^{page 53 note 1} Huss und Wicliff: zur Genesis der hussitischen Lehre, Berlin, 2^te veränderte Aufl., 1925. Loserth says that Hus borrowed only single ideas and phrases from Wycliff up to 1409, but that ‘seine Schriften der nächsten Jahre sind nichts als ein dürftiger Auszug aus der reichen Schatzkammer des englischen Theologen’, 86.

^{page 54 note 1} Thomson, S. Harrison, ‘Learning at the Court of Charles IV’, Speculum, xxv (1950), 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar, citation from p. 14. In the nineteenth century the Czech historian Franz Palacký animatedly defended the contribution made by native reform movements and the originality of Hus and his predecessors, in Die Vorläufer des Husitenthums in Böhmen, Leipzig 1846;Google Scholar published under the pseudonym of J. P. Jordan. Palacký stressed the national and moral aspects of the reform as distinguished from the purely doctrinal. In polemics against Constantin Höfler, Palacký accused him of distortion and derogation in his Geschichtsschreiber der husitischen Bewegung in Böhmen, 3 vols. (1856–68) and in Magister Johannes Hus, Prague 1864Google Scholar. Nevertheless Palacký admitted that, not having read Wycliff's works, he was not able to make any statement about Hus's possible indebtedness to the English writer.

^{page 54 note 2} Marjan Heitzman, ‘Jana Wyclifa Traktat “De Universalibus” i jego Wplyw na Uniwersytet Praski i Krakowski’, Archiwum Komisji do Badania Historyi Filozofji w Polsce, ii, Part 2 (1926), 111–56, esp. 143 f. Heitzman's argument is, it must be admitted, negative rather than positive.

^{page 55 note 1} For a detailed and admiring biography based on manuscript sources, see M. Dzieduszycki's ‘Life’ in 2 vols., Cracow 1853–54.

^{page 55 note 2} Encyklopedja Polska, Akademia Umiejętności, Dzieje Literatury Pięknej, Part ii, Warsaw, n.d., 268.

^{page 55 note 3} De Conflictu Rationis et Conscientiae de Sumendo vel Aestimando Corpore Christi, MS. in Prague University Library XVI.F.21. For discussion, see Loserth, op. cit., 54. The contents are summarised by Höffer, C., Concilia Pragensia, 1353–1413, Prague 1862, introd., li ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 55 note 4} Das Puch des Kampfkriges der Vernunfft und des Gewissen…. Hat gemacht ze Latein der würdig Lerer der heiligen Geschrifft Meyster Matheus von Krakow, Memmingen 1491. See Theodor Sommerlad, Matthaeus von Krakau, Halle 1891, on Matthew's career.

^{page 56 note 1} Höfler, op. cit., lvi f.; summary based on Walchii Monumenta Medii Aevi, Fasc. i, c. 1. Höfler points to the query in the text—how can such practices be defended against Wycliffites, Hussites and other heretics?—to prove that the extant version is too late to have been written by Matthew. Still, he was living until 1410. In F. M. Powicke's revised edition of Hastings Rashdall's The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, ii, Oxford 1936, the possibility of Matthew's authorship is conceded, p. 292 n.

^{page 56 note 2} Encycl Polska, Lit. Pięk., ii. 268.

^{page 56 note 3} Kazimierz Kolbuszewski, ‘Ruchy Husyckie w Polsce i Wplyw ich na Piśmiennictwo’, Cracow 1922, 4; separately paged reprint of an article in Reformacja w Polsce, i (1921), 161–80. Kolbuszewski remarks that Hus fully developed two themes which WyclifF had only sketched out: the problem of organising the Church community, and the task of putting worldly institutions into order on the basis of divine law. Loserth comments on the striking similarity between Wycliff and Matthew of Janow, op. cit., 48, but makes no attempt to establish a connexion.

^{page 56 note 4} Text dated 1389, published by C. Höfler, Concilia, 37–9.

^{page 56 note 5} Fijalek, Jan Nepomucen, Studya do Dziejów Uniwersytetu Krakowskiego, Cracow 1898, 102–6Google Scholar.

^{page 56 note 6} Also known as z Skalmierza; Latin, de Skarbimiria. See Encycl. Polska, Dzieje Lit. Pięk., ii, 267.

^{page 56 note 7} Kolbuszewski, op. cit., 15; MS. in Cracow, Jagiellonian Library, No. 723, fol. 233–437. For additional material of this character Kolbuszewski refers to MS. No. 1484, fol. 459–78. There are a number of anonymous fifteenth-century refutations of Wycliff preserved in MSS. in Poland, e.g. Jag. Libr. No. 1766, p. 13, which begins: ‘Hie habes Informacionem contra quosdam auctores, quibus se armant et protegunt Wyclefiste’; No. 2367, fol. 339^a–352^b: ‘Reprobacio errorum Vicleff.’ An interesting manual for interrogating suspected adherents of Wycliff was kept in the church library of St. Mary's, Danzig, MS. F.141, fol. 25O^a: ‘Hic notande sunt interrogationes cum quibus interrogantur Wycleffiste et contra eorum responsiones statim scripture allegantur, ita quod nescient os aperire, et sunt utiles iste interrogationes.’ The list included 14 questions. See Günther, Otto, Die Handschriften der Kirchenbibliothek von St. Marien in Danzig, Danzig 1921Google Scholar. In Günther's Katalog der Danziger Stadtbibliothek, iii (1909), item 2309 contains an anonymous speech against followers of Wycliff and Huss., and item 2015 lists briefly the condemned doctrines of Wycliff. The Ossolineum Library reports a set of questions to be directed against Wycliffites, see Kętozyński, W., Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Ossolinianas, iii (Lwów 1898)Google Scholar, MS. 814, fol. 229–33: ‘Interrogationes Viclephistorum’.

^{page 57 note 1} Fijalek, op. cit., 67–71. Szekna wrote a Sermo contra Johannem Wyclif (incipit ‘Caro mea’), MS. Vindob. Palat. 4314, fol. 135^b–138^b, and other sermons still unpublished.

^{page 57 note 2} Kolbuszewski, op. cit., 15–17. Andreas of Kokorzyn wrote at the direct urging of archbishop Oleśnicki. See Zeissberg, Heinrich, Die polnischen Geschichtsschreiber des Mittelalters, Leipzig 1873, 173 nGoogle Scholar.

^{page 57 note 3} Historiae Polonicae, sub anno 1414, ed. I. Z. Pauli, Cracow 1877, iv. Liber xi, pp. 183 f. The ‘Catalogus Articulorum Viclephi Haereseos’ is a clear and competent summary. Długosz says that Hus's clerical followers are ‘omnes aere alieno gravati, sceleribus atque seditionibus insignes’ (italics added). Długosz also reports that before the Council of Constance he had often seen a book in Cracow itself, written by the hand of Hus and containing a summary of all the heresies preached before the people in Prague: ‘liber in papyro manu sua propria confectus, etiam a nobis Cracoviae frequentius visus, in quem omnes haereses, a se Pragae praedicatas ad populum, congesserat, productus est’, ibid., 191. Hus admitted that it was ‘manu propria scriptum’.

^{page 57 note 4} Zeissberg, loc. cit., citing Palacký, , Documenta Magistri Joannis Hus, Prague 1869Google Scholar, a letter of Albert of Cracow written to Wencel, patriarch of Antioch.

^{page 57 note 5} For detailed discussion see Heitzman, op. cit. The author argues that Hus did not accept Wycliff's philosophical position in its entirety; that the condemnation pronounced upon Hus at Constance dealt with him as reformer rather than philosopher.

^{page 57 note 6} As reported by Heitzman (op. cit., 114) they are attributed to Vilhelmus Anglicanus.

^{page 58 note 1} Chmielowski, Piotr, Historya Literatury Polskiej, i (1899), 89Google Scholar; Sokolowski, A., ‘Andrzej Galka z Dobczyna’, Przewodnik Naukowy i Literacki, ii (1874), 120–34Google Scholar, esp. 124–7.

^{page 58 note 2} Kolbuszewski, op. cit., 11.

^{page 58 note 3} Sokolowski, op. cit., 128.

^{page 58 note 4} This summary sketch of the Council of Basle is based chiefly on the article on the subject in The Catholic Encyclopedia, New York 1913, ii. 334–8Google Scholar.

^{page 59 note 1} E.g., dukes Bolesław and Wladysław of Masovia (co-regent brothers); but the papal order to exempt their territory from tithe collections was revoked after their submission. See Caro, Jacob, Geschichte Polens, Gotha 1875Google Scholar, iv. Bk. x, chap. 2, 384 ff.

^{page 59 note 2} Ibid., 402. The archbishop may have exaggerated the danger in the country as a whole, in order to obtain the confirmation of his status as cardinal, which had been delayed in Rome. Pope Nicholas V had reason to value Oleśnicki as a defender of Church unity and orthodoxy. The statement of obedience by the university was delivered in Rome by Dlugosz on 3 July 1449; the cardinal's insignia were received by him for Oleśnicki before the end of the month.

^{page 60 note 1} Rashdall and Powicke, op. cit., ii, 292 n.

^{page 60 note 2} Besides Sokołowski, op. cit., and Caro, op. cit., iv. 405 ff., see also Wiszniewski, Michał, Historya Literatury Polskiej, Cracow 1841, iii. 223–35Google Scholar; Dzieduszycki, , zbigniew Oleśnicki, ii (1854), 303 ff.Google Scholar; Heyne, Johann, Dokumentierte Geschichte des Bisthums und Hochstiftes Breslau, Breslau 1868, iii. 57–69Google Scholar.

^{page 60 note 3} See Muczkowski, J. (ed.), Statuta nee non Liber Promotionum in Universitate Jagellonica, Cracow 1849, 15, 17, 28 and 32Google Scholar. Next to his name in the official record a different hand has added the note: ‘hereticus pessimus cum quo disputabant cuncti’ beside the entry of 1424. The date of this comment is not known.

^{page 61 note 1} Cited by Wiszniewski, op. cit., iii. 235. This item is not contained in more recent collections of MS. material relating to Cracow. Wiszniewski does not indicate his source.

^{page 61 note 2} Sokołowski, A. and Szujski, J. (edd.), Codex Epistolaris Saeculi Decimi Quinti, Cracow 1876, ii. 67 f.Google Scholar, item 62.

^{page 61 note 3} On Master Benedict see Fijałek, op. cit., 150. He was dean when Gałka became master of arts; see Liber Promot., ed. Muczkowski, 17.

^{page 62 note 1} Codex Epist., ii. 68 f., item 63: ‘Hinc quoque actum est, quod quidam magister artium huius Universitatis, apud quern praefatus Gałka certos libros depositos comendatosve (sic) habuit et habet usque in praesens, postquam malum illud contra ipsum erupit, coepit libros illos revolvere, suspicatus, ne quid erroris in se continentur et demum, quod verebatur—invenit. Reperit siquidem inter eos certos tractatus et libellos manu dicti magistri scriptos, plenos errorum, reperit laudes et carmina vulgaria in laudem Wykleph haeretici dampnati, etiam manu eiusdem annotata, invenit opera eiusdem Wykleph et illius Anglici complicis eiusdem, quae omnia tandem ad me delata, postquam saltern cursim lecticassem, inhorrui admodum ad tam execrabiles et venenosos errores.”

^{page 62 note 2} Ibid., iii (1894), ed. A. Lewicki, 23 f., item 17.

^{page 63 note 1} Ibid., ii. 69–71, item 64.

^{page 63 note 2} Wiszniewski, op. cit., iii. 224. He cites the German Chronicle of Hartmann Schedel, Nurnberg 1491, for this detail, included in a description of Silesia. Kolbuszewski calls the duke a kind of Raubritter, op. cit., 11.

^{page 63 note 3} ‘… et quid non praevalent sacerdotes efficere per sermonem doctrinae, ipsi hoc imperent per disciplinae terrorem.’ Further: ‘vestris Serenitatibus haec omnia cognita facere volumus, et vos tanquam Duces catholicos obsecramus, petimus et rogamus, dignemini praefatum Andream tanquam fidei sanctae hostem mandare comprehendi, ut non noceat sua pestifera doctrina Christi fidelibus …’: Cod. Dipl. Univ. Cracov., 104 f., item 152.

^{page 64 note 1} Ibid., ii. 103 f., item 151.

^{page 64 note 2} ‘… dum eidem [i.e., the chancellor-archbishop] per nonnullos erat secrete delatus de quibusdam erroribus, quos occulte sub pelle agnina lupinam tegens versutiam, tradebat angulose”: ibid., ii. 106.

^{page 64 note 3} Ibid., ii. 110–12, item 157. For Hus's use of the same text see Palacký, Documenta, 31 f. (1412). Hus is here addressing the monks of a monastery in Moravia; he too begins by stating directly that he has heard of charges levelled against himself. The tone is far more temperate than Galka's: ‘Legistis verbum Christi: “Nolite judicare, ut non judicemini, nolite condemnare et non condemnabimini”: et tamen me judicatis, et Wiklef in vestro libello in anima condemnatis’.

^{page 65 note 1} ‘… quod facitis … et contra vestras Decretales dicentes: quod nullus homo debet iudicari et haberi pro haeretico, nisi citatus coram iudice legitimo ipsemet fateatur haeresin de ipso, vel per testes idoneos de haeresi convincatur,’ ibid., ii. 111.

^{page 65 note 2} The archbishop had received permission to hold a Jubilee in 1450 for the express purpose of combating the spread of heresy in Poland.

^{page 66 note 1} Codex Dipl. Cracov., ii. 113 f., item 158.

^{page 66 note 2} ’ … etiamsi fuerint apud nos extincti, adhuc in voluminibus Thomae Waldensis sententia librorum Wicleff remanebit.’ In the letter to the archbishop, similarly: ‘Item non extinguatis libros Wicleph, quia Thomas Waldensis, in quo sunt sententiae Wicleph, manebit in Collegio Artistarum, quern librum Magister Kozlowski attulit de Basilea.’ The reference is probably to Thomas of Walden or Thomas Netter (died 1430), a Carmelite who opposed Wycliff's teachings and who participated in the prosecution of Sir John Oldcastle in 1413. He was sent to the Council of Constance (where Kozlowski obtained his book) and later to King Władyslaw of Poland in support of the pope's crusade against the Hussites (1419). See DNB under Netter, Thomas. The summary by Thomas was hostile, of course; Ga“ka means that such a text preserves Wycliff's tenets in the very act of refuting them.

^{page 67 note 1} Codex Dipl. Univ. Cracov., ii. 115–18, item 159. Ga“ka calls the poem ‘quandam cantilenam vulgarem’.

^{page 67 note 2} ‘Magnifice domine! Ad Episcopum Cracoviensem modernum sum delatus, quod legissem et scripsissem libros Magistri Iohannis Wicleph ac incitassem Baroniam Regni Poloniae contra sacerdotes etc.’

^{page 68 note 1} There is no evidence to support Heyne's supposition concerning an ultimate repentance by Galka, op. cit., iii. 69.

^{page 68 note 2} Ga“ka clearly expected that it might at least be damaged. He advises having a better copy made in this case: ‘Si cedula cantilenae est confracta, faciatis ipsam vobis meliorem copiam.’

^{page 69 note 1} Ed. J. Loserth, London 1886.

^{page 69 note 2} Evidence about these trials has recently been collected from Polish city records by by J. Macek, Husyci na Pomorzu iw Wielkopolsce. Warsaw 1956, tr. from the Czech. For the reference to Ga“ka, see p. 149. In a recent article Stanis“aw Kolbuszewski has called attention to copies of Ga“ka's letter which are preserved in the archives of the Wroc“aw cathedral chapter. Kolbuszewski argues that one of them is very probably an autograph copy. See Kwartalnik Opolski, i (1955), 40–72Google Scholar.

^{page 69 note 3} Chmielowski, op. cit., i. 89; Dobrzycki, Stanisław, Polska Poezya Średniowieczna, Cracow 1900, 33Google Scholar; Bruchnalski, Wilhelm in Dzieje Lit. Pięk., i (1918), 117Google Scholar; Pilat, Roman, Historya Literatury Polskiej w Wiekach Średnich, i, Part 2, Warsaw 1926, 353Google Scholar.

^{page 70 note 1} Höfler, Concilia, 52, item 4.

^{page 70 note 2} Cited from Höfler, Geschichtsschreiber, by Kolbuszewski, Ruchy Husyckie, 21. Some years later, a witness reported (1455) that another Polish priest, Stanisław of Pokość, had a book ‘sic incipientem: Panye Boże, etc., vulgariter scriptum, quem, ipse ambulans in scola deferebat in manibus.’ The same priest, according to another witness, had ‘epistolas dominicales et evangilia in vulgari scripta”, Kolbuszewski, 20. We may assume that Gałka's vernacular effort in this field was not isolated.

^{page 70 note 3} ‘Wiersz o Wiklefie’, Pamiętnik Warszawski, v (1816), 457–60Google Scholar. See also Stanisław Potocki, Pochwaly, Mowy i Rozprawy, Warsaw 1816, ii. 423–5, for details on the discovery as well as a somewhat varying version of the text.

^{page 70 note 4} Editions used are: Pamiętnik Warszawski (PW) and St. Potocki (SP) as cited in the preceding note; Rakowiecki, I. B., Prawda Ruska, Warsaw 1822Google Scholar, ii. 217 f. (PR), Michał Wiszniewski, op. cit., iii. 425–7 (MW); Codex Dipl. Univ. Cracov., ii. 116–18 (CD); and the basic edition, that by Vrtel-Wierczyński, Stefan, Wybór Tekstów Staropolskich, Warsaw 1950 ed.Google Scholar, 192 f. (VW). A modernised version is given by the last-named in his Średniowieczna Poezja Polska Świecka, Cracow 1923, 111–14Google Scholar.

Helpful discussion of the text is given by Władyslaw Nehring, Altpolnische Sprachdenkäler, Berlin 1886, 224–9; Jan Łoś Początki Piśmiennktwa Polskiego, Lwów 1922, 457 f.; and Vrtel-Wierczyński, Śred. Poezja, 38–40.