Abstract
Heresy accusations against Jan Hus have two sources. First, they originated among the priests of Prague who felt threatened by his strident preaching of reform and his withering criticism of their failure to fulfill the obligations of office. Second, with Hus’s ordinary, Archbishop Zbyněk, who regarded Hus as too popular, too radical, and increasingly disobedient to the will and authority of the archiepiscopal see. Zbyněk felt affronted. From these sources, complaints against Hus escalated to articles of grievance, which graduated to accusations of heresy eventually yielding formal charges. Heresy was considered a crimen mere ecclesiasticum; meaning an offense reserved for judgment by the Church. The political and personal motivation producing these accusations aimed to discredit Hus, rein him in, and force submission to his superiors. If this tactic failed, his enemies sought to destroy him. The goal appears to eliminate his ability to create disruption in the prevailing religious practices and structures in medieval Bohemia. Between 1408 and 1415 there were at least 13 cycles of accusations lodged against Jan Hus. These did not include four separate writs of excommunication, a number of informal denunciations, or academic polemical writings. In the Hus case, politics refers either to a commitment to an article of faith or to corruption. In the former, it is the Nicene doctrine of “one, holy, catholic and apostolic church,” which members are expected, indeed compelled, to recognize and obey the magisterium.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Alexander Patschovsky, Die Anfänge einer Ständigen Inquisition in Böhmen: Ein Prager Inquisitoren-Handbuch aus der ersten Hälfte des 14. Jahrhunderts (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1975), 15–65, 78–80.
Alexander Patschovsky, Quellen zur Böhmischen Inquisition im 14. Jahrhundert (Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1979), 289, 302 et al.
A central argument in Alain Le Boulluec, La notion d’hérésie dans la littérature grecque, II e–III esiècles, 2 vols. (Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1985).
According to the trial record of Petr Mladoňovice, Relatio de Mag. Joannis Hus causa, ed. Václav Novotný. Fontes rerum bohemicarum 8. (Prague: Nákladem nadání Františka Palackého, 1932), 25–120 at 116 (hereafter Relatio and FRB).
Gregory IX in the bull Ille humani generis (November 22, 1231) defines heresy in this sense; see Kurt-Victor Selge, Texte zur Inquisition (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1967), 45–7.
Inquisitio haereticae pravitatis neerlandica, ed. Paul Fredericq, 2 vols. (Ghent: J. Vuylsteke, 1892), 1: 50–9.
The standard biography is Václav Novotný and Vlastimil Kybal, M. Jan Hus: Život a učení, 5 vols. (Prague: Laichter, 1919–31).
In western languages see also Paul de Vooght, L’Hérésie de Jean Huss, 2nd ed. (Louvain: Publications Universitaires de Louvain, 1975);
Matthew Spinka, John Hus: A Biography (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968);
Ernst Werner, Jan Hus: Welt und Umwelt eines Prager Frühreformators (Weimar: Böhlaus, 1991);
Peter Hilsch, Johannes Hus (um 1370–1415): Prediger Gottes und Ketzer (Regensburg: Verlag Friedrich Pustet, 1999);
and, Thomas A. Fudge, Jan Hus: Religious Reform and Social Revolution (London: I. B. Tauris, 2010).
A point made by Herbert Grundmann, “Ketzerverhöre des spätmittelalters als quellenkritische Problem,” Deutsches archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 21 (1965): 519–75.
Leonard E. Boyle, “Montaillou Revisited: Mentalité and Methodology,” in Pathways to Medieval Peasants, ed. J. A. Raftis (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1981), 119–40;
and, Renato Rosaldo, “From the Door of his Tent: The Fieldworker and the Inquisitor,” in Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, ed. James Clifford and George E. Marcus (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986), 77–97.
Henri Maisonneuve, Etudes sur les origines de l’inquisition, 2nd ed. (Paris: J. Vrin, 1960), 29–91 traces the development up to the twelfth century.
The collected essays in Inventer l’hérésie? Discours polémique et pouvoirs avant l’inquisition, ed. Monique Zerner (Nice: Centre d’Etudes Médiévales, Faculté des Lettres, Arts et Sciences Humaines, 1998) make this clear.
Accusations against Hus (1414) in Documenta Mag. Joannis Hus vitam, doctrinam, causam in constantiensi concilio actam et controversias de religione in Bohemia annis 1403–1418 motas illustrantia, ed. František Palacký (Prague: Tempsky, 1869), 204–24 at 222 (hereafter Documenta).
Alcuin, Adversus felicis heresin, in Patrologia Latina, ed. Jacques Paul Migne, 221 vols. (Paris: excudebat Vraye, 1844–65), 101: 87.
This in a letter to the bishop of Litomyšl from Pope John XXIII. Kamil Krofta, “Z Geschichte der husitischen Bewegung: Drei Bullen Papst Johanns XXIII aus dem Jahre 1414,” Mittheilungen des Instituts für österreichische Geschichtsforschung 23 (1902): 598–610.
István Bejczy, “Tolerantia: A Medieval Concept,” Journal of the History of Ideas 58 (1997): 365–84.
This general query was raised by Caterina Bruschi, “Magna diligentia est habenda per inquisitorem: Precautions before Reading Doat 21–26,” in Texts and the Repression of Medieval Heresy, ed. Caterina Bruschi and Peter Biller (York: York Medieval Press, 2003), 110.
Decision text in František M. Bartoš, “V pšedvečer Kutnohorského dekretu,” Casopis českého musea 102 (1928): 107–8.
On Václav’s motivations see František M. Bartoš, “Husův Král,” Jihočeský sborník historický 13 (1940): 11–13.
Deutsche Reichstagsakten, ed. Heinz Gollwitzer, 22 vols. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979), 6: 577.
The matter is referred to several times in letters written by Hus. M. Jana Husi Korespondence a dokumenty, ed. Václav Novotný (Prague: Nákladem komise pro vydávání pramenů náboženského hnutí českého, 1920), 42–4, 101–2.
Leipzig Chronicle, in Geschichtschreiber der Husitischen Bewegung in Böhmen, ed. Konstantin von Höfler, 3 vols. (Vienna: Hof- und Staatsdruckerei, 1856), 1: 11.
Chronicle of the University of Prague, in FRB, 5: 570–1; and, Hus, Postilla de tempore bohemica, in Magistri Iohannis Hus Opera Omnia, ed. Jiří Daňhelka, vol. 2 (Prague: Academia, 1992), 165 (hereafter Opera omnia).
Liber diurnus de gestis Bohemorum in Concilio Basileensi, in Monumenta conciliorum generalium seculi decirni quinti, ed. František Palacký and Ernest Birk, 4 vols. (Vienna: Kaiserl Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1857), 1: 311.
Noted in Thomas A. Fudge, “The One-Eyed Heretic? An Introduction to the Ethics of Jan Hus,” in Contributions of Czechs and Slovaks to Science and Technology in the 21st Century, ed. Zdeněk V. David and Karel Raska, Jr. (New York: The Publishing House of the Czech and Slovak Society of Arts and Sciences, 2011), 56–70.
C.11 q.1 c.20, Istud est. For the legal aspects of the Hus trial, the reliable guide is Jiří Kejř, Husův proces (Prague: Vyšehrad, 2000).
In English, see Thomas A. Fudge, The Trial of Jan Hus: Medieval Heresy and Criminal Procedure (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013).
Pierre Torquebiau, “Contumacia, Contumax,” in Dictionnaire de droit canonique, ed. Raoul Naz, 7 vols. (Paris: Librairie Letouzey et Ané, 1935–65), 4: 507–25.
Sebastián Provvidente, “Factum hereticale, representatio et ordo iuris: Le procès contre Jean Hus au Concile de Constance (1414–1418),” Temas medievales 17 (2009): 103–38.
Super IV Sententiarum, in Spisy M. Jana Husi, ed. Václav Flajšhans, 3 vols. (Prague: Bursík and Vilímek, 1903–7), 2: 616 based on the opinions of Huguccio and Innocent IV.
Ibid., 736; and, the study by Miroslav Cerný, “Interdikt nad Prahou roce 1411: Na okraj jednoho mocenského střetu,” Právnéhistorické studie 35 (2000): 225–30.
Malcolm Lambert, Medieval Heresy, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002), 88.
His letter to the king is in Documenta, 443–5 and the comment about his demise is in Staré letopisy české, ed. František Šimek (Prague: Historick spolek, 1937), 8.
Thomas A. Fudge, The Memory and Motivation of Jan Hus, Medieval Priest and Martyr (Turnhout: Brepols, 2013), 109–33; and, Thomas A. Fudge, “The Role of Michael de Causis in the Prosecution of Jan Hus,” Filosofický časopis, supplement 5 (2016), forthcoming.
C.9 q.3 c.16, Ipsi sunt canones. On Hus’s appeal to Christ see Jiří Kejř, Husovo odvolání od soudu papežova k soudu Kristovu (Prague: Albis International, 1999); and, Fudge, The Trial of Jan Hus, 188–214.
Jan Hus, De sex erroribus, in Betlemské texty, ed. Bohumil Ryba (Prague: Orbis, 1951), 50.
An example is Prague University master Štěpán Páleč’s Antihus, in Miscellanea husitica loannis Sedlák, ed. Pavel Klener (Prague: Katolická teologická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy, 1996), 366–507. See particularly 377, 457, 459 and 466.
Chronik des Konstanzer Konzils 1414–1418 von Ulrich Richental, ed. Thomas Martin Buck (Ostfildern: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 2010), 6–8;
and, Acta concilii Constanciensis, ed. Heinrich Finke, 4 vols. (Münster: Druck und Verlag der Regensbergschen Buchhandlung, 1896–1928), 1: 174–9.
The scenario has been outlined in František M. Bartoš, “Král Zikmund, Václav IV. a M. J. Hus v r. 1414,” Věstník české akademie 53 (1944): 19–26.
Jan Sedlák, Studie a texty k životopisu Husovu, 3 vols. (Olomouc: Matice Cyrilometodějská, 1914–25), 1: 53;
Jan Sedlák, M. Jan Hus (Prague: Dědictví sv. Prokopa, 1915), 327–9; and De Vooght, L’Hérésie de Jean Huss, 322–32. De Vooght writes, “The theologians of Paris are convinced that in accordance with the teachings and spirit of Christ, heretics deserve death. On what basis do they decide? It is a mystery.” See ibid., 325.
Sacrorum conciliorum nova, et amplissima collectio…, ed. Giovanni Domenico Mansi, 53 vols. (Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1960), 27: 542 (hereafter Mansi).
Papal document edited by Loserth in Archiv für österreichische Geschichte 82 (1895): 373–4.
This is based on the witness of Peter Pulka, in “Petrus de Pulka, Abgesandter der Wiener Universität am Concilium zu Constanz,” ed. Friedrich Firnhaber, Archiv für Kunde Österreichischer Geschichts-Quellen 15 (1856): 13–4. Pulka represented the University of Vienna at the Council.
See the survey in Matthew Spinka, John Hus at the Council of Constance (New York: Columbia University Press, 1965), 13–22.
Alan Friedlander, The Hammer of the Inquisitors: Brother Bernard Délicieux and the Struggle Against the Inquisition in Fourteenth-Century France (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 289–90.
This Avisamentum fiendum processus contra Io. Hus was authored by De Causis or Johannes Náz. The text appears in František M. Bartoš, “Z posledního zápasu o M. Jana,” Jihočeský sborník historický 17 (1948): 58–9.
Noted by Herbert Grundmann, Ketzergeschichte des Mittelalters (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963), passim.
Othmar Hageneder, “Die Häresie des Ungehorsams und das Entstehen des hierokratischen Papsttums,” Römische historische Mitteilungen 20 (1978): 29–47.
Karl Joseph von Hefele and Henri Leclercq, Histoire de Conciles, 9 vols. (Paris: Letouzey and Ané, 1907–52), 7, 1, 330–1. The observation is Leclercq’s.
The argument has been made with respect to the Hussite appearance at the Council of Basel in 1433 but the observation is no less valid for Constance; see Paul de Vooght, “La confrontation des thèses hussites et romaines au concile de Bile (Janvier–Avril 1433),” Recherches des théologie ancienne et médiévale 37 (1970): 282.
R. I. Moore, “Heresy, Repression, and Social Change in the Age of Gregorian Reform,” in Christendom and Its Discontents: Exclusion, Persecution, and Rebellion, 1000–1500, ed. Scott L. Waugh and Paul D. Diehl (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 41.
Stanislaw Bylina, “Martires Gloriosi: Le martyre et la souffrance chez les contesteurs franciscains en Languedoc au XIVe siècle,” Les Cahiers de Varsovie 14 (1988): 76–7.
Mikuláš Pelhřimov, Chronicon causam sacerdotum thaboritorum continens, in Höfler, ed., Geschichtschreiber der Husitischen Bewegung in Böhmen, 2: 477, 567–8; and, Ulrich of Znojmo speech at the Council of Basel, in Orationes, ed. František M. Bartoš (Tábor: Jihočeské společnosti, 1935), 133.
The phrase appears in an eye-witness account of Hus’s trial. Passio etc. secundum Iohannem Barbatum, rusticum quadratum, in FRB, 8:16. See Thomas A. Fudge, “Jan Hus at ‘Calvary’: The Text of an Early Fifteenth-Century Passio,” Journal of Moravian History 11 (Fall 2011): 45–81.
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2014 Karen Bollermann, Thomas M. Izbicki, and Cary J. Nederman
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fudge, T.A. (2014). “O Cursed Judas”: Formal Heresy Accusations Against Jan Hus. In: Bollermann, K., Izbicki, T.M., Nederman, C.J. (eds) Religion, Power, and Resistance from the Eleventh to the Sixteenth Centuries. The New Middle Ages. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137431059_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137431059_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-49221-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-43105-9
eBook Packages: Palgrave Literature CollectionLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)