragged by horses through the streets of Breslau. 
 The cruel sentence was carried out on March 15, 1420. Krasa 
 endured his martyrdom with great courage and fortitude. 1 
 Many of the nobles of Bohemia, including the supreme Bur- 
 grave Cenek of Wartemberg, were present at the death of 
 Krasa, and were greatly incensed by the cruelty of Sigismund. 
 Contemporary chroniclers attribute largely to this occurrence 
 the defection of Wartemberg from the cause of Sigismund, 
 which took place shortly afterwards. 
 
 The numerous bands of so-called crusaders now began to 
 march on Bohemia from all directions. Sigismund himself 
 crossed the frontier about the beginning of May. The news 
 that he received on entering Bohemia was by no means favour- 
 able. Cenek of Wartemberg had, on April 17, joined the 
 
 1 Brezova refers to the death of Krasa in very pathetic words. He writes : 
 (Krasa) " in fide sancta permansit ac in sancto perstitit proposito tamquam 
 miles strenuus ac athletha domini fortissimus; orans namque pro suis inimicis 
 omnes eorum blasphemias, hereticationes, probra ac derisiones, nee non et 
 penas sustinuit durissimas magistri sui ac pastoris Jesu domini exemplo, pro 
 veritate evangelica tamquam ovis ductus ad victimam. Tandemque spiritu 
 exalato ad dominum in spe bona migrare meruit ac palmam martirii adipisci, 
 quod et nobis prestare dignetur Deus trinus et unus in secula benedictus 
 seculorum " (pp. 358-359). 
 
352 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 national party and concluded an alliance with the cities of 
 Prague. In a proclamation published on April 20, he 
 enumerated the grievances of the Bohemians against " the 
 Roman and Hungarian King Sigismund, who had not been 
 crowned as King of Bohemia." The proclamation ended by 
 declaring that no Bohemian should under penalty of losing 
 his honour, his fortune, and his life fail to take part in the 
 defence of the country. General, national and religious enthu- 
 siasm prevailed in Bohemia, but it unfortunately led to de- 
 ] plorable excesses. The Hussite movement for a time assumed 
 1 an iconoclastic character. Many ancient monasteries, monu- 
 ments of the finest ancient Bohemian architecture, were 
 destroyed both at Prague and in other parts of the country. 
 Many monks and nuns were treated with great cruelty. 
 Though some writers have attempted to attenuate these out- 
 rages, they cannot be sufficiently blamed both for their base 
 brutality and their political ineptitude. In a moment of 
 greatest peril Bohemia thus alienated many frends. Cenek 
 J of Wartemberg, who held the castles of Hradcany and Vyse- 
 hrad, concluded a truce with Sigismund, stipulating only that 
 the religious services on his estates should continue to he held 
 according to the utraquist rites. The citizens of Prague also 
 endeavoured to come to an agreement with Sigismund. The 
 King of Hungary, after crossing the frontier, first attacked the 
 city of Kralove Hradec, 1 which surrendered after a short re- 
 sistance. From here he marched to Kutna Hora, the centre of 
 a German and Romanist population. It was here that he 
 received the envoys of the cities of Prague. He had found at 
 Kutna Hora that at least some Bohemians were opposed to 
 Hussitism and now believed his victory certain. He asumed 
 a more overbearing manner, and received the citizens in a very 
 opprobrious fashion. He overwhelmed them with reproaches 
 and demanded unconditional surrender. Informed of this, the 
 citizens of Prague, though they were the most moderate of all 
 
 1 In German, Koniggratz. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 353 
 
 utraquists, knew that war to the knife was inevitable, and im- 
 mediately began to strengthen the fortifications of their city. 
 They also, understanding the folly of internal dissensions in 
 face of a powerful enemy, sent messengers to Tabor begging 
 the Taborites " if they wished verily to obey God's word, to 
 march to their aid without delay, and with as many men as 
 they could muster." Zizka did not hesitate for a moment. 
 Headed by him and the three other " captains of the people," 
 the Taborites, numbering about six thousand men, set out on 
 the day the message had reached them, and defeating a 
 Romanist force which endeavoured to intercept them, arrived 
 at Prague on May 20. About the same time the forces of the 
 Bohemian towns Loun, Slany, and Zatec also arrived in the 
 city, and several utraquist nobles and knights with their 
 followers hurried to Prague to take part in the defence of the 
 menaced capital. 
 
 Such slight succour appeared very insufficient in view of 
 the fact that from all parts of Europe vast armies were march- 
 ing on Prague. Yet the citizens did not lose courage for a 
 moment. As I have written elsewhere, 1 " absolute confidence 
 in Scripture rendered despondency impossible. A thorough 
 acquaintance with the Old Testament is evident in all the 
 contemporary records of those stirring times. No man or 
 woman of Prague doubted that the Lord, who had once struck 
 down the forces of Sennacherib, would now strike down the 
 forces of Sigismund." 
 
 At the end of May and the beginning of June the vast\ 
 armies of so-called crusaders began to encircle Prague. 2 Their 
 full amount is stated to have been about 200,000 men. They 
 had on their march committed terrible depredations and 
 murders, killing all Bohemians, even those who belonged to 
 the Roman Church. Sigismund at the end of May arrived 
 
 1 Prague, p. S3- 
 
 2 For an account of the siege of Prague and the battles of the Zizkov and 
 Vysehrad, see my Bohemia, a Historical Sketch, and Prague. 
 
 Z 
 
354 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 in the neighbourhood of Prague, where the castles of Hradcany, 
 and Vysehrad were still held by his adherents. He for some 
 time hesitated to attack the city, knowing that new forces 
 were daily joining the crusading armies. At last it was de- 
 cided that a general assault should take place on July 14. 
 Some of Sigismund's German allies attacked the Vitkov — 
 now Zizkov — hill, but were repulsed with great loss by the 
 Taborites, led by Zizka. Even the Taborite women took part 
 in the defence. One of these women surpassed the men in 
 courage. When the Bohemians were for a moment obliged 
 to retreat, she refused to do so, saying, " It is not beseeming 
 that a faithful Christian should give way to Antichrist" x 
 After this failure the attacks on the other parts of the town 
 were also abandoned. Both parties hoped by negotiations to 
 come to an agreement, and the utraquist nobles who, from 
 dynastic motives had remained faithful to Sigismund, but 
 shared the religious views of their countrymen, attempted 
 to act as mediators. The moment seemed a favourable one 
 for a pacification. The Bohemians had in the articles of 
 Prague, which had in all probability been at least outlined 
 previously, a programme that united all national parties. As 
 Mr. Krummel 2 has well pointed out, the differences among 
 the Hussites were not as yet considerable. All acknowledged 
 the teaching of Hus, and all strove for the same purpose, the 
 
 (reformation of the church in accordance with the customs of 
 the primitive church. All Hussites condemned the evils 
 caused by the temporal power granted to popes and bishops, 
 the abuse of indulgences, and the immoral life led by the priest- 
 hood of the period. All strove to establish a truly saintly and 
 apostolical church of which laymen as well as priests should 
 form an active part. The views of Hus were still fresh in the 
 memory of all, and when we notice how greatly discord in- 
 creased among the Hussites, when the memory of the master 
 
 1 Brezova, p. 388. 
 2 Leopold Krummel, Utraquisten und Taboriten. 
 
THE HUSSTTE WARS 355 
 
 grew dimmer, wo realist 1 what an irreparable loss to Bohemia 
 and the cause of church-reform the comparatively early death 
 of Hus was. 
 
 The articles of Prague were shown to the utraquist nobles 
 who had attempted mediation, and they strongly approved of 
 them. It was, however, necessary that the articles should be 
 jointly discussed by representatives of the national party and 
 by opponents of church-reform. Even the choice of a meet- 
 ing-place proved difficult because of the intense mutual dis- 
 trust. The Hussites in particular, warned by the recent fate 
 of Hus, hesitated to entrust their safety to men who might 
 possibly plead that no faith should be kept with heretics. All 
 these difficulties were, however, surmounted, and it was de- 
 cided that a meeting in the open air should take place in the 
 Mala Strana (" small quarter ") of Prague. The Romanist 
 representatives were Louis, patriarch of Aquileja, Simon of 
 Ragusa Bishop of Trau, and several other dignitaries of the 
 Roman Church. The Bohemians were represented by the 
 most prominent theologians of the university, and several 
 leaders of the utraquist and Taborite armies were also present. 
 The principal speakers were on the Roman side the learned 
 doctor Peter de Vergeriis, and on the Bohemian magister 
 John of Pribram, who was already considered one of the most 
 learned theologians of the University of Prague. The debate 
 was carried on with great decorum and gravity, and the sub- 
 jects discussed, as Palacky notes with his usual acumen, already 
 foreshadowed the discussions of the Council of Basel. It was, 
 however, impossible to arrive at an agreement. 
 
 Sigismund had retired from the neighbourhood of Prague 
 shortly after the defeat of the crusaders of Zizka's hill, but his 
 troops still garrisoned the castles of Hradcany and Vysehrad. 
 The last-named castle was hardly pressed b} 7 the Hussites. In 
 the autumn of the year 1420, Sigismund made an attempt to 
 relieve the garrison. He was, however, defeated in a very 
 sanguinary battle fought between the village of Pankrac and 
 
356 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 the castle of the Vysehrad on November 2. Sigismund now 
 i left Bohemia and for a time abandoned all attempts to con- 
 quer the country. The Hussites, both those of the utraquist 
 party — who now were often known as the " Praguers," as the 
 capital was their principal centre — and those who belonged 
 to the Taborite party, now assumed the offensive and obtained 
 possession of almost the whole of Bohemia. Many of the 
 nobles, among them Cenek of Wartemberg, also now formally 
 adopted the Hussite cause. 
 
 At this moment when Bohemia was at least for a time free 
 from the obnoxious presence of Sigismund, it is interesting to 
 notice briefly the development of the doctrines of Hus in the 
 country. The moderate or utraquist party among the 
 Hussites, who were known also as Calixtines or Praguers, was 
 in accordance with the Church of Rome on most points, as had 
 indeed been the case with Hus himself. The opposition of 
 the utraquists was directed against the Roman hierarchy, not 
 against the ancient dogmas of the Catholic Church. They 
 accepted fully the teaching of the Roman Church with regard 
 to the sacrament, but they maintained that communion 
 should be administered to all in the two kinds. They de- 
 clared, as I have previously mentioned, that the distinction 
 which the Church of Rome had established in this respect 
 between priests and laymen was unjust, and not founded on 
 the teaching of Scripture. It may also be said that they 
 attached more importance to the study of the Bible than 
 priests usually did at that period. This had indeed been a 
 characteristic of the Bohemian church-reformers from the 
 beginning of the movement. The utraquists allowed the 
 adornment of churches by pictures and statues, but sternly 
 opposed the exaggerated veneration of such images, which 
 had at that period become absolute idolatry. The calixtines 
 strongly disapproved of the possession of secular property by 
 the priesthood, as it led, according to their views, to im- 
 morality and the neglect of ecclesiastical duties. They wished 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 357 
 
 that their priests, to whom marriage was permitted, should 
 differ as little as possible from the rest of the faithful, and 
 sternly reproved the exaggerated and sometimes almost sacri- 
 legious veneration which the Roman priests at this period 
 claimed. Following here also the example of Hus, the Calix- 
 tines endeavoured to extend the use of the national language 
 in the services of the church, though they did not in this 
 respect go as far as the Taborites. Though opposed to Rome 
 on some points, the Calixtines attached great importance to 
 the apostolical succession of their priests and their intention 
 undoubtedly was to found a national Bohemian church forming 
 part of the Catholic or universal church. As previously men- 
 tioned, immediately after the death of Hus the theological 
 faculty of the University of Prague had by the Hussites been 
 recognised as the authority on matters of religion. When in; 
 142 1 Conrad of Vechta, archbishop of Prague, accepted the 
 four articles of Prague, he naturally became the head of the 
 Calixtine church. After his death a consistory became its 
 governing body. Among the first administrators of this con- 
 sistory were Mladenovic, the biographer of Hus, and magister 
 Pribram. The learned master Jacobellus, the real originator 
 of utraquism, held some views which were more " advanced,'' 
 if we may thus describe them. His teaching was on some 
 points similar to that of the Taborites. Only once after j 
 the death of Vechta was the Calixtine church governed by an 
 archbishop. As will be mentioned presently, after the treaty 
 of Iglau the estates of Bohemia chose John of Rokycan as 
 archbishop, but he was never recognised by the pope. 
 
 The position of the calixtine church was at all times a very 1 
 difficult one. The calixtines were confronted by the bitter, ) 
 relentless hostility of Rome, which demanded unconditional \ 
 surrender. Even those moderate Calixtines who were ready 
 to conform to the Church of Rome on all other points, were 
 they but allowed to retain the use of the chalice, met with a 
 stern refusal, though this concession has on other occasions 
 
358 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 been made by the Church of Rome. 1 There is little doubt that 
 in this case German influence prevailed, and that the matter 
 was treated from a political rather than from an ecclesiastical 
 standpoint. While the conciliatory efforts of the Calixtines 
 thus met with no success, they exposed them to the vehement 
 enmity of the extreme church-reformers in Bohemia, and of 
 the Taborites in particular. 
 
 Little was up to recently known of the Taborite com- 
 munity, and their own written documents having been de- 
 stroyed, all contemporary knowledge of them has been derived 
 from the works of their enemies. According to their main 
 principle, the Taborites 2 admitted as truth nothing not con- 
 tained in Scripture, and they rejected as false all the writings 
 of the fathers of the church which deserved to be burnt as 
 work of antichrist. After the year 1422 the Taborites rejected 
 'the teaching of the Roman church with regard to the sacra- 
 ment, which had been the teaching of Hus also. They 
 believed that after communion, bread remains bread and 
 wine, but that Christ who is in heaven is through His 
 divine grace present in the sacrament, and that those who 
 piously receive communion partake of His divine grace. Of 
 the sacraments the Taborites recognised only baptism, and 
 they rejected all veneration of the virgin Mary and the 
 saints. They also repudiated aural confession. When 
 the faithful wished to confess, the Taborite priests said to 
 them: Why do you run to us? We cannot forgive you your 
 sins; go and make confession to God Himself. In distinction 
 from Hus and the Calixtines, the Taborites rejected the doc- 
 trine of purgatory and therefore also the prayers for the dead. 
 They were totally opposed to the traditional hierarchy of the 
 Roman church, declaring that popes and cardinals were evil 
 
 1 For instance, in the case of the Greek uniates. 
 
 2 1 must here acknowledge my indebtedness to Dr. Siegmund Winter, 
 whose admirable Zivot cirkevni v. Cechach (Church life in Bohemia), founded 
 almost entirely on unprinted documents, contains the first reliable modern 
 account of the community of Tabor. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 359 
 
 doers and instruments of Antichrist. They none the less at 
 one time chose Nicholas of Pelhrimov, one of their most learned 
 divines as bishop. His powers were, however, very limited, 
 and his position was similar rather to that of the bishops of 
 the Bohemian brethren — a community that in some respects 
 resembled that of Tabor — than to that of the bishops of the 
 Roman church. The political principles of the Taborites 
 were strictly democratical. They acknowledged no differences 
 of social rank. All members of the community called each 
 other brothers and sisters, and the organisation was at first a 
 communistic one, though this did not continue even to the end 
 of the short-lived community. The battle of Lipany in 1434 
 marks the downfall of democracy in Bohemia, and with it 
 that of the Taborite community, though the city itself was 
 only captured in 1452 by the utraquist King George of Pode- 
 brad, who established there the services of the utraquist or 
 Calixtine church. 
 
 As was inevitable in a moment of general intense religious 
 excitement, considerable differences of opinion existed among 
 the Taborites, as among the Calixtines. The best known of 
 all Taborites, John Zizka of Trocnov, was the leader of a 
 moderate division, whose members after his death assumed 
 the name of Orphans. Though Zizka was an ardent demo- 
 crat and hated with undying hatred Sigismund, whom he 
 rightly considered responsible for the death of Hus, his atti- 
 tude in matters of religion was very moderate and his views 
 did not differ greatly from those of the Calixtines. His touch- 
 ing devotion to the memory of Hus rendered him unwilling to 
 accept innovations of which the master might not have ap- 
 proved. An intermedial position among the Taborites was] 
 that held by Nicholas of Pelhrimov, the bishop of the com- 
 munity. There were, however, among the Taborites also 
 enthusiastic priests whose fanaticism was often pernicious to 
 the cause of church-reform. Such men were John of Zelivo, 
 who has already been mentioned, and Martin Huska, sur- 
 
360 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 named Loquis, who is described as a man of great eloquence. 
 The people surnamed him the " prophet Daniel " and the 
 " angel of the hosts of the Lord." Another fanatical preacher 
 was Peter Kanis, whose teaching was mainly founded on 
 chiliastic views. 
 
 In connection with these fanatics, I must, according to 
 the established custom, mention the sect of the Adamites, 
 whose importance has been enormously exaggerated by 
 writers hostile to the cause of Hus. Dr. Nedoma l has indeed 
 proved that the Adamite sect had no connection with Hussi- 
 jtism, and he maintains that even the extreme Taborites, 
 ; Martin Huska and Peter Kanis, cannot in any way be rendered 
 responsible for the deeds of these obscene fanatics. Dr. 
 Nedoma prints a letter addressed about the year 1409 to 
 archbishop Zbynek by master John, vicar of Chvojnov, in 
 which the latter states that in his parish the diabolical custom 
 had sprung up that men and women met secretly at night in 
 the woods and took part in terrible orgies, of which the worthy 
 priest states that he dares not describe them. This was, of 
 course, some years before the beginning of the Hussite wars. 
 It should be added that the Adamitic movement by no means 
 originated in Bohemia. The forerunners of the Adamites 
 were undoubtedly the " turlupins " in France, and at the end 
 of the fourteenth and the beginning of the fifteenth century we 
 hear of similar complaints against the Adamites in Germany 
 and other countries. When some of these fanatics settled in 
 an island in the Nezarka river near Tabor they were merci- 
 lessly destroyed by Zizka. It would hardly be necessary to 
 dwell on this matter were it not that all enemies of the Hussite 
 cause have laid great stress on it. Pope Martin V., when pro- 
 claiming a crusade against Bohemia, did not hesitate to 
 identify the whole party of church-reform with the Adamites. 
 iEneas Sylvius also in his Historia Bohemica has devoted to 
 
 1 In an able article — on the codex of Stara Boleslav — published in the 
 Vestnik kral c. spolecnosti nauk (Journal of the Scientific Society) for 1891. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 361 
 
 them a chapter x which is neither edifying nor trustworthy. 
 The gifted author of Lucretia and Euryalus seems to have care- 
 fully preserved all tales concerning this matter that were 
 current at the time. 
 
 Though the Taborites were innocent of the worst accusa- 
 tions brought against them by their opponents, it cannot be 
 denied that the more fanatical members of that party greatly 
 injured the cause of church-reform. Proclaiming as they did 
 the approach of the millennium, and denouncing as the imagin- 
 ing of Antichrist all secular and ecclesiastical authority, they 
 undoubtedly encouraged communism and anarchy in Bohemia. 
 This alone accounts for the bitterness with which the Calix- 
 tines, and magister John of Pribram in particular, write of the 
 Taborites. This bitterness is particularly evident in Pribram's 
 famed work entitled The Life of the Taborite priests. 2. He 
 has in consequence been attacked by modern Bohemian 
 writers, who have even asserted that he became unfaithful to 
 the Calixtine cause. This is certainly untrue. Like Hus 
 himself, Pribram did not wish the nation to separate entirely 
 from the universal church, but he hoped to establish in 
 Bohemia an autonomous national church which would pre- 
 
 1 See my Bohemia, a Historical Sketch, p. 172, n. 
 
 3 As a proof of the intense bitterness of this feeling I will quote the opening 
 words of the Life. Pribram wrote: " We priests and preachers and other 
 faithful Bohemians, both laymen and ecclesiastics, earnest and constant 
 lovers of the Bohemian nation, cannot suffer any longer the many errors and 
 diabolical imaginings of these Taborite priests, which they proclaim in a 
 manner that is ever worse and worse, spreading thus hatred and fear through- 
 out the wide Bohemian land. As we have against them neither judge nor 
 champion, either secular or spiritual, we bring our complaints before the 
 Almighty Lord God, and pray to Him fervently for help and justice. We 
 appeal to the whole kingdom of heaven for help and for the punishment of 
 these terrible sins. We beg the whole Holy Church and all faithful Bohemians 
 to consider this matter; we beg you, we call on you, we exhort you. Listen 
 earnestly to these most weighty warnings of the whole Bohemian land; 
 listen, we beg you, that our warning and your heedlessness and disobedience 
 bear not witness to your damnation and that irreparable harm befall not 
 this land because of your delay. Verily with great sorrow and with un- 
 speakable anguish of the heart we intend to notify and to announce to you 
 the many terrible errors and misdeeds of these Taborite priests." {Pribram 
 Zivot Knezi Taborskych — Life of the Taborite priests — in Vybor z Literatury 
 Ceske — Selections from Bohemian Literature, ii. pp. 409-430). 
 
362 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 serve the Calixtine rites, particularly with regard to com- 
 munion, which would have at its head a pious, virtuous clergy 
 not burdened with worldly riches, and which would employ 
 the national language in its religious services. If Pribram 
 attacked rather the Taborites than the partisans of Rome, it 
 was because he knew that in Bohemia, where the memory of 
 Hus was still venerated, the Roman church had for the time 
 lost all hold on the people, while he feared that the communism 
 and anarchy preached by some of the extreme Taborites 
 would alienate all pious and orderly men from the cause of 
 church-reform. Though Pribram has undoubtedly been very 
 unjustly attacked, it is impossible to overlook his many faults. 
 In his frequent controversies with archbishop Rokycan, a much 
 sterner opponent of the Church of Rome, Pribram appears 
 rather as an ambitious politician than as a preacher of 
 God's word. Hus was not destined to find a successor. Nor 
 Pribram nor any other Hussite divine possessed the truly 
 apostolic character, the indomitable fortitude, the intense 
 compassion, the spirit of absolute self-sacrifice which have 
 rendered Hus immortal. 
 
 To avoid repetitions I have here endeavoured to give a 
 brief outline of the teaching and organisation of the two great 
 Hussite parties. It is hardly necessary to say that not only 
 the Calixtine or utraquist church, which with various vicissi- 
 tudes existed up to the year 1620, when all religious freedom 
 : in Bohemia perished, but also the Taborite community, whose 
 < downfall occurred in 1452, underwent several changes. To 
 ; give a detailed account of these changes would be entirely 
 beyond the purpose of this work, which endeavours only to 
 note briefly the development of Hus's teaching. In 1420, 
 after the great victories of the Zizkov and Vysehrad, it was 
 hoped that a union between the contending Hussites might be 
 obtained. A meeting for this purpose took place in Prague 
 immediately after the battle of the Vysehrad " in the house of 
 Peter Zmrzlik, a citizen of Prague, who lived in the old town 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 363 
 
 near the Church of St. Jacob." x Peter Mladenovic acted as 
 spokesman for the University of Prague, and bishop Nicholas 
 of Pelhrimov for the Taborites. The conference proved 
 resultless. 
 
 After the departure of Sigismund from Bohemia, in the 
 autumn of 1420, the country was almost entirely subdued by 
 the armies of the Praguers and the Taborites, who sometimes 
 acted jointly, but more often waged war separately. Even 
 the towns of Plzen and Kutna Hora, strongholds of the 
 Romanist or German party, were obliged to submit. The 
 Bohemians now endeavoured to establish an orderly govern- 
 ment. Representatives of all Bohemian parties met at 
 Caslav in 1421, and as was customary in Bohemia at that 
 period, both ecclesiastical and political matters were dis- 
 cussed. It was agreed almost unanimously to reaffirm the 
 articles of Prague and to pronounce the deposition of Sigis- 
 mund as King of Bohemia. A provisional government, in- 
 cluding members of all parties, was formed, and it was decided 
 — though not without some opposition — to offer the Bohemian 
 crown to a Polish prince. Shortly afterwards Bohemia was 
 again attacked by Sigismund and so-called crusaders. Zizka's 
 great victory at Nebovid between Kutna Hora and Kolin on 
 January 6, 1422, again freed Bohemia from all foreign invaders- 
 Early in the same year Prince Korybut of Lithuania arrived 
 in Bohemia as representative of his uncle duke Witold of 
 Lithuania, whom the Bohemians had chosen as king. He 
 left the country, however, before the end of the year, recalled 
 by the Polish court through the influence of King Sigismund. 
 About this time Zizka, who had recently acted in union with 
 the Calixtine party, rejoined the extreme Taborites. He 
 appears to have believed that after the departure of Korybut 
 some of the utraquist nobles wished to recall Sigismund to 
 Bohemia. Zizka, on whom, as on most Bohemians of his 
 
 1 Palacky in his History of Bohemia (vol. iii.) gives an interesting account 
 of this conference. 
 
364 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 time, the Old Testament had great influence, appears to have 
 considered himself as an instrument chosen by providence to 
 avenge on Sigismund the murder of master John Hus, and he 
 always pursued the King of Hungary with relentless hatred. 
 Having the greatest general of the time at their head, the 
 Taborites no longer hesitated to wage open warfare against the 
 moderate or Calixtine party. What I have written has, I 
 hope, made it clear how great was the antagonism between 
 the Hussite parties, and at a warlike period, and among a war- 
 like people, such differences could only be settled by " blood 
 and iron." Zizka defeated the Calixtines, led by Cenek of 
 Wartemberg, in a great battle at Horic (April 27, 1423)- 
 Rumours of a threatened new invasion caused the Bohemians 
 to reunite, as indeed they at this period always did when 
 attacked by foreign enemies. A truce was concluded at 
 Konopist, which, reserving for future decision all questions of 
 dogma and ecclesiastical government, limited itself to declar- 
 ing that the questions concerning vestments and the decora- 
 tion of churches should be entrusted to the authorities of the 
 church, and did not depend on the law of God. So insuffi- 
 cient a settlement could not prove definite, and civil war again 
 broke out as soon as the danger of foreign invasion disap- 
 peared for a time. Zizka, victorious as ever, defeated the 
 Calixtines at Kralove Hradec and Malesov. 
 
 In the last year of Zizka's life, peace was re-established 
 between the contending Hussite parties, mainly through the 
 mediation of Prince Korybut, who had returned to Bohemia. 
 A great meeting took place on the " Spitalske pole " (spital 
 field) on the spot where the Prague suburb Karlin * now 
 stands. Zizka, whose usual moderation always abandoned 
 him when King Sigismund was in question, had sworn entirely 
 to destroy the city of Prague, which, as he believed, still har- 
 boured some adherents of the King of Hungary. The elo- 
 quence of the young priest John of Rokycan, afterwards arch- 
 
 1 In German, Karolinenthal. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 365 
 
 bishop of Prague — pacified him. Rokycan strongly and 
 successfully appealed to his feelings as a Slav and a Bohemian. 
 It was thus as a leader of the whole united Hussite army that 
 Zizka started on his last campaign. All the Taborite leaders, 
 the Praguers under Prince Korybut and the Calixtine nobles 
 joined Zizka's colours. It was indeed a fateful moment in 
 the history of Bohemia. The allies were determined to 
 establish the rule of the chalice in the sister-land Moravia. 
 The scanty and often-defeated Austrian troops of Sigismund's 
 son-in-law Albert, who held the country for the Germans, 
 could have offered little resistance. Prince Korybut had 
 frankly and sincerely accepted the articles of Prague, and the 
 formerly suspicious Bohemians had begun to trust his loyalty. 
 Had Moravia been conquered, the estates of that country 
 would undoubtedly, jointly with those of Bohemia, have 
 elected Korybut as king. Republican rule over an extensive 
 country being in the fifteenth century practically an impos- 
 sibility, this was certainly the one moment when the founda- 
 tion of a Slavic and utraquist state in Bohemia and Moravia 
 was possible. Fate, never favourable to Bohemia, willed it 
 otherwise. Before crossing the Moravian frontier, the 
 Hussites laid siege to the castle of Pribislav near that frontier. 
 During the siege Zizka was attacked by the plague and died 1 
 on October 11, 1424. His death put a stop to the campaign 
 in Moravia. The moderate Taborites adopted the name of 
 Orphans, thus indicating that it would be impossible to them 
 to replace their dead leader. 
 
 It is a proof of the military spirit that was general among 
 the Hussites that, deeply as they felt the loss of their leader, 
 they did not hesitate for a moment in continuing their resist- 
 ance to the ever-returning German invaders. In Prokop thes 
 Great and Prokop the Less they found leaders who were no 
 unworthy successors of Zizka. The Bohemians now no 
 
 1 An account of Zizka's death — founded on the narrative of a contemporary 
 chronicler — will be found in my History of Bohemian Literature, p. 152. 
 
366 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 longer contented themselves with repulsing the invaders, but 
 they successfully attacked the Germans and Austrians in their 
 own countries, though they never attempted permanently to 
 establish their rule in foreign lands. It now appearing evident 
 that Bohemia could not be subdued, both Sigismund and the 
 Roman church determined to enter into negotiations with the 
 Hussites. The negotiations were prolonged and encountered 
 many obstacles. After hesitating for a considerable time, 
 Pope Martin consented to the meeting of a general council of 
 the church at Basel. New difficulties, however, arose as the 
 Bohemians demanded that all Christian churches, that is the 
 members of the Greek and Armenian churches as well as those 
 who belonged to the Roman church, should be invited. The 
 Hussites also demanded special guarantees for the safety of 
 their envoys, who might otherwise meet with the fate of Hus. 
 A new and decisive defeat of the Romanists at Domazlice * 
 on August 14, 1531, accelerated the negotiations. The 
 Bohemians, who were assured of the safety of their envoys, 
 and who themselves wished for peace, determined to send 
 envoys to Basel, where the council had already assembled. 
 Their numerous embassy, at the head of which were Prokop 
 the Great and John of Rokycan, arrived at Basel on January 
 4, 1433. Very lengthy discussions at the council now began. 
 The papal representatives, now aware that some concessions 
 would have to be made to the Bohemians, wished to limit as 
 much as possible these concessions. The Hussites, on the 
 other hand, after an uninterrupted series of victories that had 
 lasted twelve years, saw no reason to assume a conciliatory 
 attitude. After a time, though negotiations were not entirely 
 broken off, the Bohemian envoys left Basel. They were, 
 however, accompanied by representatives of the council who 
 hoped to continue the negotiations in Bohemia. In July a 
 new embassy of the Bohemians formulated their demands in 
 four articles, which were finally accepted in a slightly modified 
 
 1 In German, Tauss. 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 367 
 
 form by the council and constituted the famed compacts, 
 which continued to be, up to 1567, a fundamental law of the 
 kingdom. The compacts declared that : — 
 
 I. The Holy Sacrament is to be given freely in both kinds 
 to all Christians in Bohemia and Moravia and to those else- 
 where who adhere to the faith of the two countries. 
 
 II. All mortal sins shall be punished and extirpated by 
 those whose office it is to do so. 
 
 III. The word of God is to be freely and truthfully 
 preached by the priests of the Lord and by worthy deacons. 
 
 IV. The priests in the time of the law of grace shall claim 
 ownership of no worldly possessions. 
 
 The compacts are obviously founded on the articles of 
 Prague, but they hardly satisfied the demands of even thej 
 most moderate utraquists. Some of the stipulations are very: 
 unclear. The one which limited the wealth of the clergy,, 
 always very reluctantly accepted by the church, was liable to 
 be interpreted in various manners. Indirectly this question 
 contributed considerably to the outbreak of the thirty years 
 war. 1 It is doubtful whether the compacts would have 
 generally been accepted by the Bohemians had it not been 
 that a political reaction took place in the country about this 
 time. The formerly powerful nobility of Bohemia had played 
 but an insignificant part in the latter years of the Hussite wars. 
 Many utraquist nobles therefore wished — if the freedom to 
 retain the revered chalice was granted them — to act in union 
 with the papal nobles and suppress the turbulent democracy 
 of Tabor. Almost the entire nobility of Bohemia, both utra- 
 quist and Romanist, and a few of the more conservative towns 1 
 formed a confederacy for this purpose, and their army decisively ' 
 defeated the Taborite forces, led by Prokop the Great, at- 
 Lipany on May 30, 1434. A general pacification rapidly" 
 followed the defeat of the advanced party. At a meeting at 
 
 1 See my Bohemia, a Historical Sketch, pp. 300-301. 
 
368 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Iglau the compacts were signed and accepted by both the 
 Bohemians and the representatives of the council, and the 
 Bohemians at last recognised Sigismund as their king. The 
 estates had some time previously elected John of Rokycan as 
 utraquist Archbishop of Prague. One of their conditions for 
 accepting Sigismund as king was his promise to use his in- 
 fluence on the pope to obtain the recognition of Rokycan as 
 archbishop. Treacherous as ever, Sigismund did not fulfil 
 his promise, and indeed secretly opposed the recognition of 
 the archbishop by the pope. John of Rokycan, however, con- 
 tinued to exercise his functions up to his death in 1471, and 
 the fact that the papal opposition to him also continued was 
 alone sufficient to render a true ecclesiastical pacification of 
 Bohemia impossible. 
 
 Sigismund's reign in Bohemia was very short. Already 
 sixty-eight eyars of age, he arrived at Prague for the first time 
 as king in August 1436, and he died in December 1437. He 
 was succeeded by his son-in-law, Albert Duke of Austria, of 
 whom the chroniclers only tell us laconically that " he was a 
 good man though a German." Albert only reigned about two 
 years, and a very turbulent period followed his death. 
 Albert's widow had indeed in February 1440 given birth to a 
 son Ladislas, surnamed " Posthumus," but the government of 
 *the country was in dispute between two rival parties among 
 the nobility. George of Podebrad acted as leader of the 
 utraquist — or, as Palacky at this period calls it — the national 
 party, while Ulrich of Rosenberg was the leader of the 
 Romanist, or Austrian party. In 1448, Podebrad obtained 
 the guardianship of Ladislas Posthumus. 
 
 Since the defeat of Tabor the utraquist church in Bohemia 
 had adopted a very retrograde policy. It endeavoured in every 
 way, except by means of absolute submission, to ingratiate 
 itself with the Roman see. These attempts were invariably 
 resultless. The Roman pontiff never recognised Rokycan 
 as archbishop, and Pope Nicholas V. formally repudiated 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 369 
 
 the compacts. While the cringing policy of the utraquist 
 church gained it no friends in Rome, it caused great discon- 
 tent in Bohemia. Many Bohemians seriously contemplated 
 a union with the Eastern Church, and these negotiations 
 were only ended in consequence of the conquest of Con- 
 stantinople by the Turks. Other opponents of the utraquist) 
 church favoured views not dissimilar to those formerly held by' 
 the men of Tabor. Thus arose the community of the Bohemian, 
 brethren which played so eminent a part during the last years 
 of Bohemian independence. Its moral originator was Peter 
 Chelcicky, 1 but the community was founded by a young monk 
 named Brother Gregory, a nephew of Archbishop Rokycan,| 
 and Michael, parish priest of Zamberk. 2 They first estab-', 
 lished themselves at Kunwald, a small village near Zamberk 
 
 During the short reign of Ladislas Posthumus, George of 
 Podebrad continued to govern Bohemia, and after his death 
 — he died in 1457, not yet eighteen years of age — Podebrad 
 was elected king. His reign was, particularly in its earlier 
 part, a time of great prosperity for Bohemia. Podebrad 
 being, however, and always remaining a firm adherent of the 
 utraquist church, he was confronted by the constant enmity 
 of the Roman church. It was through the influence of Rome f 
 that Podebrad became in the last years of his life involved in 
 a long and disastrous war with King Matthias of Hungary. > 
 In consequence of these wars, Podebrad, who had at one time 
 thought of founding a national dynasty, was obliged to use his 
 influence to assure the succession to the Bohemian throne to 
 Prince Vladislav, son of Casimir, King of Poland. Though 
 the Bohemian estates still considered the Bohemian throne an 
 elective one, they without much opposition accepted Vladi- 
 slav as king after the death of Podebrad in 147 1. Vladislav 
 was a firm adherent of the Church of Rome, but his influence 
 on Bohemian affairs was very slight, as after his election as 
 
 1 For Chelcicky, see my History of Bohemian Literature, pp. 1 53-171. 
 
 2 In German, Senftenberg. 
 
 2 A 
 
370 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 King of Hungary in 1490, he resided almost entirely in that 
 country. Vladislav was succeeded by his son Louis, who had 
 been crowned as King of Bohemia when but three years of 
 age. He also succeeded his father as King of Hungary, and 
 when defending that country against the Turks he was killed 
 at the battle of Mohac, when but twenty years of age. 
 
 The estates of Bohemia, after prolonged negotiations, chose 
 j as successor to King Louis his brother-in-law Ferdinand, Arch- 
 1 duke of Austria. Though two princes of the House of Habs- 
 burg had previously ruled for brief periods over Bohemia, 
 Ferdinand's election marks the accession of the House of 
 Habsburg to the Bohemian throne. Simultaneously with this 
 foundation of a new dynasty, the almost extinct Romanist 
 creed again began to gather strength. There is, of course, a 
 close connection between the two events, for even at that time 
 the unwritten but almost unbroken alliance between the 
 House of Habsburg and the Roman see had long been in exist- 
 
 !ence. Ferdinand, a prince of exceptional astuteness, to whose 
 talent historians have never done sufficient justice, from the 
 moment of his coronation endeavoured to strengthen the 
 Roman cause in Bohemia. He endeavoured, though with 
 little success, to gain for his side the more conservative Calix- 
 tines. Since the appearance of Lutheranism in the neighbour- 
 ing German lands, these men had become somewhat isolated. 
 The more advanced utraquists had adopted many of Luther's 
 views, and the community of the Bohemian brethren were yet 
 further from the old Calixtine teaching. Yet Ferdinand 
 found little sympathy even among the Hussites nearest to the 
 Church of Rome, and these attempts, which began soon after 
 Ferdinand's accession in 1526, were afterwards discontinued. 
 A foolish and unsuccessful attempt made by the Bohemian 
 estates in 1547 to assist the German Protestants who were 
 engaged in war with Ferdinand's brother Charles V., gave the 
 king the desired occasion for acting with more vigour in 
 Bohemia. The Bohemian towns were deprived of most of 
 
THE HUSSITE WARS 371 
 
 their privileges. This undoubtedly proves how crafty was 
 Ferdinand's policy. The Bohemian nobles had sometime 
 previously established serfdom in Bohemia, thus rendering 
 helpless the peasants who had supplied the Hussites with their 
 best soldiers. Ferdinand's decrees now rendered the towns- 
 men defenceless. As defenders of the nation and its church 
 there remained only the knights and nobles, whom Ferdi- 
 nand's grandson was afterwards to subdue. Pursuing his 
 policy, Ferdinand in 1556 established the Jesuits in Bohemia, 
 and in 1562 the Roman archbishopric of Prague was re- 
 established after an interval of more than a century. 
 
 The re-establishment of the Roman church made little 
 progress during the reign of Maximilian, who after Ferdi- 
 nand's death in 1564 succeeded to the Bohemian throne. 
 Maximilian's son, Rudolph II., the second who became King 
 of Bohemia in 1576, also at first showed little interest in 
 religious matters, and during the prolonged struggle between 
 him and his brother Matthias both brothers made use of the 
 religious divergences to further their own ambitious purposes. 
 Rudolph in 1609 very reluctantly signed the "Letter of 
 Majesty," which granted the Protestants — a name that at 
 this period included Lutherans, members of the Bohemian 
 brotherhood, and utraquists — considerable privileges. Rudolph, 
 as the so-called " incursion of the men of Passau " proves, 
 had determnied to free himself from this onerous obligation 
 as soon as circumstances permitted it, and the same may 
 be said of his brother Matthias, though he confirmed the 
 letter of majesty when he succeeded his brother in 1612. Both • 
 Rudolph and Matthias being childless, Archduke Ferdinand 
 of Styria, a grandson of Ferdinand I., became heir to the; 
 Bohemian throne, and under great pressure the majority of 
 the Bohemian estates recognised him as such in 1617. Ferdi- 
 nand, who had for some time ruled over Styria, had in 
 that country relentlessly persecuted and driven from the 
 land all who did not profess the Roman creed. He made 
 
372 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 no secret of his intention of pursuing the same policy in 
 Bohemia after his succession to the throne. The Bohemians 
 had therefore either tacitly to accept their fate, as the Styrians 
 had done, or to rise in arms before Ferdinand should have 
 ascended the throne. It is beyond my purpose to describe 
 this rising and the subsequent campaigns. At the battle of 
 the Bila Hora — November 8, 1620 — the religious freedom 
 and for a time also the nationality of Bohemia perished. The 
 Roman religion was forcibly re-established, and Hus's influence 
 on the development of Bohemia ends here. Yet will the 
 memory of Hus always be sacred to Bohemians. Though the 
 conflicts of the present day turn on questions of politics and 
 nationality, not of religion, the memory of Hus and of the 
 Hussite wars has often strengthened and roused to new efforts 
 those Bohemians who felt inclined to despair of the future of 
 their country. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 A CONTEMPORARY BOHEMIAN ACCOUNT OF THE 
 DEATH OF HUS 
 
 That indefatigable searcher of documents appertaining to ancient 
 Bohemian history, Mr. Adolphus Patera, formerly head-librarian of 
 the Bohemian museum, about the year 1888 discovered in the 
 library of Prince Lobkowitz at Roudnice a contemporary Bohemian 
 account of the death of Hus that was previously entirely unknown. 
 I had intended merely to refer to this account briefly, while telling 
 the story of the death of the master according to the well-known 
 account of his disciple, Peter Mladenovic, which will never be 
 superseded. I found, however, that such references retarded and 
 impeded the narrative, and I have therefore translated for the 
 benefit of those interested in the matter the Bohemian paper which 
 Mr. Patera read at the general meeting of the Bohemian Society of 
 Sciences on April 9, 1888. Mr. Patera stated : In a paper manu- 
 script contained in the library of Prince Lobkowitz at Roudnice 
 (vi. Fg. 60) which begins with the " Dispute of Intellect and 
 Conscience on the worthy manner of receiving the Body of God," 1 
 I found among other matter also an " Account of the Trial and 
 Burning of Master John Hus." In the present — nineteenth — 
 century some one wrote on the cover: " The following little work 
 is known under the name of Peter Mladenovic's Life of John Hus, 
 and J. Jungmann 2 in his History of Bohemian Literature, 1849, 
 p. 71, n. 159, maintains that this notice is derived mainly from the 
 writings of Hus about himself." Both these conjectures are, 
 however, not founded on truth. We also can give no credit to the 
 view that the writer was an eye-witness of the events which he 
 describes, though he himself affirms this, writing of himself, " I 
 have briefly noted down everything concerning the events that 
 befell in the Suabian country and its capital called Constance, for 
 
 1 An ancient Bohemian religious pamphlet. 
 
 2 Joseph Jungmann (b. 1773 — 1847) author of a large work on Bohemian 
 literature. (See my History of Bohemian Literature, pp 362-371.) 
 
 373 
 
374 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 some have taken away and some added. But I have noted down 
 all that I saw, and at which I was present." It appears more 
 likely that he noted down what he heard among the people from 
 the mouths of some persons. The manuscript of Roudnice pre- 
 serves to us rather the tradition concerning the judgment and 
 burning of Hus which was current in Bohemia in the fifteenth 
 century, and which was written down by some admirer of Hus. 
 The manuscript of Roudnice dates from about the second third * of 
 the fifteenth century. In the same manuscript is preserved on 
 page 100&-103& a short Bohemian catechism which differs slightly 
 from the catechism printed by Palacky, Documenta, 2 magistri 
 Joannis Hus, Prague, 1869, pp. 703-708, and which Dr. J. Muller 
 translated into German in his work, Die Deutschen Katechismen der 
 bohmischen Bruder, pp. 90-95 (Monumenta Germaniae paedagogica, 
 vol. vi.). 
 
 The contents of the account are given with the greatest faithful- 
 ness in accordance with the original. The necessary interpunctua- 
 tion has been added, and the prepositions and other particles have 
 been separated from the following word. The account runs as 
 follows : — 
 
 In the year since the birth of the son of God fourteen hundred and 
 fifteen, I have briefly noted down the events that befell in the Sua- 
 bian country and in its capital, which is called Constance, for some 
 have taken away (i.e. omitted facts) and some (have) added. But I 
 have noted down what I saw, and at which I was present. When 
 the servitor of Venceslas, King of Bohemia 3 arrived, he wrote in the 
 evening a letter to the famed and celebrated master Jakubek, 
 surnamed " of Stribro." 4 Seeing this, Master John Kardinal 6 
 said: What dost thou write, master of the blood of God and of 
 communion with the chalice ? With difficulty will the Christianity 
 of the present age accept this. Knowest thou not that we must 
 stand to-morrow before the masters of all Christianity, who will 
 greatly oppose, declaring us guilty because of this (i.e. the intro- 
 duction of communion in the two kinds). On the next morning 
 the legates, cardinals, the bishops of all Christianity, the King of 
 Hungary as emperor of the (Roman) empire questioned him (Hus) 
 saying: This assembly is very grateful to thee for coming to us; 
 hadst thou failed to do so, much good would have been destroyed. 
 
 1 That is to say, between 1433 and 1466. 
 
 8 The well-known collection of documents, which has been frequently 
 quoted in this work. 
 »Hus. 
 
 4 Magister Jacobellus, the famed theologian. 
 6 The great friend of Hus, and one of his companions on his last journey. 
 
APPENDIX 375 
 
 And Master John Hus answered saying: Often have I wished to 
 see you in person and converse with you, but I had not such an 
 opportunity (as now). I have appealed to you and sent my 
 magisters (to represent me), Master John of Jesenic, Master Marcus 
 and other magisters, but to them you did not grant a hearing 
 before you. Rather did you oppose them with cries and insults, 
 imprisonment and frowns, but I, commending myself to the Lord 
 God, preached the word of God, wishing only that I could with my 
 own hands lift up all men to heaven, were it but possible. The 
 Bishop of Riga arose among the council, and spoke saying : Master 
 John, this assembly convened by the Holy Ghost says: Wilt thou 
 of thy own account do this (namely), not be sophistical, obey, and 
 accept instruction ? He answered and spoke saying : Give me the 
 lowest of your assembly, I am ready to accept with thanks all that 
 will be good. They answered saying: Fifty-two masters have 
 insisted on this, that thou shalt declare thy preaching, councils, 
 and confessions to be heretical, and teach the contrary. Master 
 John Hus answered and said: That was fine teaching of this 
 learned assembly. Did not that young weak girl St. Catherine 1 
 act thus, that she led fifty magisters to the Lord and I, poor and 
 insufficient man, cannot even convince one. Then the Bishop of 
 Lodi arose and spoke saying: If thou wilt not yield and obey, the 
 spiritual arm will submit you to its discipline, place you in prison, 
 and endeavour to mitigate your errors and heresy. Then they 
 placed him with the barefooted monks under the Rhine where he 
 was put in a prison-chamber which was so narrow that he could 
 hardly stretch himself, and which had but a small window, so that 
 he could obtain a small quantity 2 of water or wine, for in those 
 countries there is no beer; and while in prison he wrote of his 
 imprisonment to the faithful Bohemians who loved God, to the men 
 of Prague, Zatec, 3 Loun, and also Plzen saying : Pray fervently for 
 me to God begging him to grant me constancy, for I am not better 
 than St. Peter who three times disowned the Lord Jesus. If I 
 (also) disown (him) do not use me ill (blame me), dear Bohemians 
 who are without blame before God and men. But if" we are com- 
 panions in affliction with Christ, we will also rejoice together with 
 Christ. We (will not be) as murderers and robbers, who suffer for 
 
 1 A reference to the well-known legend of St. Catherine. It is said that 
 fifty pagan philosophers visited her to expound the erroneousness of Chris- 
 tianity, but that her eloquence was so great that she converted them all to 
 the Christian creed. 
 
 * In the original " zajdlyk," a measure of liquor. The word, in German, 
 " seidel," continued in use up to recent times, 
 
 * In German, Saaz. 
 
376 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 their deeds, but we will with Christ suffer guiltlessly that we may 
 obtain eternal life. For Solomon says that God behaves to men as 
 a father to his little sons, punishing them, though he loves them, 
 as a father loves his sons and wishes not to behold their perdition. 
 Graciously hast Thou (Jesus) deigned to look down upon us, giving 
 strange gifts, a narrow prison, an evil couch, vile food, cruel fetters, 
 toothache, dysentery and fever, that, as the whole body sinned, 
 offending its God, thus also the whole body should receive the 
 punishment given it by God. Then came Master Stephen surnamed 
 Palicz x the parish priest of Kourim, and said to him (Hus) : Lend 
 briefly thy ear to what I will say. Master John Hus answered and 
 said: Say, dear brother, something good to comfort me." Master 
 Stephen answered and said: I wonder at that which I have read 
 according to Scripture; since the day of the birth of the son of 
 God, there has not been so hardened a heretic as thou art. Master 
 John Hus answered and said: May God not account this to thee 
 as a sin, for thou hast preached the gospel from the same pulpit 
 as I, and thou hast preached the true faith. But already at the 
 time of my judgment hast thou declared me to be a heretic, may 
 God forgive thee thy sins. Then came the Bohemian nobles, 
 knights of the Hungarian king, Lord Venceslas of Duba, otherwise 
 of Lestno, and Lord John of Chlum, and they spoke saying: Listen 
 but for a short time to that which we will say to thee. We are 
 laymen and know not scripture (sufficiently) that we could counsel 
 thee in accordance with it ; but according to common sense we 
 counsel thee : if thou art guilty of these errors and heresies, recant 
 them and save thy life. But if thou art not guilty — and that thy 
 conscience knoweth well — then entrust thyself in great confidence 
 to God. Then Master John Hus answering said: I would not 
 stand before God with even the slightest stain on my conscience. 
 You have given me better advice than could a master, who had 
 studied in the schools. 
 
 In the month of June, in the octave of St. Peter and Paul, 2 
 they at last decided to deprive him of his life, if he did not yield. 
 In the church of St. Paul, the principal one of that city, they placed 
 in a spot in the middle of the church which was surrounded by 
 planks some chairs and a table on which were laid his vestments, 
 that he might be despoiled of the dignity of priesthood. Then the 
 Hungarian king, having on his head the golden imperial crown, sat 
 down on his splendid throne between two princes ; Prince Hanus, 
 
 1 Stephen Palec, the famous — or rather infamous — informer. 
 
 2 Old style. The martyrdom of Hus took place on the 6th of July new 
 style. 
 
APPENDIX 377 
 
 the younger 1 sat at his right holding in his hand the golden apple 
 with a cross as emblem of his dignity. Another prince was at his 
 left holding aloft a bare sword. When they led Master John Hus 
 out of prison, he was so weak that his bones clang to his skin, 
 because of the many illnesses from which he had suffered in prison. 
 Master John Hus bowed down before the body of God (on the 
 altar) and prayed, but to the people he only showed his respect by 
 (bowing) his head. For it is written thus : Before God humble 
 your heart, but before the great and the prince bend your head ; 
 and he (Hus) stood before them, folding his hands, and from his 
 right foot the fetters had not yet been struck off. One of the 
 assembly arose and spoke saying : This assembly which has met by 
 order of the Holy Ghost bids thee to allow thyself to be instructed. 
 Master John answered: I still beg for instruction, but up to the 
 present time I have received none. I am ready to die for that 
 which I have preached in accordance with the holy prophets, the 
 holy scriptures, the words of the holy apostles, the fathers of the 
 church and the holy martyrs, for better doctrine have I none. 
 Oh, you have summoned me (before your tribunal) and oppress me 
 unrighteously with your might ; but I summon you all in a century 
 before the Lord God. Then immediately the Cardinal of Cambray 
 sprang up and said : John Hus, obdurate heretic, this will not avail 
 thee : thou wilt not escape from our hands. Master John Hus 
 answered and spoke : It is indeed a fine holy council ; three hundred 
 harlots have followed it (come with it). Your earthly God you 
 once called John the Pope, Balthasar XXIII., saying that he was 
 an earthly God (God upon earth) and could not sin. But when 
 by divine permission the secular power seized him you confessed 
 that he was an evil sinner and simonist, the worst of heretics, and 
 you hold him in the Castle of Gottlieben ; and what this council 
 did in summer, that will be known when winter comes ; they will 
 fly away like storks, and their enactments will be vain. He then 
 looked at the King of Hungary, and spoke saying : King, that for 
 which thou strivest thou shalt not obtain, for through thy miserable 
 artifices thou shalt lose thy life ; that for which thou strivest thou 
 shalt not obtain. Thou wilt be neither Roman Emperor nor 
 King in Bohemia. 2 Hearing this the Hungarian king blushed with 
 shame and hung down his head; then they immediately read out 
 
 1 The person thus described is Louis Count Palatine, who carried the 
 imperial globe here designated as the " golden apple." 
 
 2 These (false) predictions, here wrongly attributed to Hus, seem to point 
 to the early date of the manuscript. Though he always claimed the Bohemian 
 throne, Sigismund was only recognised as King of Bohemia in 1436. 
 
378 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 some articles against him (Hus) according to the deposition of some 
 witnesses mentioned above or mentioned afterwards, and they 
 said: For this we have (as witnesses) two canons of the Vysehrad, 
 two of the castle (Hradcany), two masters of the University of 
 Prague, two aldermen of the old town, that thou didst say in one 
 of thy sermons that the mother of God is like any other woman. 
 And bursting into tears and protesting, he said: Far be this from 
 me, miserable and weak man. Of the Virgin Mary I believe and 
 hold that from the beginning she was a pure virgin, that after the 
 birth she remained a pure virgin and that she remained without 
 any corruption of her body. I believe also that she was raised to 
 heaven, and that she is the highest person in heaven and therefore 
 above the angels, above the prophets, above the apostles, above 
 the martyrs. After he had professed his faith about the mother 
 of God, he immediately ended. Then they spoke saying : Obdurate 
 heretic, deserving to be condemned, sentenced to death and sent 
 to hell, thou hast said : When a priest consecrates the body of God, 
 raises it to his head and lays it on the corporal 1 there does not 
 remain only material bread, that is to say it in Latin, pants materialis 
 vel substantialis. And bursting into tears and protesting he said : 
 Far be this from me, miserable and weak man. This do I believe 
 and hold, concerning the body of God, when an ordained priest 
 according to regulations • approaches the altar piously and says the 
 words (of consecration), there immediately remains the whole body 
 of Christ, born of the Virgin Mary, martyred on the cross and now 
 sitting on the right hand of God Father, the Almighty, as long as 
 the sacrament (the holy wafer), its whiteness and roundness, are at 
 all visible. Concerning the third article the witnesses said: Hear, 
 obdurate heretic, deserving to be condemned, thou hast said that thou 
 art the fourth person of the Holy Trinity (sic). Protesting he said: 
 Far be this from me, miserable and weak man, that I should think so 
 unwisely. This do I believe and hold concerning the Holy Trinity. 
 I declare — and for this I am ready to die — that the three names, 
 the three persons are one, one power, that is the Father, the Son, 
 and the Holy Ghost ; these three are one without difference, and 
 I by no means add a fourth to them. Then they brought a 
 paper crown, yards in height, on which three devils were painted in 
 black. Seeing it Master John Hus took it in his hands and placed 
 it on his head. And he said: Oh, crucified Jesus, meek lamb, 
 Thou hast received a crown of thorns, bloody and piercing to the 
 brain on Thy sacred head, for the sake of me, sinful one, and I 
 now take on me this soft and light crown for Thy truth and because 
 1 The cloth used in churches for covering the elements of the Eucharist. 
 
APPENDIX 370 
 
 of my earthly sins that I may timely escape them. Then imme- 
 diately they brought a chain and Master John Hus spoke saying: 
 Oh, crucified Jesus, meek lamb, Thou wert by the bishops of the 
 old law bound during a whole night, mocked and imprisoned. This 
 light chain I gladly receive for Thy truth; then immediately the 
 bishops spoke, saying: Wrongly hath this heretic enjoyed the 
 dignity of priesthood, without permission of the Roman church 
 hath he preached God's word, he hath dared to say mass. There- 
 fore let his priestly dignity be destroyed, let his tonsure be shaved 
 off as if he were a madman ; others said, let it be cut out with 
 knives ! And he (Hus) smiling, spoke and said : Oh, how quickly 
 the bishops of the old law agreed about the scoffing and mocking 
 of my dear Lord, and ye cannot agree about me, miserable and 
 weak man. Forgive them, oh God, for they know not what they 
 do. Answering him the Cardinal of Cambray spoke saying : Suffi- 
 ciently, Hus, hast thou screamed in the city of Prague, leading 
 the common people to error and heresy, therefore wilt thou not be 
 allowed to do so here. Then they immediately dress him in mass- 
 vestments, place him for derision in their midst before the high 
 altar, put a silver chalice with a paten in his hand and speak saying : 
 Oh accursed Judas, who hast deserted the peaceful ranks of this 
 holy assembly, and hast gone out to join the ranks of the Jews, we 
 take to-day from thee the chalice in which thou hast offered up the 
 blood of Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and thy soul with thy 
 lord devils l we send to damnation. Answering them, Master John 
 Hus said : And I hope that I will to-day drink of the chalice in the 
 heavenly kingdom with the martyrs and the Lord Christ. You 
 commend my soul to the devil, but I commend it to the Lord 
 Christ. Then they took from him the mass- vestments, and placed 
 him in their midst. Then immediately the Bishop of Lodi who 
 was called (a) monk stood on a chair and preached a sermon on 
 heresy, taking (for his text) the words of St. Paul in the eleventh 
 chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, " because of unbelief they 
 were broken off." The body of John Hus, the unbeliever (the 
 bishop said) is worse than the body of Judas, for Judas, having 
 betrayed the Lord Jesus, thus helped all men to salvation, but 
 this man has committed a greater sin than Judas by contaminating 
 the holy Roman church. Therefore hath the spiritual hand nothing 
 more to do with him, and surrenders him to the temporal hand, 
 that the temporal hand may purify his errors and heresies by the 
 flames of death. Then they immediately begin to burn some little 
 
 1 Probably an allusion to the three devils painted on the cap that had 
 been placed on the head of Hus. 
 
380 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 books, similar to his (books) and condemn them for heresy. 
 Master John Hus answered and said: How could you condemn my 
 Bohemian writings, and disparage them, as being heretical, as you 
 had not read them ! even had you wished it, you would have been 
 unable to do so, for there were here (men of) many nations, Hun- 
 garians, Germans, Italians, Frenchmen, Englishmen, and (men of) 
 other nations. Except John, Bishop of Litomysl, none could 
 understand (the Bohemian writings) ; for he is a Bohemian. Then 
 Master John Hus recited an offertory which is usually sung at mass 
 saying : Arise, Lady Mother, queen of heaven, beg of your son good 
 things for us ; then as he had learnt German in prison he spoke to 
 the common people saying: Thus do I believe and hold with 
 regard to the intercession of the Virgin Mary. Then the common 
 people began to whisper among themselves: " This man professes 
 good things, he should not die, if he acted thus in Bohemia." Re- 
 marking this the King of Hungary with his instigators, 1 his (Hus's) 
 bitterest enemies, spoke saying: Perhaps he will lead astray the 
 common people by his fine speeches to (believe) his errors and 
 heresies, and he ordered the beadles and constables to whip the 
 common people away from him with whips and clubs. Meanwhile 
 he (the king) himself rises with the executioners, bishops and 
 prelates, and he orders Prince Hanus, Lord of Klem the younger 2 
 to rise and hand him (Hus) over to the executioner. Prince Hanus, 
 Lord of Klem, the younger, gave the golden apple with the cross, 
 the emblem of his dignity, to another prince and handed him (Hus) 
 over to the executioner. Then while twelve bishops read holy 
 prayers, Master John Hus professed the common faith (saying) : 
 Thus do I hold and believe concerning the common Christian 
 faith; and they led him out by the gate (on the road to) the 
 Gottlieben Castle, where the road runs close to the Rhine, and they 
 drive a wooden stake deep into the earth. Seeing this, Master 
 John knelt down and prayed saying: Lord God, deign, I beg 
 you, to grant me your holy help while I end my life on this couch. 
 The crown falls from his head, and he, seeing the three devils 
 painted on it, smiles, saying: These will not harm me, for I fear 
 not the powers of hell. Then one of the masters said: Always 
 have heretics the habit of smiling, be their fate ever so evil. Place 
 again, master, on his heretical body that crown, that he may die 
 
 1 This refers to the Bishop of Litomysl, Michael de causis, Palec and the 
 other Bohemian priests, opponents of church -reform, who were then at 
 Constance. 
 
 2 The author writes in German " her czu klem." Rupert, Count Palatine, 
 was generally known by the sobriquet of Klem. The writer here describes 
 his son Louis, whom he wrongly calls " Hanus,"— as " Klem the younger." 
 
APPENDIX 381 
 
 separated from the wholesome heart of the holy church. One 
 standing near said : Let a confessor be given to this man. But he 
 (Hus) said that he had already secretly confessed in prison and that 
 it was therefore not necessary now. Then a priest on a fine horse 
 and clad in red silk (said) : It is not seemly to give to a heretic 
 the sacrament of the holy church, let him die like a dog ! Then he 
 begged that his gaolers might be allowed to approach him. He 
 thanked them and having blessed them he said : Your reward will 
 be the Lord God in the hour of your death. Then the executioner 
 bound him, standing, to the stake, with one chain round his head, 
 another round the middle, and a third round his feet, and he sur- 
 rounded his body with dry faggots of vine up to his chin. Then 
 Prince Hanus, Lord of Klem the younger, and the Count of Puphaim 
 (Pappenheim), the imperial marshal spoke, saying: Recant, and 
 save your life, or let some small child recant for you. Answering, 
 Master John Hus said : As my lips have since my childhood never 
 intentionally lied, assuredly the mouth of another will not lie for 
 me. They then waved their hands asunder (as a signal to the 
 executioner) and went away, saying: Burn, master, thou art 
 obdurate in thy heresy, it is sure that thou wilt not give way. 
 When the executioner set fire (to the stake) a great flame with 
 smoke arose. Master John Hus cried out to God with great con- 
 fidence and said : Christ, son of the living God, have mercy on me, 
 sinner. Then taking a hymn of the holy David in the psalter, he 
 sang one psalm, saying: Lord God Almighty, according to thy 
 great and manifold compassion, have mercy on me, sinner. Then 
 he still moved his lips, saying the Lord's prayer, and remained in 
 the flames for the time you would take to go from the town of 
 Prague across the bridge to the other side x as far as the great 
 church of the Virgin Mary ; and then he gave up the ghost. Then 
 the fire sank, the body was burnt down and only the stake remained 
 standing. Then the Lord of Klem ordered three cart-loads of wood 
 to be brought and the remains to be broken up into fragments, 
 that the heretical Bohemians might not obtain possession of his 
 bones and venerate them as relics. Then they threw his garments 
 and the boots which he had worn in prison into the fire, roasted his 
 heart on a pointed stake and turned everything, even his bones, 
 into dust. Then they dig up the earth deeply 2 load (the remains) 
 on carts and, as the Rhine was near, scatter them in the water 
 saying: Swim, Hus, to thy God. Then assembling the beadles 
 
 1 The Mala Strana (" small quarter ") of the town of Prague, situated on 
 the left bank of the river Vltava. 
 
 2 To prevent the Bohemians carrying away morsels of earth as relics. 
 
382 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 he (the Count Palatine), gave them orders with a loud voice (saying) : 
 He who shall mourn over this heretic, or follow him, or hold to 
 him, to him shall the same be done or worse, and then they all 
 went their way. 
 
 I have translated this curious document as literally as the 
 rugged Bohemian of the original permitted. The document 
 obviously dates from the time of the Hussite wars, and represents 
 Hus as he appeared to the warriors of that period. The account 
 of the martyrdom of the master is very similar to that of the 
 eye-witness, Mladenovic. Greater stress is laid on the brutalities 
 committed against Hus, and it is attempted — contrary to facts — to 
 connect Hus very closely with the origins of utraquism. The 
 writer was a Bohemian well acquainted with Prague — as is proved 
 by his quaint allusion to the duration of the martyrdom of Hus. 
 He had little knowledge of Germany, as is proved by various 
 mistakes concerning German personalities. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 I have only attempted to note the names of some of the most 
 prominent works that have been written on Hus, and of some to 
 which I have devoted particular attention. The literature dealing 
 with Hus and the cognate works referring to Wycliffe, which I 
 quite omit, amount to an enormous mass of volumes. I here only 
 mention some books referring mainly to Hus's life and the history 
 of Bohemia at his time. I therefore do not include works like 
 Bishop Creighton's History of the Papacy, though it contains — next 
 to Mr. Wratislaw's — the best account of Hus's career written in 
 English, or Dr. Harnack's Dogmengeschichte, though the origin of 
 some of Hus's views is expounded here more clearly than anywhere 
 else. The Bohemian periodicals entitled, Journal of the Bohemian 
 Museum, Bohemian Historical Journal, Yearbook of the Bohemian 
 Society of Sciences, and Yearbook of the Bohemian Academy, contain 
 a vast amount of little-known information on Hus and his times. 
 Messrs. Jirecek, Goll, Nedoma, Novotny, Patera, Gindely, Kalousik 
 and many others have contributed valuable articles to these 
 reviews on the subject of Hus. 
 
 Ashbach, Dr. Joseph. Geschichte Kaiser Sigmunds. 
 
 Bezold, Friedrich von. Zur Geschichte des Hussitenthumes. 
 
 Brezova, Laurentius de. Historia Hussitica, ed. Goll. Fontes 
 rerum Bohemicarum V. 
 
 Caro, J. A us der Kanzlei Kaiser Sigismunds. 
 
 Casopis Muse a. Kralovstvi Ceskeho (Journal of the Royal 
 Bohemian Musem). 
 
 Cesky Casopis. Historicky (Bohemian Historical Journal). 
 
 Denis, Professeur Ernest. Huss et la Guerre des Hussites. 
 
 Dolanensis, Stephen of Dolein. Works published by Pez The- 
 saurus Anecdotorum, T. IV. : Medulla Tritici sive Anti- 
 wycleffus, Antihussus, Dialogus volatilis inter aucam et passer em, 
 Liber epistolaris ad Hussitas. 
 
 Dvorsky, Frantisek. Pocatky Kalicha a Artikule Prazske (The 
 beginnings of the chalice and the articles of Prague). 
 
 3*3 
 
384 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Flajshans. Pisemnictvi Ceske (Bohemian Literature). 
 
 Flajshans. Mistr Jan Hus. 
 
 Flajshans. Litevayni cinnost Mestva Jana Husi (Literary activity 
 of Master John Hus). 
 
 Goll, Professor Jaroslav. Cechy a Pyusy v styedoveku (Bohemia 
 
 and Prussia in the middle ages). 
 Gozzadini, Giovanni. Nanne Gozzadini e Baldassayye Cossa. 
 
 Hardt, Hermann v. der. Magnum (Ecumenicum Constantiense 
 concilium. 
 
 Helfert, Josef Alexander. Hus und Hieronymus. 
 
 Hofler, Dr. K. Geschichtschyeibey dey Hussitischen Bewegung in 
 
 Bohmen. 
 HOfler, Dr. K. Magistev Johannes Hus. 
 Hus, Magister. For editions of works of Hus and translations, see 
 
 chapter X. 
 Janov, Matthias de. Regulae Veteyis et Novi Testamenti, ed. 
 
 Kybal. Only one volume has as yet appeared. 
 
 Jirecek, Josef. Rukovet k Dejinam Liteyatuvy Ceske (Handbook of 
 
 the history of Bohemian literature). 
 Kalousek, Dr. Jcsef. Histoyii Kalicha v dobach pyedhusitskych 
 
 (On the history of the chalice in prehussite times). 
 
 Kalousek, Dr. Josef. potyebe pyohloubiti vedomosti Husovi 
 (On the necessity of further study of Hus). 
 
 Krummel, Leopold. Geschichte dey bohmischen Refoymation. 
 Krummel, Leopold. Utyaquisten und Taboyeten. 
 Kybal, Dr. Vlastimil. M. Mate] z Janova. 
 v Lechler, Dr. Gotthard. Johann Hus. 
 Lenfant, Jaques. Histoiye du Concile de Constance. 
 Lenz, Dr. Antonin. Uceni Mistya Jana Husi (The teaching of 
 
 Master John Hus). 
 Loserth, Dr. Johann. Hus und Wicliff. 
 Lutzow, Count. Bohemia, a Histoyical Sketch. 
 Lutzow, Count. A Histoyy of Bohemian Liteyatuye. 
 Lutzow, Count. Pyague — mediaeval town series. 
 Lutzow, Count. Lectmes on the Histovians of Bohemia. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 385 
 
 Morfill, Professor W. R. Slavonic Literature. 
 
 Nejedly, Dr. Zdenck. Prameny k synodam Strany Prazske a 
 Taborske (Documents concerning the synods of the parties of 
 the Praguers and Taborites). 
 
 Nejedly, Dr. Zdenek), Dejepsis Predhusitskeho zpevit v Cechach 
 (History of prehussite singing in Bohemia). 
 
 Nejedly, Dr. Zdenek. Pocatky Husitskeho zpevu (The beginnings 
 of Hussite singing). 
 
 Palacky, Frantisek. Geschichte von Bohmen. 
 
 Palacky, Frantisek. Die Geschichte des Hussitenthumes and Prof. 
 Hofler. 
 
 Palacky, Frantisek. Documenta Mag. Joannis Hus vitam, doc- 
 trinam, cansam illuslrantia. 
 
 Palacky, Frantisek. Urkundliche Beitrage zur Geschichte des 
 Hussitenkrieges. 
 
 Richenthal, Ulrich von. Chronik des Constanzer Concils. 
 Herausgegeben von Michael Richard Buck. 
 
 Riezler, Sigmund. Die literarischen Widersacher der Papste. 
 
 Schwab, Dr. Johann Baptist. Johannes Gerson. 
 
 Scriptores rerum Bohemicarum. Cura et impensis regiae 
 Societatis Scientarium Bohemicae. 
 
 Stitny, Tomas. Besedni Reci (Learned Entertainments), ed. 
 Hattala. 
 
 Stitny, Tomas. obecnych vecech krestanskych (Of general 
 Christian matters), ed. Erben. 
 
 Sylvius, Aeneas. Historia Bohemica. 
 
 Theobaldus, M. Zacharias. Hussitenkrieg, darinen begriffen Das 
 Leben, die Lehr, der Todt M. J. Hussi. 
 
 Tomek, Professor Wacslaw Wladiwoj. Dejepis Mesta Prahy 
 (History of the town of Prague). 
 
 Tomek, Professor Wacslaw Wladiwoj. Deje university Prazske 
 (History of the university of Prague). 
 
 Tomek, Professor Wacslaw Wladiwoj. Jan Zizka. 
 
 Tosti, Don Luigi. Geschichte des Konziliums von Konstanz. 
 
 Tschackert, Dr. Paul. Peter von Ailli. 
 
 Vestnik ceske akademie (Yearbook of the Bohemian Academy). 
 
 2 B 
 
386 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 Vestnik ceske spolecnosti nauk (Journal of the Bohemian 
 Society of Sciences). 
 
 Vybor z Literatury ceske (Selections from Bohemian Literature) . 
 
 Wessenberg, J. H. v. Die grossen Kirchenversammlungen des 
 i$ten und i6ten Jahrhunderts. 
 
 Winter, Dr. Zikmund. Zivot cirkevni v bechach (Church life in 
 
 Bohemia). 
 Winter, Dr. Zikmund. Deje vysokych skol Prazskych (History of 
 
 the high schools (university) of Prague. 
 
 Winter, Dr. Zikmund. zivote na vysokych skolach Pragskych 
 (Life at the high schools (university) of Prague). 
 
 Workman, Herbert B. M. A. The Dawn of Reformation. The Age 
 of Hus. 
 
 Wratislaw, Rev. A. H., M.A. The Native Literature of Bohemia 
 in the Fourteenth Century. 
 
 Wratislaw, Rev. A. H., M.A. John Hus. 
 
 I have given the names of these works as they are printed on 
 the title-pages, adding an English translation only of those names 
 which in the original are in Bohemian. 
 
INDEX 
 
 Adamites, sect of fanatics, their orgies, 
 360; " turlupins " of France their 
 forerunners, 360; destroyed by Zizka, 
 360; have been ignorantly identified 
 with the church-reformers, 360, 361 
 
 Albert, Duke of Austria, succeeds Sigis- 
 mund as King of Bohemia, 368 
 
 Albert of Unicov, elected Archbishop of 
 Prague, 147; his early life, 148 
 
 Albik, Archbishop of Prague, resigns his 
 office, 169; his traffic in ecclesiastical 
 dignities, 170; royal commissioner at 
 church conference, 173 
 
 Alexander V., Pope, 116; bull issued by 
 against heretical preachers, 121 
 
 Anna, or Anezka, of Stitny, 43, 76 
 
 Answer to the Writings of Stanislas, by 
 Hus, 206, 207 
 
 Antioch, Patriarch of, his answer to the 
 Bohemian nobles, 242, 243 
 
 Appeal from the Pope to Jesus Christ, by 
 Hus, 202, 203 
 
 Basle, General Council at, 366; Compacts 
 accepted by, 367; and signed, 367, 368 
 
 Benedict XIII., Pope, (see church, 
 schism in) 
 
 Bernard of Citta di Castello, appointed 
 by Council of Constance to report on 
 Hus. 222 
 
 Bethlehem Chapel, in Prague, founded 
 for preaching in the national language, 
 74; Hus appointed preacher, 74; 
 account of, 75, 76; attack on, 161; 
 famed for its singing, 300 
 
 Bible, reading of and devotion to among 
 the Bohemian reformers, 3, 16, 27, 40, 
 48, 350; Bohemian translations of, 
 297, 298 
 
 Bila Hora, battle of, 336, 345, 372 
 
 Bohemia, its connection with the Eastern 
 Church, 10, 11; persecution in 1620, 
 10; becomes part of the domain of 
 the Western Church, n; its state of 
 semi-independence, n, 12; sides with 
 the German Emperors, 12; increasing 
 power of Rome in, 12, 13; ill conduct 
 of the clergy of, 14, 15; connection of 
 reform movement with national 
 movement in, 18; efforts of the 
 Emperor Charles IV. to reform the 
 clergy in, 22 ; Hus's sermon on condi- 
 tion of, 73; Germans in, 77, 78; intel- 
 lectual advance of in the beginning of 
 
 387 
 
 the fifteenth century, 78; its attitude 
 towards the Schism, 101, 102; liberty 
 granted to the Bohemians in the 
 university by King Venceslas, 105, 
 106; reform movement in. an indi- 
 genous one, 134; synod of Bohemian 
 clergy in, 168, 170-173; fails to restore 
 peace, 173; further religious warfare 
 in, 176, 177; its evil fame as a here- 
 tical country, 179; the religious up- 
 heaval in, horror of simony a chief 
 factor in, 187; nobles of, send remon- 
 strances about Hus's imprisonment, 
 220, 221; anxiety concerning Hus in, 
 234; efforts of the nobles at inter- 
 vention, 236, 238-242; succeed in 
 obtaining the promise of a public 
 hearing for Hus, 243 ; further remon- 
 strances from, to Sigismund, 260; 
 Hus's letter to the nation, 264-266; 
 his further letters to the Bohemians, 
 269-273; last messages to his friends 
 in, 275; national language of, Hus's 
 desire to preserve, 293, 294, 295; 
 racial antipathy between Bohemians 
 and Germans in, 295 ; question of lan- 
 guage still prominent in, 296; Hus's 
 effort to introduce church-song in the 
 vernacular, 301; women of, staunch 
 adherents of Hus, 302; relations of 
 with England, 304; rejoicings of 
 national party at King Vladislav's 
 victory at Tannenberg, 305; indigna- 
 tion in at Hus's death, 337; national 
 movement in becomes more revolu- 
 tionary, 337; protest of the nobles 
 forwarded to the Council, 337, 338; 
 confederation of nobles for the defence 
 of liberty, 339; hostile confederation 
 of nobles in, 339, 340 ; council appoints 
 John the " iron " to suppress heresy 
 in, 342; Taborite movement in. 346: 
 death of the king, 347; short-lived 
 Romanist reaction in, 349; Pope 
 proclaims crusade against, 350; anger 
 of people at this and Sigismund's 
 cruelty, 351; national uprising in, 
 352 ; iconoclasm and cruelty of people, 
 352; in possession of the Hussites, 
 356; development of Hus's doctrines 
 in, 356; fall of democracy in after the 
 battle of Lipan, 359; communism and 
 anarchy encouraged in by the Tabor- 
 ites, 361; almost entirely subdued by 
 
388 
 
 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 the Praguers and Taborites, 363; 
 meeting of parties at Caslav in 1421, 
 363; deposition of Sigismund and 
 offer of crown to Polish prince, 363; 
 re-attacked by Sigismund, and de- 
 livered by Zizka, 363; elects Duke 
 Witold of Lithuania as king, 363; 
 success of its armies, 365, 366; em- 
 bassy sent by to Basle, 366; Compacts 
 accepted at, 367; political reaction in, 
 367; confederacy of the nobles and 
 defeat of Taborites by, 367; Sigis- 
 mund recognised as king, 368; his 
 death and successor, 368; turbulent 
 period succeeding the death of King 
 Albert, 368, 369; rise of the Bohemian 
 Brethren in, 369; George of Podebrad 
 elected king, 369; Vladislav, Prince 
 of Poland, king, 369; his son, Louis, 
 king, 370; Ferdinand, Archduke of 
 Austria, king, 370; loss of freedom 
 under, 371 ; establishment of serfdom 
 in, 371 ; establishment ol Jesuits in, 
 371; Maximilian, king, 371; Rudolph 
 II. king, 371 ; privileges granted to 
 Protestants in, 371; final loss of 
 religious liberty and nationality, 372 
 
 Bohemian Brethren, rise of, important 
 part played by, 369 
 
 Bohemians, their horror of simony, 187; 
 their love of theological discussions, 
 210; their hatred of Sigismund, 291, 
 292; their racial antipathy towards 
 the Germans, 295; their ideal stand- 
 point, 335 
 
 Bologna, decision of university as regards 
 the burning of Wycliffe's books, 132 
 
 Book against the Priest Kitchen-master, 
 by Hus, 199, 312 
 
 Bracciolini, Poggio, his letter describing 
 Jerome of Prague's death, 321, 331, 
 332, 333; present as papal legate dur- 
 ing Jerome's trial, 331, 332 
 
 Calixtines, moderate or utraquist party, 
 356; attitude of to teaching of the 
 Church of Rome, 356, 357; endeavour 
 to extend use of the vernacular in the 
 churches, 357; Taborites wage war 
 against, 364; defeated by Zizka at 
 Horic, 364, at Kralove Hradec, and 
 at Malesov, 364 ; truce with Taborites, 
 
 364 
 Calixtine Church, government of, 357; 
 
 its difficult position, 357 
 Cambray, Cardinal of, at Hus's trial, 
 
 251, 254 
 Caslav, meeting of Bohemian parties at, 
 
 in 1421, 363 
 Celibacy of the clergy, opposition to in 
 
 Bohemia, 12, 13 
 Cenek of Wartenberg, supreme Burgrave, 
 
 appointed Queen Sophia's coadjutor, 
 348 ; helps to restore peace in Prague, 
 349; joins the national party, 351, 
 352 ; concludes truce with Sigismund, 
 352; openly espouses the Hussite 
 cause, 356; leads the Calixtines at 
 Horic, 364 
 
 Charles IV., emperor, his efforts for the 
 reformation of the Bohemian clergy, 
 22; his death, 22; gives protection to 
 Conrad Waldhauser, 26, 27; his for- 
 bearance towards the reformers, 30; 
 presents land to Milic for his mission, 
 34; his foundation of the University 
 of Prague, 66, 67 
 
 Chelcicky, Peter, moral originator of the 
 Bohemian Brethren, 369 
 
 Christian of Prachatice, visits Hus in 
 prison, 135; Hus's last message to, 
 275 
 
 Church, the Eastern, its connection with 
 Bohemia, 10, n; its intense animosity 
 against the Roman Church, 331; 
 Bohemians contemplate union with, 
 
 369 
 
 Church, the Western, schism in, 93-95, 
 98 seq. ; 225, 226; discussion concern- 
 ing, at the Council of Constance, 227 
 
 Church-song, participation of congrega- 
 tion in, 298; Hus's views concerning, 
 299; his efforts at reform of, 300, 301 ; 
 opposition to by Bohemian prelacy, 
 302 
 
 Clux, Sir Hartung van, English envoy, 
 146 
 
 Cobham, Lord, Hus writes to for copies 
 of Wycliffe's works, 304 
 
 Colonna, Cardinal Odone, his hatred of 
 Bohemia, 130; excommunicates Hus, 
 133 (see Martin V.) 
 
 Colonna, Egydius, Archbishop of 
 Bourges, 4 
 
 Compacts, as accepted at the Council of 
 Basle, 367; signed at Iglau, 367, 368; 
 repudiated by Nicholas V., 369 
 
 Conrad of Vechta, becomes Archbishop 
 of Prague, 169; letter from Bishop of 
 Litomysl to, 172, 173; his answer to 
 John Gerson's letter, 178; head of the 
 Calixtine Church, 357 
 
 Constance, General Council of, 183; 
 French and English representatives at, 
 183; awaited with anxiety by Europe, 
 183; short treatise by Hus, known as 
 his protest to the Council, 204; 
 appoints commissioners to report on 
 Hus, 222; German princes at, 225, 
 226; discussion of the schism at, 227; 
 deposes John XXIIL, 227, 231; 
 appoints commissioners to examine 
 Hus, 237; publishes declaration against 
 heresy, 238; expostulations received 
 
INDEX 
 
 389 
 
 from Bohemian nobles by, 240, 241; 
 evasive answer sent by, 241; refuses 
 to release Hus, but consents to his 
 public trial, 243; its determination to 
 condemn him, 245, 246; Hus's trial. 
 246 seq. ; Sigismund's address to at 
 its close, 259; its decree against utra- 
 quism, 266, 267; Hus's letter about 
 the Council, 273; its final proceedings 
 against Hus, 278-282; its sentence 
 upon, 282; was the council justified 
 in accusing Hus of heresy? 286-288; 
 summons Jerome of Prague to a public 
 abjuration, 329 ; its fresh act of accusa- 
 tion against, 331; its condemnation 
 of as heretic, 332; its correspondence 
 with Sigismund and the Bohemians, 
 337; protest of Bohemian nobles to, 
 337, 338. 339; appoints John the 
 " iron " to suppress heresy in Bohemia, 
 342 
 
 Contra Anghcian Johan. Stokes, by Hus, 
 165, 317 
 
 Contra Occult um Adversarium, by Hus, 
 165, 317 
 
 Contra Octo Doclores, by Hus, 318 
 
 Contra Palec, by Hus, 318 
 
 Contra Praedicatorem Plzntnsem, by Hus, 
 3i8 
 
 Contra Stamslaum de Znoymo, by Hus. 
 206, 318 
 
 Cosmas, Bohemian chronicler. 12 
 
 Cossa, Baldassare, Cardinal, elected 
 Pope, 95; early life of, 96, 97; his 
 " reign of terror " as papal legate, 97; 
 his arrest of the Bohemian envoys, 
 99, 100 (see John XXIII.) 
 
 Cunegunda of Wartenberg, 76 
 
 D'Ailly, Cardinal, at the Council of 
 Constance, 208; appointed to examine 
 Hus, 237; reasons for his hostility to 
 Hus, 237; his scholastic duel with Hus 
 during the latter's trial, 248; de- 
 nounces Hus as an enemy of the tem- 
 poral authorities, 251, 253; attacks 
 him again about Wycliffe. 255, 256; 
 his final charge to Hus, 256, 257; at 
 the final trial, 279 
 
 Dcerka (daughter), one of Hus's best 
 works, 186, 315, 317 
 
 De Corpore Christi, by Hus, 84, 92. 316, 
 317 
 
 De Ecclesia, by Hus, 90, 199-202, 317; 
 accusations against founded on, 222, 
 224, 252, 253 254 
 
 De Sanguine Christi, by Hus, 84, 92, 
 316, 317 
 
 Didacus, the monk, sent to entrap Hus. 
 217, 218 
 
 Domazlice, Hussite victory at, 366 
 
 " Donation of Constantine," 1, 7 
 
 Elias, John, at the Church Conference in 
 Prague, 173 
 
 England, its sympathy with the 
 Bohemian movement, 133, 134; is 
 favourable to the Council of Constance, 
 183; altramontane attitude of it-, 
 representatives, 183 
 
 Ernest of Pardubice, first Archbishop of 
 Prague, 14, 22, 25, 26 
 
 Expositura Decalogi, by Hus, 316, 317 
 
 Ferdinand, Archduke of Austria, King 
 of Bohemia, 370; endeavours to 
 strengthen the Roman cause, 370; 
 deprives the Bohemian towns of their 
 privileges, 371; establishes Jesuits in 
 Bohemia, 371 
 
 Ferdinand, Archduke of Styria, heir to 
 the Bohemian throne, 371; his perse- 
 cuting policy, 372 
 
 Filastre, Cardinal, appointed to examine 
 Hus, 237 
 
 France, its struggle with the Papacy, 4; 
 and the schism, 99, 101 ; embassy sent 
 by to King Venceslas concerning, 104, 
 105; its opposition at first to the 
 Council at Constance. 183; finally 
 sends representatives, 183 
 
 Frederick II., Emperor of Germany, his 
 struggle with the Pope, 2 
 
 Frederick, Burgrave of Nuremberg, at 
 Constance, 226 
 
 Frederick, Duke of Austria, his agree- 
 ment with John XXIII., 211, 212; 
 arrives at Constance, 226; helps the 
 pope to escape, 229; imperial ban 
 pronounced on, 230; his defeat by the 
 Swiss, 230; makes his submission to 
 the Emperor, 230 
 
 George of Podebrad, utraquist king, 
 takes city of the Taborites, 359; 
 leader of the national party. 368; 
 obtains guardianship of Ladislas 
 Posthumus, 368; elected King of 
 Bohemia, 369; war with King Matthias 
 of Hungary, 369 
 
 Germans, in Bohemia, Hus preaches 
 against oppression of, 73, 77; at the 
 University of Prague. 77, 78; their 
 attitude during the schism, 101, 102; 
 their accusations against the " Wycliff- 
 ites," 102, 103; their anger at the 
 king's decree, 107; their departure 
 from Prague, 109, no; racial anti- 
 pathy between Bohemians and, 295; 
 German inhabitants leave Prague. 348 
 
 Germany, its struggle with the Papacy, 
 2, 3, 4; and the Schism, 101, 225; 
 German princes at the Council of 
 Constance, 225, 226 
 
 Gerson, John, denounces the heretical 
 
390 
 
 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 views spreading in Bohemia, 177, 178, 
 179; at the Council of Constance, 
 208, 223, 230; on the recantation of 
 heretics, 330 
 
 Gesta Christi, earliest printed work of 
 Hus, 312 
 
 Gottlieben, Castle of, Hus's cruel im- 
 prisonment in, 236, 237 
 
 Gregory XII., Pope (see church, schism 
 in) 
 
 Gregory, Brother, founder of the 
 Bohemian Brethren, 369 
 
 Hanus of Lipa, 220 
 
 Henning of Baltenhagen, rector of Prague 
 University, complains to Venceslas of 
 the " Wycliffites," 103, 104, 323 
 
 Henry, Lord, of Chlum, surnamed 
 Lacembok, sent by king to protect 
 Hus, 208 
 
 Henry, Lord, of Lazan, invites Hus to 
 his castle, 180; account of his after 
 life and death, 180 
 
 Hiibner, John, his " articles " against 
 Wycliffe, 79, 80 
 
 Hus, John, and the Eastern Church, n; 
 an ardent Bohemian patriot, 17; his 
 indebtedness to Wycliffe exaggerated, 
 18-22, 118; his extensive learning, 20, 
 91 ; his great qualities, 63 ; his birth, 
 home, and parentage, 64, 65 ; anecdote 
 of, 65; at Prague University, 66; his 
 student days, 69, 70; admitted to 
 college in the fruit market, 70; anec- 
 dote of, 70 ; his early adherence to the 
 Catholic Church, 71; his fellow 
 students, 71; his academic honours, 
 72 ; becomes rector of the University, 
 72; ordained priest, 72; his talents 
 as a preacher, 73; preaches against 
 German oppression, 73; appointed 
 preacher at the Bethlehem Chapel, 74 ; 
 attracts numerous disciples, 76 ; incurs 
 hostility of the German inhabitants of 
 Prague, 77 ; his study of Wycliffe, 79 ; 
 his first theological controversy, 79- 
 81 ; appointed preacher to the Synod, 
 82; attacks conduct of Bohemian 
 priests, 82; appointed court chaplain 
 and confessor to the Queen, 82; sent 
 to investigate into the miracles per- 
 formed at Wilsnack, 82-84; hatred of 
 the priests towards, 84; accusations 
 brought against, 85, 86; his letter to 
 the archbishop, 86, 87; close of the 
 academic period of his life, 87; his 
 numerous writings, 88; his translation 
 of Wycliffe's Trialogus, 89; his Super 
 IV. Sententiarum, 90, 91, 92; other 
 Latin works, 84, 92; interferes on 
 behalf of the imprisoned Bohemian 
 envoys, 100; supports the Bohemian 
 
 members of the university in favour 
 of neutrality in regard to the schism, 
 103; decree against signed by the 
 archbishop, 103; King Venceslas 
 threatens him, 104; receives the good 
 news of the king's decree of Kutna 
 Hora, 106; accused of wishing to 
 expel the German students from 
 Prague, 107, no, in; elected rector 
 of the university, 114; increased 
 animosity of the parish priests to- 
 wards, 114; fresh accusations brought 
 against by Zbynek, 118, 119; sum- 
 moned to appear before the court of 
 the archbishop, 120; his sermon in 
 response to the papal bull, 124; 
 appeals to the pope, 124, 125; is ex- 
 communicated by Zbynek, 125; pro- 
 tests against the burning of Wycliffe's 
 books, 127; is summoned to appear 
 before the papal tribunal, 130; sup- 
 port of by the court, 130, 131 ; decides 
 not to take the Italian journey, 132; 
 his letter to Richard Wiche, 135, 136; 
 his dispute with the archbishop is 
 settled by arbitration, 141, 142, 143; 
 renewed bitterness between, 143; his 
 letter to the pope, 143; his dispute 
 with the English envoy Stokes, 146, 
 147, 165; invites to a disputation con- 
 cerning the sale of indulgences, 151; 
 his speech, 151; condemnatory judg- 
 ment passed against him by the papal 
 courts, 153; meets the leaders of the 
 Roman party at the Castle of Zebrak, 
 I 54» x 55» pleads on behalf of the 
 three youths condemned for raising a 
 disturbance, 156, 157; his moderation 
 prevents a catastrophe, 158, 159; is 
 further excommunicated, 159; after 
 some indecision he leaves Prague for a 
 while, 161, 162, 163; writings dating 
 from this period, 164, 165; his letter 
 explaining his reasons for leaving 
 Prague, 167; his treatise on simony, 
 170; and the Bohemian Synod, 171; 
 denounced by the Bishop of Litomysl, 
 172, 173; retires to Kozi Hradek, 175; 
 his popularity among the Bohemians, 
 176; Bohemian letter of June 10, 1415, 
 176; pays short visit to Prague, his 
 position there becomes more difficult, 
 179; accepts invitation to Krakovec, 
 180; negotiations concerning his 
 journey to Constance, 184; Sigis- 
 mund's promise of safe conduct to, 
 184; is warned not to go, 185; his 
 farewell letters, 185; the court and 
 nobles provide means for his journey, 
 185; he leaves Prague, 186; works 
 written by during the previous two 
 years, 186-207 (see under Simony); 
 
INDEX 
 
 39i 
 
 extracts from his sermons on the 
 Gospels, 196-198; his De Ecclesia, 
 199-202; his Apellatio, 202-204; other 
 Latin works, 204-207; his treatise on 
 the pretentions of the Bohemian 
 clergy, 204, 205; his affirmation that 
 Christ, not the pope, is the head of 
 the Church, 207; arrives at Nurem- 
 berg, 209; sends his friend to receive 
 letter of safe-conduct for him, and 
 proceeds direct to Constance, 209, 210; 
 his first letter after arrival at, 210; 
 accusation against placed on the door 
 of the church, 211; is surrounded by 
 enemies and spies, 212, 213; pope 
 promises him protection, 214; circula- 
 tion of false tales about, 215; visit of 
 the cardinals to, 216; his dwelling- 
 place surrounded by armed men, 217; 
 his reply to the cardinals in the pope's 
 palace, 217; his interview with the 
 monk Didacus, 218; his arrest, 219; 
 taken to the dungeon of the Domini- 
 can monastery, 220; commissioners 
 appointed to report on, 222; asks to 
 be allowed a lawyer for his defence, 
 223; is refused, 223 ; falls dangerously 
 ill, 223; continued prosecution of, 
 224; concocted accusations against, 
 233, 234; his letter to the citizens of 
 Prague, 234; has a few friends to 
 visit him, 235; placed in custody of 
 the Bishop of Constance, 236; cruel 
 treatment of, 236, 237; his examina- 
 tion by the commissioners, 238; 
 intervention of Bohemian nobles on 
 behalf of, 238-241; promise extracted 
 from council of his having a public 
 hearing, 243; is brought to trial, 246; 
 is not allowed to speak, 247; his 
 second day of trial and scholastic duel 
 with D'Ailly, 248, 249; further wit- 
 nesses brought against, 250; endeavour 
 to prove his dependence on Wycliffe, 
 250; his answer to the Cardinal of 
 Cambray, 251; his third day of trial, 
 252; accusations against, founded on 
 De Ecclesia and other works, 253, 254, 
 256; his speech concerning unworthy 
 kings, 254, 255 ; bis answer to D'Ailly 
 about Wycliffe, 255, 256; his final 
 speech of defence, 257; his answer to 
 those who urge him to recant, 257; 
 corresponds with "the father," 261; 
 is aware of Sigismund's treachery, 
 263 ; his letter to the Bohemian nation, 
 264-266; his letter on the subject of 
 utraquism, 268, 269; his books con- 
 demned to be burnt, 269; his further 
 letters to the Bohemians, 269-273; his 
 farewell letter to Prague University, 
 •273, 274; his messages to his various 
 
 friends, 275; last efforts made to 
 induce him to recant, 276; is taken to 
 the Cathedral, 278; is not allowed to 
 defend himself, 279, 280; final pro- 
 ceedings against, 280-282; sentence 
 passed upon, 282; his degradation 
 and deconsecration, 282; is led to 
 the stake, 283; account of his last 
 moments, 283-285; discussion as to 
 whether he was justly accused of 
 heresy, 286-288; his patriotic devotion 
 to his own country and language, 293, 
 -94. 295; the first to attempt to 
 establish a recognised written lan- 
 guage, 296; revises the Bohemian 
 translations of the Bible, 298; his 
 character antagonistic to that of 
 Wycliffe, 299; his views on church- 
 singing, 299; endeavours to replace 
 the latin singing in his church by 
 songs in the national language, 301; 
 objections to raised by Bohemian 
 prelacy, 302; hymns composed by, 
 303; his efforts to establish relations 
 with foreign countries, 304; writes to 
 Lord Cobham, 304; relations with 
 King Vladislav, 304, 305 ; sends latter 
 congratulatory letter on his victory, 
 305, 306, 307; his letter on church- 
 reform to, 308, 309; his fame as a 
 writer, 312 {see below under works 
 by); portraits of, 318-320; defence of 
 by Bohemian nobles, 337, 338; 
 development of his doctrines in 
 Bohemia, 356 seq.; no one found to 
 be his true successor, 362 
 
 Hus, John, works by, 84-92, 164, 
 165, 186-207, 310-318; disappearance 
 of some, 311; earliest work printed, 
 312; danger incurred in publishing 
 as late as 19th century, 314, 315; 
 periods of Hus's literary activity, 
 317 (see under separate works) 
 
 Husinec, birthplace of Hus, 64; national 
 feeling strongly developed in that part 
 of the country, 293 
 
 Huska, .Martin, surnamed Loquis, his 
 fanaticism and eloquence, 359, 360 
 
 Hussites, the Hussite movement, first 
 check to the autocratic tendencies of 
 Rome, 3; origin of Hussitism, 17, 170; 
 discord among the Hussites, 344; 
 movement for a time has iconoclastic 
 character, 352; agreement among 
 Hussites on matters of reform, 354; 
 the Hussites obtain possession of 
 nearly all Bohemia, 356; the Hussite 
 war, the first in the world's history 
 fought for intellectual interests, 335; 
 meeting of contending Hussites after 
 the battle of the Vysehrad, 362, 363; 
 peace between, 364; great meeting at, 
 
392 
 
 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 " Spitalske Pole," 364; negotiations 
 entered into with by Sigismund and 
 the Roman Church, 366 ; victory over 
 Romanists at Domazlice, 366; they 
 formulate their demands at the 
 Council of Basle, 366; Compacts as 
 determined at, 367 
 
 Hussite doctrine formulated in 141 7, 
 343, 344 (see Articles of Prague) 
 
 Hymns, Bohemian, introduction into his 
 church by Hus, 301, 302; famous 
 Hussite songs, 303 
 
 Indulgences, sale of, 71 ; disturbances in 
 Prague, an account of, 149 seq. ; dis- 
 putation upon and Hus's speech, 151; 
 Jerome of Prague takes part in dis- 
 cussion, 325 
 
 Infallibility, as opposed to the individual 
 conscience, 261, 262 
 
 Jacob or Jacobellus of Stribro (Mies), 
 70, 71, 135; draws up document to be 
 forwarded to the synod, 171; 174, 
 221 ; his introduction of utraquism at 
 Prague, 232, 268; and the formulation 
 of the Hussite doctrine, 343; his more 
 " advanced " views, 357 
 
 Jenzenstein, John of, Archbishop of 
 Prague, festival founded by in honour 
 of the Virgin, 46 ; 72 
 
 Jerome of Prague, n, 71, 89; King 
 Venceslas threatens him for his heresy, 
 104; 131; speaks against sale of indul- 
 gences, 151; connives at grotesque 
 procession, 153; at Constance, 235; 
 accused by Sigismund, 259, 260; con- 
 trasted with Hus, 321, 322; his 
 parentage, 322; goes to Oxford and 
 studies Wycliffe, 322; his roving life, 
 323; at Kutna Hora, 323; his violent 
 denunciation of the clergy, 324; 
 denounced as a heretic and summoned, 
 324; escapes from Vienna, 325; takes 
 part in the discussion concerning 
 indulgences, 325; leaves Prague and 
 proceeds to Poland, 325; his appear- 
 ance and manners, 325-6; goes to 
 Constance, 326; endeavours to escape 
 and is captured and imprisoned, 326; 
 Hus's mention of, 326-7; his recanta- 
 tion, 327; his letter to Lacko of 
 Kravar, 327, 328; his public abjura- 
 tion, 329, 330; expresses his regret at 
 having recanted, 331; new act of 
 accusation against, 331; his trial, 
 332; description of his eloquence by 
 Bracciolini, 332 ; his death, 332, 333 
 
 Jodocus, Margrave of Moravia, 124; 
 chosen as King of the Romans, 137; 
 his death, 141 
 
 John XXIII., his election, 95 ; his policy, 
 
 98; Hus appeals to, 125; receives 
 letters from Venceslas and Queen 
 Sophia, 129; issues bull supporting 
 the church party and summoning Hus 
 to appear, 130; receives remonstrances 
 from the king and queen, 130, 131; 
 his cautious policy, 137, 138; his 
 struggle for temporal dominion, 149; 
 grants plenary indulgence to those 
 who take part in war against King of 
 Naples, 149; declares all Wycliffe's 
 works heretical, 169; his negotiations 
 with Sigismund concerning a general 
 council, 181; consents to it being held 
 at Constance, 183; his agreement with 
 Duke Frederick of Austria, 211, 212; 
 his journey to Constance, 212; 
 promises protection to Hus, 214; his 
 part in Hus's arrest, 219; offers bribe 
 to Sigismund, 226; his deposition, 
 227, 228; escapes from Constance, 
 229; sentence pronounced on by 
 council, 231 ; his last years and death, 
 231; his tomb, 231; Hus's letter con- 
 cerning, 271 
 
 John, Bishop of Litomysl, opponent of 
 church - reform, 144; his excessive 
 cruelty, 144, 145; candidate for Arch- 
 bishopric of Prague, 148; letter to 
 Archbishop Conrad, 172, 173; his 
 bitter enmity towards Hus, 212, 213; 
 tries to deprive him of his liberty, 217; 
 assistance given by to Hus's enemies, 
 234; accusation against by Bohemian 
 nobles, 241; brings witnesses against 
 Hus, 250; his letter to King Venceslas, 
 337; appointed by council to suppress 
 heresy in Bohemia, 342; his estates 
 seized by the national party, 343 
 
 John, Bishop of Liibeck, appointed by 
 Council of Constance to report on 
 Hus, 222 
 
 John, Burgrave of Nuremberg, at 
 Constance, 226 
 
 John of Brogni, Cardinal-bishop of 
 Ostia, his correspondence with Hus, 
 261 
 
 John, Lord, of Chlum, accompanies Hus 
 to Constance, 208; at Biberach, 210; 
 his anger with the cardinals, 216; 
 accompanies Hus to the pope's palace, 
 217; at the interview between Hus 
 and the monk, 218; appeals to the 
 pope against Hus's arrest, 219; affixes 
 protests against on the gates of the 
 cathedral, 220; and writes to Sigis- 
 mund, 220 ; appeals to Sigismund at the 
 time of Hus's trial, 246; Hus's letter 
 to about his trial, 247; his generous 
 speech and action in support of Hus, 
 251, 252, 258; overhears Sigismund's 
 speech to the council, 258; Hus's last 
 
INDEX 
 
 393 
 
 message concerning, 274-5; visits 
 Hus in prison, 276 
 
 John the elder, Lord of Usti, upholder 
 of reform, 168 
 
 John titular), patriarch of Constanti- 
 nople, appointed by Council of Con- 
 stance to report on Hus, 222 
 
 John of Jandum, 5, 6 
 
 John of Jesenice, chosen as representa- 
 tive oi Hus at the papal court, 13;; 
 protests against Palec's statement con- 
 cerning the Roman Church, 174 
 
 John of Maintz, Elector Archbishop, 
 rides into Constance in full armour, 
 226 
 
 John (or Hanus) of Millheim, founder of 
 Bethlehem Chapel, 74 
 
 John of Paris, 4 
 
 John of Pribram, his work on the 
 Taborites, 361 ; his own idea of a 
 national church, 361, 362 
 
 John of Reinstein, nicknamed " Kar- 
 dinal," sent by King Venceslas as 
 envoy to Pisa, 101; represents the 
 University of Prague at the Council of 
 Constance, 208; not allowed a hearing, 
 208 
 
 John of Rokycan, chosen by Estates of 
 Bohemia as archbishop, 357; at the 
 meeting at " Spitalske Pole," 364, 365 ; 
 at the Council of Basle, 366; pope 
 refuses to recognise, 368, 369 
 
 John of Stekna, famous preacher, 71 
 
 John of Zelivo, Hussite and utraquist, 
 his popularity in Prague, 346; his 
 sermon, 346; leads the faithful to the 
 town hall, 346; struggle with priests 
 at St. Stephen, 346; is struck by stone. 
 347; denounces Sigismund, 347, 348; 
 his fanaticism, 359 
 
 Joseph II.. Emperor, his " Toleranz 
 Patent," 10 
 
 Kanis, Peter, fanatical preacher, 360 
 Kaplir, Catherine, of Sulevic, 76 
 Konopist, truce between Taborites and 
 
 Calixtines concluded at, 364 
 Korybut, Prince, of Lithuania, repre- 
 sentative of the elected King of 
 Bohemia, 363; mediates between the 
 contending Hussite parties, 364; leads 
 the Calixtines to battle, 365 
 Kozi Hradek, tower of, Hus at, 167, 175 
 Kralove Hradec (Koniggratz) surrenders 
 
 to Sigismund, 352 
 Krasa, John, cruel sentence passed on by 
 
 Sigismund, 351 
 Kristan of Prachatice, rector of the 
 university, conference held at house of. 
 
 1/3, 174' 
 Kriz, part founder of the Bethlehem 
 Chapel, 74, 139, 140 
 
 Kutna Hora (Kuttenberg), famous decree 
 of, 105; French embassy at for dis- 
 cussion of Schism, 323; Hus and 
 Jerome at, 323; Sigismund receives 
 envoys from Prague at, 352; subdued 
 by the Praguers, 363 
 
 Lacko of Kravar, Jerome of Prague's 
 
 letter to, 327, 328 
 Ladislas, King of Naples, supporter nt 
 
 Gregory XII., invades papal states, 
 
 149 
 Ladislas Posthumus, son of King Albert 
 
 of Bohemia, 368; his death, 369 
 Lefl, Lord Henry, Hus's last message to, 
 
 275 3 . 
 
 Leipzig, university founded at, no 
 "Letter of majesty," granting privileges 
 
 to Lutherans, signed by Rudolph II.. 
 
 37i 
 Letters, Latin and Bohemian, by Hus, 
 
 editions and translations of, 313, 314; 
 
 Constance Letters, 318 
 Lipauy, defeat of Taborites at, 359, 367 
 Lombard, Peter, his Sententiarum Libri 
 
 quatuor, Hus's great work on, 90-92 
 Loserth, Professor, on Hus and Wycliffe, 
 
 18, 20 
 Louis, son of King Vladislav, succeeds 
 
 his father, 370; killed at the battle of 
 
 Mohac, 370 
 Louis of Bavaria, King of the Germans, 
 
 his resistance to Rome, 4, 5 
 Louis, Count Palatine, arrives at Con- 
 stance, 225, 226; conducts Hus to the 
 
 stake, 283 
 Luther, Martin, translation by of some 
 
 of Hus's letters, 312 
 
 Margaret of Moravia, 33 
 
 Margrave of Baden, at Constance, 226 
 
 Marik, or Mauritius de Praga, opponent 
 of church - reform, treatise of Hus 
 against, 165. 166 
 
 Marsiglio of Padua, his views on the 
 temporal power of the pope, etc., as 
 stated in his Defensor Pacis, 5-9 
 
 Martin V. proclaims crusade against 
 Bohemia, 350; enters into negotiations 
 with the Hussites, 366; consents to 
 general council at Basle, 366 
 
 Matthew of Janov, reformer, 3, 4, 18, 27, 
 32, 42, 47; his birth and early life, 48; 
 his academic honours and poverty, 49; 
 receives a canonry of Prague, 49; 
 other dignities conferred on, 50; views 
 preached by, opposed to the teaching 
 of Rome, 50; summoned to appear 
 before the archiepiscopal court and 
 forced to retract. 51; continues his 
 bold preaching, 51, 52; further pro- 
 
394 
 
 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 eeedings against, promises of obedience 
 and reinstatement, 52 ; a change comes 
 over him and he renounces all his 
 earthly ambitions, 52-54; he continues 
 to preach against abuses, 55; his 
 death, 55; summary of his Regulae 
 Veteris et Novi Testamenti, 55-60; 
 character of his work in general, 60, 
 61 ; his importance in connection with 
 the Hussite movement, 61, 62 ; 63 
 Matthias, King of Hungary, war with 
 
 Bohemia, 369 
 Maximilian, King of Bohemia, 371 
 Meissen, Margrave of, ravages Bohemia, 
 
 73 
 
 Mendicant orders, their avarice and 
 immorality, and complaint against, 
 by Conrad Waldhauser, 24; their 
 persecution of the latter, 25, 26; 
 their enmity towards the reformer 
 Milic, 31, 32 
 
 Mensi Zrcadlo (the Smaller Mirror) by 
 Hus, 186 
 
 Michael de causis, opponent of Hus, 
 141; his bad reputation, 152; ap- 
 pointed advocate at the papal law 
 courts, 152, 159, 160; places accusa- 
 tion against Hus on door of church 
 at Constance, 211; he and Palec 
 prepare articles against Hus, 213, 214; 
 circulates false tale about Hus, 215; 
 his part in the latter's arrest, 219; 
 accusations against, prepared by, 222 ; 
 seizes opportunity of Hus's illness and 
 weakness to confront him with op- 
 ponents, 223, 224; his false accusa- 
 tions against Hus, 233, 234 
 
 Milic, John, of Kromerize, reformer, his 
 early life and piety, 27, 28; made 
 canon of St. Vitus in Prague, 28; 
 renounces all his worldly honours, 28; 
 his apostolic poverty and preaching, 
 28, 29; denounces emperor as anti- 
 christ, 30; twice imprisoned and 
 released, 30, 31; his letter to the 
 pope, 31, 32; his asceticism, 32; his 
 mission to fallen women, 33, 34; 
 proceedings taken against at instiga- 
 tion of the parish priests, 34, 35, 36; 
 he appeals to the pope and is declared 
 innocent, 36; his death, 37, 63 
 
 " Mohamedans," nickname given to the 
 opponents of reform, 177 
 
 Moravia, allied Hussites march to con- 
 quest of, 365; campaign stopped by 
 death of Zizka, 365 
 
 Nebovid, victory of Zizka over Sigismund 
 
 at, 363 
 Newman, Cardinal, on poverty, 2 
 Nicholas V. repudiates the Compacts, 
 
 369 
 
 Nicholas of Hus, 345, 346; leads the 
 Taborites against Prague, 348 
 
 Nicholas of Pelhrimov, Calixtine bishop, 
 359; spokesman for the Taborites at 
 the meeting of contending Hussites, 
 363 
 
 Nicholas of Velenovic, surnamed Abra- 
 ham, accused of heresy and defended 
 by Hus, 86, 87 
 
 Nominalists and Realists, animosity of 
 the former against Hus, 249, 250 
 
 Nuremburg, Hus's stay at, 209 
 
 Ortlwgraphia Bohemica, by Hus, 295, 296, 
 317 
 
 Palec, Stephen, sent as envoy to Pisa, 
 99; arrested by order of Cardinal 
 Cossa, and subsequently liberated, 
 99, 100; becomes an opponent of Hus, 
 140; at the disputation concerning the 
 sale of indulgences, 151 ; at the church 
 conference in Prague, 173; his bad 
 faith, 174; leaves Bohemia and stirs 
 up public opinion against Hus, 175; 
 arrives at Constance, 2r3; he and 
 Michael de causis prepare articles 
 against Hus, 213, 214; circulates 
 false tale about Hus, 215; his part 
 in Hus's arrest, 219; his false accusa- 
 tions against Hus, 222, 233; at Hus's 
 trial, 254, 255, 258, 280 
 
 Papacy, its struggle with Germany, 2, 
 3 ; with the Kings of France, 4 ; views 
 concerning temporal power of, 5-9 
 
 Peter of Mladenovic, spokesman of the 
 Bohemian nobles at the Council of 
 Constance, 240, 241, 242, 243; Hus's 
 farewell gift to, 275; his account of 
 Hus's last moments, 283-285; pre- 
 serves copies of Hus's writings, 311; 
 on the governing body of the Calixtine 
 church, 357; spokesman for the uni- 
 versity at meeting of contending 
 Hussites, 363 
 
 Peter of S. Angelo, Cardinal, his con- 
 demnation of Hus, 153, 159 
 
 Pisa, meeting of cardinals at, to negotiate 
 concerning the Schism, 95, 101 ; envoys 
 sent to by King Venceslas, 99, 100, 101 
 
 Poland, reform movement in, 305; 
 Jerome of Prague in, 325 
 
 Poles, part played by in the Hussite 
 wars, 304 
 
 Postilla, the, by Hus, 196-198, 310; 
 editions of 313, 315, 317 
 
 Prague, foundation of bishopric of, n; 
 Cathedral of, charged with papal 
 "provisions" 13; archdeaconal in- 
 spection held in 1379, 1380, 14, 15; 
 effect of Conrad Walhauser's preaching 
 in, 23, 24; hostility between Germans 
 
INDEX 
 
 395 
 
 and Bohemians in, 77, 7S; popular 
 demonstrations in, 115, 116; hatred 
 of the clergy among the people, 125, 
 126; placed under an interdict, 139; 
 disturbance in, on account of sale of 
 indulgences, 149 seq. ; grotesque pro- 
 cession through the streets of, 153, 154; 
 execution of three youths for protest- 
 ing against simony, 156, 157; interdict 
 against, put into execution, 160, 161; 
 anxiety in concerning Hus's fate, 232; 
 introduction of utraquism at, 232; 
 struggle between priests and heretics 
 at St. Stephen, 347; attack on the 
 town hall led by Zizka, 347; expulsion 
 from of non-utraquist priests, 348; 
 German inhabitants leave the town, 
 348; march of Taborites upon, 348; 
 fury of people at introduction of 
 German mercenaries, 348; citizens 
 seize the Vysehrad, 348; large part of 
 city destroyed, 349; peace restored, 
 349; citizens endeavour to come to 
 agreement with Sigismund, 352; send 
 to the Taborites to come to their aid, 
 353; city surrounded by the "cru- 
 saders," 353; the enemy is repulsed, 
 354; arrival and death of Sigismund 
 in, 368 ; Roman archbishopric re - 
 established, 371 
 Prague, Articles of, 343, 344; approved 
 by the utraquist nobles, 355; meeting 
 between Romanists and Bohemians for 
 discussion of, 355; accepted by Arch- 
 bishop of Prague, 357; re-affirmed by 
 meeting at Caslav, 363 
 Prague, University of, its foundation, 66, 
 67, in, 112; diversity of "nations" 
 at, 67, 68 ; its fame, 68 ; sends envoys 
 to Pisa, 99 ; division between Germans 
 and Bohemians in as regarded the 
 question of neutrality during the 
 church schism, 101, 102, 103; some 
 of its members accuse the " Wycliff- 
 ites " to King Venceslas, 102, 103; 
 the king's famous decree conferring 
 increased privileges on the Bohemian 
 members, 105, 106; departure of 
 German students from, 109, no; 
 becomes a national university, 113; ap- 
 peals against the burning of Wycliffe's 
 works, 122; document forwarded by 
 to the Bohemian synod, 171, 172; 
 begs Hus to remain in Bohemia, 185; 
 helps to defray expense of Hus's 
 journey to Constance, 185; sends 
 representative to Council, 208; Hus's 
 farewell letter to, 273, 274; meeting 
 of chief theologians of to formulate 
 Hussite doctrine, 343; sends repre- 
 sentative to meeting of contending 
 Hussites, 363 
 
 Pragucrs, see Calixtines 
 
 Predestination, Hus's opinion on, 200, 
 
 201, 253 
 Pribislav, Castle, attacked by Zizka, 365 
 Prokop the Great, and Prokop the Less, 
 
 successors of Zizka, 365; the former 
 
 at Council of Basle, 366; leader of 
 
 Taborites at Lipany, 367 
 Protiva, informer against Hus, 114, 115, 
 
 119, 120, 140 
 " Provisions," papal, 13, 28 
 
 Ranco, Adalbert, reformer, 32, 42, 43, 
 44; becomes rector of the University 
 of Paris, 44 ; reports on Milic's ortho- 
 doxy, as Canon of Prague, 44; pro- 
 nounces funeral oration on the 
 Emperor Charles, 45; his fame as a 
 preacher, 45; his letter concerning 
 frequent communions, 45, 46; pro- 
 tests against the new festival in honour 
 of the Virgin, 46; his death, 47; at 
 Prague when Hus was a student, 71 
 
 Replica Contra Pradicatorem Plznensem, 
 by Hus, 204 
 
 Rome, autocratic tendencies of, first 
 checked by Hussite movement, 3 
 
 Rudolph II., King of Bohemia, struggle 
 with his brother, 371; signs the 
 " Letter of Majesty," 371 
 
 Rupert, Elector Palatine, elected King 
 of the Romans, 73, 101 ; his successor, 
 137 
 
 Ruthenians, Jerome of Prague's connec- 
 tion with, 326, 331 
 
 Sacrament, in both kinds, 1,2; customary 
 in Bohemia, 10 (see utraquism) ; ad- 
 ministration of by unworthy priests, 
 3; views of Hus upon, 119, 120, 179; 
 question of frequent communion, 37, 
 41; Ranco's letter upon, 45, 46; 
 Matthew of Janov's views on, 50, 56, 
 57, 61, 62; Hus's adoption of the 
 doctrine of transubstantiation, 205; 
 218, 222 
 Sermones de Sanctis, by Hus, 316 
 Sigismund, King of the Romans, after- 
 wards Emperor, 137; ready to employ 
 any means to injure his brother. King 
 Venceslas, 179; his negotiations with 
 Pope John XXIII. concerning a 
 general council, 181; decides that it 
 shall be held at Constance, 183; pro- 
 mises Hus a safe-conduct to Constance 
 and back, 184; his part in Hus's 
 arrest, 219; his feigned displeasure, 
 220; remonstrances sent to, by the 
 Bohemian lords, 220; neglects their 
 warning letter, 221 ; his arrival in 
 Constance, 224, 225; his neglect of 
 Hus, 226; refuses the pope's offered 
 
396 
 
 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 bribe, 226; conciliates the council, 
 227; neglects opportunity of releasing 
 Hus, 229, 230; pronounces imperial 
 ban against Duke Frederick, 230; his 
 treachery to Hus, 236; remonstrances 
 addressed to, by Bohemian nobles. 
 239, 242; revokes all letters of safe- 
 conduct, 242 ; determines that Hu^ 
 shall not return to Bohemia, 244, 
 246; his feigned indignation with the 
 council, 246; Hus's answer to the 
 Cardinal of Cambray increases his 
 anger against the reformer, 252; his 
 words to Hus after the latter's speech 
 about unworthy kings, 255; urges 
 Hus to recant for his own political 
 purposes, 257, 260, 261; his address to 
 the council, 259, 260; receives further 
 remonstrances from Bohemia, 260; 
 his treachery referred to by Hus, 263; 
 is present at Hus's final trial and con- 
 demnation, 277, 279; orders the Count 
 Palatine to lead Hus to the stake, 283; 
 indignation against, in Bohemia, 291, 
 292, 337; discussion of his treachery. 
 290, 291; hatred of Bohemians 
 towards, 291, 292; hostilities with 
 King of Poland, 307; covert threat to 
 by Bohemian nobles, 338; his letters 
 to Venceslas and Queen Sophia con- 
 cerning heresy, etc., 340, 341; heir to 
 the throne of Bohemia, 347; his 
 temporising policy after his brother's 
 death, 348; appoints Queen Sophia 
 regent of Bohemia, 348; his answer to 
 the demands of the Bohemian envoys, 
 349i 35° ; persuades the pope to declare 
 a crusade against Bohemia, 350; his 
 cruelty to John Krasa, 351; crosses 
 into Bohemia, 352; marches to Kutna 
 Hora, 352; his ungracious reception 
 of the envoys from Prague, 352; 
 attacks Prague and is repulsed, 354; 
 attempts to relieve the castle of 
 Vysehrad, 355; his defeat, 355, 356; 
 returns from Bohemia, 356; his de- 
 position pronounced by Bohemia, 363; 
 reattacks Bohemia and defeated by 
 Zizka, 363; enters into negotiations 
 with the Hussites, 366; recognised as 
 king by the Bohemians, 368; his short 
 reign and death at Prague, 368 
 Simon, Cardinal of Rheims, begs Arch- 
 bishop Conrad to extirpate heresy, 
 
 179 
 
 Simony, universal in Bohemia, 170; 
 horror of a chief cause of the religious 
 upheaval, 187; Hus's treatise on, 170. 
 T87; summary of, 188-195; Hus's 
 closing words, 195, 196; his letter to 
 King of Poland concerning, 307, 308; 
 317 
 
 Slav and Teuton, racial animosity 
 between, 295, 304, 305 
 
 Sophia, wife of King Venceslas, 76; 
 appoints Hus her confessor, 82; 
 strongly supports his party, 105; 
 writes to the pope on behalf of freedom 
 of preaching, 128; further remon- 
 strance from, 130; her influence over 
 the king, 182; her fervent adherence 
 to Hus, 302; her indignation at the 
 treatment meted to him, 337; letter 
 from Sigismund to, 341; appointed 
 regent of Bohemia, 348; calls German 
 mercenaries to her aid against the 
 Taborites, 348 
 
 " Spitalske Pole" (Spitalfield), great 
 meeting of Hussites at, 364 
 
 Stanislas of Znoymo, sent as envoy to 
 Pisa, 99; arrested by order of Cardinal 
 Cossa, and subsequently liberated, 
 99, 100; opponent of Hus, 140; at 
 the disputation concerning the sale 
 of indulgences, 151; at church con- 
 ference in Prague, 173; his panegyric 
 of the papal power, and Hus's answer 
 to, 206; his death, 213 
 
 Stokes, John, English envoy, his dispute 
 with Hus, 146, 147, 165; at Hus's 
 trial, 249 
 
 Stransky, Paul, Bohemian exile, 10 
 
 Super IV. Sententiarum by Hus, 90, 91, 
 310, 316, 317 
 
 Synod, Bohemian, 168, 170; proceedings 
 at, i7r-i73; failure of to restore peace, 
 173 
 
 Taborites, the, 344, 345; democratic 
 character of Taborite movement, 
 346; they march on Prague, 348; 
 build their stronghold of Tabor, 349; 
 march to the help of Prague, 353; 
 repulse the enemy, 354 ; their doctrines 
 as distinguished from those of Hus and 
 the Calixtines, 358; opposed to the 
 hierarchy of the Roman Church, 358, 
 359; their political principles, 359; 
 downfall of community after the 
 battle of Lipany, 359; their fanaticism 
 pernicious to the cause of reform, 361 ; 
 Pribram's work on, 361; Zizka joins 
 the extreme party, 363; wage war 
 with the Calixtine party, 364; their 
 victories over, 364; truce with, 364; 
 march under Zizka against Moravia, 
 365 ; adopt the name of " Orphans " 
 after his death, 365; their defeat by 
 the nobles at Lipany, 367 
 
 Tannenberg, victory of King Vladislav 
 at, 305 
 
 Teuton (see Slav) 
 
 Thomas of Stitny, reformer. 29, 32, 38, 
 39; his views as given in his work 
 
INDEX 
 
 397 
 
 Of General Christian Matters, 39, 40, 
 41; his Learned Entertainments, 42, 
 43; falls out of touch with the leaders 
 of the reform movement, 43; his use 
 as a writer of the national language, 43 ; 
 his death, 43 
 Tiem, Venceslas, Dean of Passau, his 
 traffic in indulgences, 150; his desire 
 to revenge himself on Hus, 213 
 " Toleranz Patent " of Joseph II., 10 
 Transubstantiation, Hus's acceptance of, 
 and argument on, with D'Ailly at his 
 trial, 248, 2 49 
 
 Ulrich of Rosenberg, leader of the 
 Romanist party, 368 
 
 Utraquism, or communion in both kinds, 
 56, 61, 62; its introduction at Prague, 
 232; influence of this on Hus's fate, 
 232, 233; decree against by the 
 council, 266, 267; becomes the watch- 
 word of the Hussite Church, 267; 
 Hus's letter on the subject, 268, 269; 
 outbreaks in Prague concerning, 343, 
 346, 347, 34S 
 
 Utraquists, their attitude towards the 
 Church of Rome, 356, 357; retrograde 
 policy of, 368, 369; adopt some of 
 Luther's views, 370 
 
 Vencelas, King, college founded by. at 
 Prague, 70, 73 ; his kindness to Hus, 
 82; his action as regards the Schism, 
 99; sends envoys to Pisa, 99, 100; 
 sends further envoy, 101 ; his willing- 
 ness to remain neutral, 10 1, 102; 
 complaints made to him of the " Wv- 
 cliffites " at Prague ; his angry words 
 to Hus and Jerome, 103, 104; receives 
 French embassy, 104; his change of 
 feeUng and famous decree of Kutna 
 Hora, 105; further decree forbidding 
 allegiance to Pope Gregory, 106, 107; 
 his answer to the remonstrance of 
 the German students, 107-109; urges 
 moderation on Zbynek, 124; continues 
 to extend protection to Hus, 128; 
 writes to the pope concerning the 
 Bohemian controversy, 128; remon- 
 strates with pope on behalf of Hus, 
 130; reasons for his not being elected 
 King of the Romans, 137; orders 
 confiscation of the archbishop's pro- 
 perty to refund the value of books 
 burnt, 138, 139; he is chosen as arbi- 
 trator between Hus and the arch- 
 bishop, 141; his court physician made 
 archbishop, 147; endeavours to 
 mediate between Hus and the Roman 
 party, 154, 155; forbids any participa- 
 tion in street riots on pain of death, 
 155; he and the queen persuade Hus 
 
 to leave Prague lor a while, 163, 164; 
 his efforts at conciliating the hostile 
 parties, 168, 169; summons synod to 
 meet, 170; his disappointment at its 
 failure, 173; calls another conference, 
 1 7^ ; his anger with Palec and sentence 
 of banishment against, 175; fears his 
 treacherous brother Sigismund, 179; 
 his popularity, 182; suspected of 
 heresy, 182; his representative not 
 allowed a hearing at the Council of 
 Constance, 208; his speech on hearing 
 of Hus's execution, 292; his dis- 
 pleasure with his brother and the 
 Bohemian priests, 337; refuses to 
 join the confederative nobles, 339; 
 loses his popularity and determines 
 to send to Sigismund for aid, 346; 
 hears of disturbance at Prague, seized 
 with apoplexy and dies, 347 
 
 Venceslas, Lord, of Duba, or Lestna, 
 friend of Hus, 214, 216; his visit to 
 him in prison, 235, 236; appeals to 
 Sigismund on his behalf, 246; over- 
 hears Sigismund's speech to the 
 council, 258; his visit and speech to 
 Hus in prison, 276. 277 
 
 Vladislav, King of Poland, Hus estab- 
 lishes relations with, 304, 305; his 
 victory over the army of the Teutonic 
 order, 305 ; Hus's letters to, 306, 307, 
 308; at war with King of Hungary, 
 307; his ambassadors at the Council 
 of Constance endeavour to save Hus, 
 309; offered the crown of Bohemia, 
 309 
 
 Vladislav, Prince of Poland, King of 
 Bohemia, 369, 370 
 
 Vlasim, Ocko of, Archbishop of Prague, 
 30; his distress at proceedings being 
 taken against Milic, 36 
 
 Vok, Lord, of Waldstein organises 
 grotesque procession through streets 
 of Prague, 153, 154; Jerome of 
 Prague's part in, 325 
 
 Vyklady, expositions by Hus, 186, 310, 
 315, 317 
 
 Vysehrad, castle of, seized by citizens 
 of Prague, 348; besieged by the Hus- 
 sites, 355; Sigismund defeated near, 
 355, 356 
 
 Waldhauser, Conrad, Augustine monk, 
 effect of his preaching in Prague, 23, 
 24; comes into collision with the 
 mendicant friars, 24; summoned to 
 appear before the archiepiscopal 
 court, 25; declines the legate's sum- 
 mons to a disputation, 2.5, 26; his 
 reply to his accusers, 26; King 
 Charles's favour towards, 26, 27; his 
 death, 27 
 
398 
 
 THE LIFE OF JOHN HUS 
 
 White Mountain, see Bila Hora 
 
 Wiche, Richard, his letter to Hus, 134, 
 135 
 
 William of Occam, 5 ; his views concern- 
 ing the secular power of the pope, 9 
 
 Wilsnack, Hus sent to investigate the 
 supposed miracles performed at, 82-84 
 
 Witold, Duke of Lithuania, elected 
 King of Bohemia, 363 
 
 Women of Bohemia, their joining in 
 church singing derided by the prelacy, 
 302; their resentment at the evil life 
 of the latter, 302; their fervent ad- 
 herence to Hus, 302 
 
 Wycliffe, indebtedness of Hus to exagge- 
 rated, 18-22, 117, 118; Hus studies 
 his works, 79; Hiibner's "articles" 
 against, 80; translation of work of 
 his by Hus, 89; strange tale concern- 
 ing, 117; his writings burnt, 122, 125; 
 all his works declared heretical, 169; 
 pronouncement of Council of Constance 
 against, 238; endeavours made to 
 prove Hus's identity of views with 
 at the former's trial, 250, 255, 256; 
 his character compared with that of 
 Hus, 299 
 
 Zabarella, Cardinal, appointed to 
 examine Hus, 237; at Hus's trial, 280 
 
 Zbynek, Archbishop of Prague, 81; his 
 efforts to improve the moral conduct 
 of the clergy, 81, 82; appoints Hus 
 preacher to the synod, 82; appoints 
 him to inquire into the Holy Blood of 
 Wilsnack, 82; becomes less friendly 
 to Hus, 86; letter from Hus to, 86, 87; 
 supporter of the rival Pope Gregory, 
 102; signs a decree against Hus, 103; 
 opposes the king's wishes, and retires 
 
 from Prague, 115; brings further 
 accusations against Hus, 118, 119; 
 his embassy to Alexander V., 121; in 
 accordance with papal bull orders 
 destruction of Wycliffe's works and 
 forbids heretical preaching, 122, 123; 
 burns the books and excommunicates 
 Hus, 125; ordered by king to refund 
 the value of the books and refuses, 
 138 ; some of his property confiscated, 
 138; places Prague under an interdict, 
 139; thinks it politic to make peace 
 with the king, 141; his dispute with 
 Hus is settled by arbitration, 141, 142, 
 143; renewed bitterness between, 143; 
 retires from Prague, 144; his threaten- 
 ing letter to the king, and death, 145 
 
 Zdenek of Laboun, Provost of All Saints, 
 royal commissioner at the church con- 
 ference in Prague, 173, 174 
 
 Zizka, John, of Trocnov, 221, 335; leads 
 attack on town hall of Prague, 347; 
 leads the Taborites against Prague, 
 348; to the help of Prague, 353, 354; 
 his political and religious views, 359; 
 his devotion to Hus's memory, 359; 
 defeats Sigismund at Nebovid, 363; 
 joins the extreme Taborites, 363; 
 defeats the Calixtines at Horic, 364; 
 and at Kralove Hradec and Malesov, 
 364; at the meeting at " Spitalske 
 pole," 364, 365; leads the united 
 Hussites on a last campaign, 365; 
 marches against Moravia, is attacked 
 by plague and dies, 365 
 
 Zmrzhk, Peter, meeting of contending 
 Hussites in house of, 362, 363 
 
 Zrcadlo Hrichuv (Mirror of Sin) by Hus, 
 186 
 
 
 THE TEMPLE PRESS, PRINTERS, LETCHWORTH 
 
Date Due 
 
 
 '^~~^r 
 
 — 
 
 *43JBjf|pW?**^j^ 
 
 l] 
 
 «fe 9f6 1ft 
 

 * 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 /H 
 
 
 J- 
 
 
 
 
BW2116.L94 
 
 The life & times of Master John Hus, 
 
 Princeton Theological Semmary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 00016 6621