Our systems are now restored following recent technical disruption, and we’re working hard to catch up on publishing. We apologise for the inconvenience caused. Find out more: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 April 2010
The idea of reform still supplies the guiding principle for most accounts of late medieval religion in Bohemia. Like a brightly colored thread, reform marks a trail leading forward from Jan Hus (d. 1415) to the leaders of the sixteenth-century Reformation, as well as backward to a series of precursors in the fourteenth century. This essay takes a different path through the religious culture of fourteenth-century Bohemia and of Prague, in particular. Rather than following the traditional historiography in identifying a handful of fourteenth-century Prague preachers as revolutionary forerunners of Jan Hus, this essay situates these and other figures within a more complicated and multivalent local religious culture, a culture that was carefully molded by Central Europe's most powerful authority. No one shaped Prague's local religion more dramatically than the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles IV (r. 1346–1378), as three examples offered here will illustrate. Like an architect, Charles IV designed much of Prague's vibrant local religion. Nevertheless, neither he nor anyone else completely controlled it.
1 David, Zdeněk, Finding the Middle Way: The Utraquists' Liberal Challenge to Rome and Luther (Baltimore, 2003), 5–6Google Scholar.
2 Palacký's Dějiny národu českého v Čechách a na Moravě [History of the Czech nation in Bohemia and Moravia] appeared from 1836 in German as Geschichte von Böhmen, the Czech volumes from 1848. By Palacký's 1878 death, second and, in some cases, third editions of each Czech volume had been issued. See Kutnar, František and Marek, Jaroslav, Přehledné dějiny českého a slovenského dějepisectví [Synoptic history of Czech and Slovak historiography] (Prague, 1997), 213–30Google Scholar.
3 For example, Lambert, Malcom, Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1992)Google Scholar; Oberman, Heiko, Forerunners of the Reformation: The Shape of Late Medieval Thought (New York, 1966)Google Scholar.
4 Kaminsky, Howard, A History of the Hussite Revolution (Berkeley, 1967)Google Scholar; Šmahel, František, Husitská Revoluce, 4 vols. (Prague, 1993),Google Scholar now translated by Krzenck, Thomas as Die Hussitische Revolution, ed. Patschovsky, Alexander, 3 vols. (Hannover, 2002)Google Scholar.
5 See, for example, Ozment, Steven, The Age of Reform 1250–1550 (New Haven, 1980)Google Scholar; Stump, Phillip H., “The Influence of Gerhart Ladner's The Idea of Reform,” in Reform and Renewal in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance: Studies in Honor of Louis Pascoe, SJ, ed. Izbicki, Thomas M. and Bellitto, Christopher M. (Leiden, 2000), 3–17Google Scholar.
6 See, for example, the biennial Prague conference established in 1996, The Bohemian Reformation and Religious Practice, with published proceedings appearing from 1998, edited by Zdeněk V. David and David R. Holeton, and now also available at http://brrp.org.
7 Amedeo Molnár used this term to describe Hussites together with Waldensians, in distinction from the “second Reformation” of the sixteenth century. See Robert Kalivoda, “K otázkám myšlenkového modelu tzv. první a druhé reformace” [On the question of the conceptual model of the so-called first and second Reformation], in Bratrský sborník: Soubor prací přednesených a symposiu konaném 26. a 27. září 1967 k pětistému výročí ustavení Jednoty Bratrské [Symposium of the Brethren: Series of works presented at the symposium held on the 26 and 27 September 1967 for the five hundredth anniversary of the founding of the Unity of the Brethren], ed. Rudolf Říčan, Amedeo Molnár and Michal Flegl (Prague, 1967), 120–26, reprinted in Kalivoda, , Husitská epocha a J. A. Komenský (Prague, 1992), 153–59Google Scholar.
8 Šmahel, František, ed., Häresie und vorzeitige Reformation im Spätmittelalter (Munich, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hudson, Anne, The Premature Reformation: Wycliffite Texts and Lollard History (Oxford, 1988)Google Scholar.
9 Palacký, František [J. P. Jordan, pseud.], Die Vorläufer des Husitenthums in Böhmen (Leipzig, 1846)Google Scholar; Balbín, Bohuslav, Epitome historica rerum Bohemicarum (Prague, 1677), 406–409Google Scholar.
10 Now see Marin, Olivier, L'archevêque, le maître et le dévot: Genèses du movement réformateur pragois années 1360–1419 (Paris, 2005), e.g., 11Google Scholar.
11 Kaminsky, Howard, “The Problematics of ‘Heresy’ and ‘the Reformation,’” in Häresie und vorzeitige Reformation im Spätmittelalter, ed. Šmahel, František (Munich, 1998), 1–22Google Scholar.
12 See, for example, Christian, William A., Local Religion in Sixteenth-Century Spain (Princeton, 1981)Google Scholar. One of the most eloquent critiques of a two-tiered model of medieval religion remains Brown, Peter, The Cult of the Saints: Its Rise and Function in Latin Christianity (Chicago, 1981)Google Scholar. See also Van Engen, John, “The Christian Middle Ages as an Historiographical Problem,” American Historical Review 91 (1986): 519–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and now, Van Engen, , “The Future of Medieval Church History,” Church History 71 (2002): 492–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also see the editors' introduction to part 4, “Religion and Society,” of Debating the Middle Ages: Issues and Readings, ed. Lester K. Little and Barbara H. Rosenwein (Oxford, 1998), 299–309; and Jean-Claude Schmitt, “Religion, Folklore, and Society in the Medieval West,” in the same volume (376–87).
13 Privilegia civitatum Pragensium, ed. Jaromír Čelakovský, Codex juris municipalis regni Bohemiae 1 [Prague, 1886], 73 no. 48; 81 no. 49.
14 Francis of Prague, Chronicon Francisci Pragensi, ed. Jana Zachová, Fontes rerum bohemicarum (Prameny dějin českých), Series Nova 1 (Prague, 1997), 202; Lorenc, Vilém, Nové město pražské [Prague's New Town] (Prague, 1973), 75–81Google Scholar.
15 Seibt, Ferdinand, Karl IV.: Ein Kaiser in Europa, 1346 bis 1378 (1978; reprint Munich, 1994), 177Google Scholar; Čarek, Jiří, “Praha v období vlády Karla IV” [Prague in the time of the rule of Charles IV], in Dějiny Prahy [History of Prague], ed. Janáček, Josef (Prague, 1964), 112, 123Google Scholar.
16 Privilegia civitatum Pragensium, ed. Čelakovský, 79–85 nos. 49–50; Lorenc, Nové město Pražské, 97–104. For the long-established Jewish community in Old Town, see Putík, Alexandr, “On the Topography and Demography of the Prague Jewish Town Prior to the Pogrom of 1389,” Judaica Bohemiae 30–31 (1996): 7–46Google Scholar.
17 Peter Moraw calculates from Charles IV's known itinerary that the emperor and his court spent approximately one-third of his reign (nine to ten years) in Prague or at one of the nearby castles like Karlstein, (“Zur Mittelpunktsfunktion Prags in Zeitalter Karls IV,” in Europa Slavica—Europa Orientalis: Festschrift für Herbert Ludat zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Grothusen, Klaus-Detlev and Zernack, Klaus [Berlin, 1980], 455)Google Scholar. See also Patze, Hans, “Die Hofgesellschaft Kaiser Karls IV. und König Wenzels in Prag,” in Kaiser Karl IV. 1316–1378: Forschungen über Kaiser und Reich, ed. Patze, Hans (Neustadt an der Aisch, 1978), 733–74Google Scholar; Macek, Josef, “Die Hofkultur Karls IV,” in Kaiser Karl IV: Staatsmann und Mäzen, ed. Seibt, Ferdinand (Munich, 1978), 237–41Google Scholar, and František Kavka, “Die Hofgelehrten,” in the same volume, 249–53.
18 [Chronicon], in Henricus de Diessenhofen und andere Geschichtsquellen Deutschlands im späteren Mittelalter, edited by Alfons Huber from the Nachlass of Johann Friedrich Boehmer, Fontes rerum Germanicarum, Geschichtsquellen Deutschlands 4 (Stuttgart, 1868), 116. Peter Moraw argues persuasively that Henry of Diessenhofen is here attempting to justify the place of Prague on the emperor's itinerary after stops in Aachen, Mainz, and Nuremberg, cities whose impeccable imperial credentials did not need to be repeated (“Zur Mittelpunktsfunktion Prags,” 457–58). Prague's inclusion among these cities was indeed remarkable, but one should not conclude that contemporaries generally considered Prague to be the empire's preeminent city.
19 For an introduction to the substantial literature, see Svatoš, Michal, ed., Dějiny univerzity Karlovy I: 1347/48–1622 [History of Charles University] (Prague, 1995)Google Scholar; recently scholars have debated how soon after its 1348 foundation charter the university in fact began to function: e.g., Moraw, Peter, “Die Prager Universitäten des Mittelalters im europäischen Zusammenhang,” Schriften der Sudetendeutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften und Künste 20 (1999): 97–129Google Scholar; Šmahel, František, “Die Anfänge der Prager Universität: Kritische Reflexionen zum Jubiläum eines ‘nationalen Monuments,’” Historica NS 3–4 (1996–1997): 7–50Google Scholar.
20 Graus, František, “Die Handelsbeziehungen Böhmens zu Deutschland und Österreich im 14. und zu Beginn des 15. Jahrhunderts,” Historica 2 (1960): 77–110, esp. 104–6Google Scholar; Mezník, Jaroslav, “Der ökonomische Charakter Prags im 14. Jahrhundert,” Historica 17 (1969): 43–91Google Scholar.
21 Kalista, Zdeněk, Karel IV.: jeho duchovní tvár [Charles IV: His spiritual character] (Prague, 1971)Google Scholar. Cf. Čapek, J. B., “Karel IV. a nástup české reformace” [Charles IV and the start of the Bohemian Reformation], Křest'anská revue 45 (1978): 200–209Google Scholar.
22 Crossley argues, for instance, that some of the oddest elements of Prague's cathedral must be attributed to Charles, rather than to the architect, Peter Parler. Crossley's important work builds upon (and provides convenient access to) the substantial German and especially Czech literature on the architecture of Charles IV: Crossley, Paul, “The Politics of Presentation: The Architecture of Charles IV of Bohemia,” in Courts and Regions in Medieval Europe, ed. Jones, Sarah Rees, Marks, Richard, and Minnis, A. J. (York, 2000), 99–172Google Scholar, esp. 101–6, 113. See also Crossley, , “Bohemia Sacra: Liturgy and History in Prague Cathedral,” in Pierre, lumière, couleur: études d'histoire de l'art du Moyen Âge en l'honneur d'Anne Prache, ed. Joubert, Fabienne and Sandron, Dany (Paris, 1999), 341–65Google Scholar. See also Rosario, Iva, Art and Propaganda: Charles IV of Bohemia, 1346–1378 (Woodbridge, UK, 2000)Google Scholar; Ferdinand Seibt, “Probleme eines Profils,” in Kaiser Karl IV.: Staatsman und Mäzen, ed. Seibt, 27–28; Seibt, Karl IV, 384–97.
23 “Privatfrömmigkeit und Staatsfrömmigkeit,” in Seibt, Karl IV, 87–101.
24 Boehm, Barbara Drake and Fajt, Jiří, eds., Prague: The Crown of Bohemia 1347–1437 (New York and New Haven, 2005)Google Scholar; also see Rosario, Art and Propaganda.
25 Balbin, Bohuslav, Vita venerabilis Arnesti primi Archiepiscopi Pragensis (Prague, 1664)Google Scholar, quoted in Podlaha, Antonín, Catalogi ss. reliquiarum quae in sacra metropolitana ecclesia Pragensi asservantur, Editiones archivii et bibliothecae s. f. metropolitani capituli pragensis 24 (Prague, 1931), 131Google Scholar. See chapter 5 of my doctoral dissertation, “Bones, Stones, and Brothels: Religion and Topography in Prague under Emperor Charles IV (1346–1378)” (PhD diss., University of Notre Dame, 2003).
26 Podlaha, Antonín and Šittler, Eduard, eds., Chrámový poklad u sv. Víta v Praze: jeho dějiny a popis [The Cathedral Treasury of St. Vitus in Prague: History and Description] (Prague, 1903)Google Scholar.
27 Tomáš Jan Pešina z Čechorodu, , Phosphorus septicornis, stella alias matutina (Prague, 1673), 436–37Google Scholar.
28 Pražské synody a koncily předhusitské doby [Prague synods and councils of pre-Hussite times], ed. Jaroslav Polc and Zdeňka Hledíková (Prague, 2002), 176; Beneš Krabice of Weitmil, , Cronica ecclesie Pragensis, ed. Emler, Josef, Fontes rerum bohemicarum 4 (Prague 1884), 519, 522Google Scholar; Monumenta Vaticana res gestas Bohemicas illustrantia, ed. Ladislas Klicman et al., 7 vols. (Prague, 1903–1998), 2.84, no. 197; 1.672–673 nos. 1263, 1264; Francis of Prague, Chronicon Francisci Pragensis, 211.
29 See Mengel, , “A Holy and Faithful Fellowship: Royal Saints in Fourteenth-Century Prague,” in Evropa a Čechy na konci středověku. Sborník příspěvků věnovaných Františku Šmahelovi [Europe and Bohemia at the end of the middle ages: Collection of papers presented to František Šmahel] (Prague, 2004), 145–58Google Scholar; Mengel, , “Remembering Bohemia's Forgotten Patron Saint,” in The Bohemian Reformation and Religious Practice, vol. 6, ed. David, Zdeněk V. and Holeton, David R. (Prague, 2007), 17–32Google Scholar.
30 Klaniczay, Gábor, Holy Rulers and Blessed Princesses: Dynastic Cults in Medieval Central Europe (Cambridge, 2002), 327–31Google Scholar; Crossley, “The Politics of Presentation,” esp. 159–60; Barbara Drake Boehm, “Charles IV: The Realm of Faith,” in Boehm and Fajt, Prague: The Crown of Bohemia, esp. 30–31.
31 The only surviving manuscript of this collection, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Nouvelles acquisitions Latins, Cod. 1510, was printed by the Bollandists: “Miracula sancti Sigismondi martyris, per ipsum in sanctam Pragensem ecclesiam manifeste demonstrata,” in Catalogus codicum hagiographicorum latinorum antiquorum saeculo XVI qui asservantur in Bibliotheca Nationali Parisiensi, vol. 3 (Brussels, 1893), 462–69.
32 Mengel, “A Holy and Faithful Fellowship,” 149–52.
33 According to the archbishop in a 1365 synodal statute, for example, Charles IV was responsible for the order that Sigismund's body be laid in the cathedral (Polc and Hledíková, Pražské synody a koncily, 192).
34 This is my central argument in “A Holy and Faithful Fellowship.”
35 “Miracula sancti Sigismondi,” 469; Beneš Krabice of Weitmil, Cronica ecclesie Pragensis, Fontes rerum bohemicarum 4.543–544; cf. Böhmer, Johann Friedrich, Die Regesten des Kaiserreichs unter Kaiser Karl IV. 1346–1378, ed. Huber, Alfons, Regesta imperii 8 (1877, reprint Hildesheim, 1968), 412 no. 4972aGoogle Scholar.
36 Beneš Krabice of Weitmil describes the “libellus” in which the Sigismund miracles were recorded (Cronica ecclesie Pragensis, Fontes rerum bohemicarum 4.533–34), evidently the origin for the surviving Paris manuscript. For the identification of some of the miracle recipients, see Mengel, “Remembering Bohemia's Forgotten Patron Saint.”
37 Folz, Robert, who did not take this miracle collection into account, notices the same tendency among the posthumous miracles of other royal saints (Les saints rois du moyen âge en occident (VIe–XIIIe siècles), Subsidia Hagiographica [Brussels, 1981], 129)Google Scholar.
38 “Miracula sancti Sigismondi,” 465.
39 “Father of the Bohemian Reformation” is the subtitle of František Loskot's 1911 biography, Milíč z Kroměříže: otec české reformace (Prague, 1911), which was the second volume in the series, “Great Men of the Bohemian Reformation.”
40 Mengel, , “From Venice to Jerusalem and Beyond: Milíč of Kroměříž and the Topography of Prostitution in Fourteenth-Century Prague,” Speculum 79 (2004): 409–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
41 Mengel, , “A Monk, a Preacher, and a Jesuit: Making the Life of Milíč,” in The Bohemian Reformation and Religious Practice, vol. 5, ed. David, Zdeněk V. and Holeton, David R. (Prague, 2004), 33–47Google Scholar. I have also identified a previously unknown, seventeenth-century manuscript of the same text and am currently producing a new edition of the text.
42 Morée, Peter, Preaching in Fourteenth-Century Bohemia: The Life and Ideas of Milicius de Chremsir (†1374) and His Significance in the Historiography of Bohemia (Heršpice, Czech Republic, 1999), esp. 255–60Google Scholar.
43 One could also include Pierre d'Ailly in this list. On the broader context, see McGinn, Bernard, Antichrist: Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil (San Francisco, 1994), esp. 173–99Google Scholar. On Milíč and Matthias of Janov, McGinn concludes that “[b]oth men were obsessed with Antichrist and the evidence of his presence in the world, although neither departed from the usual applied Antichrist views prevalent in the fourteenth century” (183).
44 Rubin, Miri, Corpus Christi: The Eucharist in Late Medieval Culture (Cambridge, 1991)Google Scholar. Arguably, the same general preoccupation with the Eucharist also later provides the context for the later Utraquist demand for communion in both kinds for the laity. See Marin, L'archevêque, le maître et le dévot, 457–508; Holeton, David, “The Bohemian Eucharistic Movement in its European Context,” in The Bohemian Reformation and Religious Practice, vol. 4, ed. David, Zdeněk and Holeton, David (Prague, 2002), 23–38Google Scholar, also available at http://brrp.org/proceedings/brrp1/holeton.pdf.
45 Karras, Ruth Mazo, “Holy Harlots: Prostitute Saints in Medieval Legend,” Journal of the History of Sexuality 1 (1990), 3–32Google ScholarPubMed.
46 Otis, Leah Lydia, Prostitution in Medieval Society: The History of an Urban Institution in Languedoc (Chicago, 1985), 72–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bloch, Iwan, Die Prostitution, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1912), 820–21Google Scholar; Brundage, James A., Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe (Chicago, 1987), 211–12, 395–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Graus, František, “Randgruppen der städtischen Gesellschaft im Spätmittelalter,” Zeitschrift für historische Forschung 8 (1981): 405–6Google Scholar.
47 Rollo-Koster, Joëlle, “From Prostitutes to Brides of Christ: The Avignonese Repenties in the Late Middle Ages,” Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 32, no. 1 (2002): 110–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
48 Mengel, “From Venice to Jerusalem and Beyond,” 439–40.
49 Mengel, “From Venice to Jerusalem and Beyond,” 434–38; Kejř, Jiří, “Žalobní članky proti Milíčovi z Kroměříž” [Articles of accusation against Milíč of Kroměříž] Husitský Tabor 10 (1988–1991): 181–89Google Scholar.
50 Elm, Kaspar, “Vita regularis sine regula: Bedeutung, Rechtsstellung und Selbstverständnis des mittelalterlichen und frühneuzeitlichen Semireligiosentums,” in Häresie und vorzeitige Reformation im Spätmittelalter, ed. Šmahel, František (Munich, 1998), 239–73Google Scholar.
51 See Čapek, “Karel IV. a nástup české reformace,” 200–209; cf. Hledíková, Zdeňka, “Karel IV. a církev” [Charles IV and the church], in Karolus Quartus, ed. Vaněček, Václav (Prague, 1984), 149–50Google Scholar.
52 Mengel, “From Venice to Jerusalem,” 439–40.
53 The most extensive treatment of Waldhauser remains Loskot, František, Konrad Waldhauser: Řeholní kanovník sv. Augustina, Předchůdce Mistra Jana Husa [Conrad Waldhauser: Augustinian Canon, Forerunner of Master Jan Hus], (Prague, 1909)Google Scholar; see also Machilek, Franz, “Konrad Von Waldhausen (Waldhauser)” in Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters: Verfasserlexikon, vol. 5 (Berlin, 1985), 259–68Google Scholar; Marin, L'archevêque, le maître et le dévot, 248–67.
54 Beneš Krabice of Weitmil, Cronica ecclesie Pragensis, Fontes rerum bohemicarum 4, 540.
55 Waldhauser, Conrad, “Apologia Konradi in Waldhausen,” in Geschichtschreiber der husitischen Bewegung in Böhmen, ed. Höfler, Konstantin, vol. 2, Scriptores rerum Austriacarum 1.6.2, (1865; reprint Graz, 1965), 18, 26Google Scholar.
56 Palacký, Die Vorläufer des Husitenthums in Böhmen; František Loskot, Konrad Waldhauser.
57 For William of Saint-Amour and the antimendicant tradition, Penn Szittya's study remains one of the best places to start: The Antifraternal Tradition in Medieval Literature (Princeton, 1986).
58 Peter of Zittau, , Chronicon Aulae Regiae, ed. Emler, Josef, Fontes rerum bohemicarum 4 (Prague, 1885), 321Google Scholar; Kadlec, Jaroslav, Das Augustinerkloster Sankt Thomas in Prag vom Gründungsjahr 1285 bis zu den Hussitenkriegen, mit Edition seines Urkundenbuches, Cassiciacum 36 (Würzburg, 1985), 38–39; 223–25 no. 71; 168–69 no. 35Google Scholar.
59 Kadlec, Jaroslav, Das Augustinerkloster Sankt Thomas in Prag, 36–39Google Scholar; see also Hledíková, Biskup Jan IV. z Dražic, 128–32; Marin, L'archevêque, le maître et le dévot, 235–47.
60 Ferdinand Menčík, “Konrad Waldhauser, mnich řadu svatého Augustina” [Conrad Waldhauser, a monk of the Order of St. Augustine], Pojednání královské české společnosti nauk 6, řady díl 1. Třida pro filosofii, dějepis a filologii 1 (1881): 15 no. 2, 18 no. 4.
61 Höfler, “Apologia,” 37.
62 Libri confirmationum ad beneficia ecclesiastica Pragensem per archidiocesi, vol. 1.2, ed. Joseph Emler (Prague, 1874), 16. Waldhauser held a benefice at the parish of All Saints in Litoměřice, where both the Dominicans and the Franciscans had communities.
63 Höfler, “Apologia,” 19–20; 29–30.
64 Ibid., 23–25.
65 Ibid., 36; 21; 32–33.
66 For example, Nechutová, Jana, “Konrád Waldhauser a myšlenkové proudy doby Karla IV” [Conrad Waldhauser and the currents of thought in the time of Charles IV], Sborník prací filosofické fakulty Brněnské Univerzity B 26/27 (1979–1980): 51–57Google Scholar; Nechutová, , “Raně reformní prvky v ‘Apologii’ Konráda Walhausera” [Early reforming elements in the ‘Apologia’ of Conrad Waldhauser], Sborník prací filosofické fakulty Brněnské Univerzity E 25 (1980): 241–48Google Scholar. Cf. Nechutová, , “Die charismatische Spiritualität in Böhmen in der vorreformatorischen Zeit,” Österreichische Osthefte 39 (1997): 411–19Google Scholar. For a more detailed account of the historiography, see Mengel, “Bones, Stones, and Brothels,” chapter 3.
67 Höfler, “Apologia,” 23; the Biblical warning against those who “penetrate houses” appears in 2 Timothy 3.6; Szittya, The Antifraternal Tradition, 58.
68 For the struggles of Waldhauser and the other traditional pre-Hussite forerunners with Prague friars, now see Marin, L'archevêque, le maître et le dévot, 231–324.
69 “Sed unum eciam sibi defuit, scilicet quod cum religiosis ordinum mendicancium nunquam cessare voluit litigare. Et tu tibi ergo de talibus cave, eciam cum hiis predictis vivas pacificus et cum hiis eciam, qui pacem oderunt. Hoc tamen dico, si fieri potest, quia cum predictis litigando modicum fructum facies et in sermonibus tuis multos supervacuos labores tibi facies in plebe” (Jan Sedlák, M. Jan Hus [1915, reprint Olomouc, 1996], 2*).
70 Polc and Hledíková, Pražské synody a koncily předhusitské doby, 190.
71 Charles IV seems to have had some role, for example, in securing for Waldhauser one of Prague's most important and wealthiest parishes, Saint Mary before Týn, probably around the time he resigned from his Litoměřice parish on 30 January 1365 (Menčík, “Konrad Waldhauser, mnich řadu svatého Augustina,” 30 n. 14; Libri confirmationum, vol. 1.2, ed. Emler, 59).
72 Josef Hemmerle, “Karl IV. und die Orden,” in Seibt, Karl IV, 301–5.
73 Mengel, “Bones, Stones, and Brothels,” chapter 1.
74 Moraw, Peter, “Die Universität Prag im Mittelalter: Grundzüge ihrer Geschichte im europäischen Zusammenhang,” in Die Universität zu Prag, ed. Eichler, Richard W., Schriften der Sudentendeutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften und Künste 7 (Munich, 1986), 35Google Scholar; Moraw, “Die Prager Universitäten des Mittelalters,” 110–11; Šmahel “Die Anfänge der Prager Universität, 25–31.
75 Koudelka, Vladimír J., “Zur Geschichte der böhmischen Dominikanerprovinz im Mittelalter: I: Provinzialprioren, Inquisitoren, Apost. Pönitentiare,” Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum 25 (1955): 96–98Google Scholar.
