The Crusade against Heretics in Bohemia, 1418-1437. Sources and Documents for the Hussite Crusades (review)

The core of the book consists of translated documents relating to the period from the first Bohemian crusade (1420) to the fifth (1431). It begins with a general introduction relating to the whole period. Each of the 208 documents is preceded by an explanation of its contents, context, and date. There are between sixty and seventy documents whose originals are in each of Czech, German, and Latin. While most scholars interested in the Middle Ages can handle German and Latin readily, the availability of translations of the Czech material will be widely welcomed.

The author has selected his material so that the dates are as equally as possible spread over the years under study. He draws on a wide variety of sources including songs, contemporary historians, commentaries on military practice, and registers of the papal chancellery, synods, reichstags, and diets. Dr. Fudge's efforts to select material adequately covering the period, while using diverse sources, have been successful.

The documents give a vivid picture of the military leadership on the two sides and why the crusaders failed so abjectly. The crusades were organized by a series of papal legates who attempted to cajole leaders of the states surrounding Bohemia to contribute troops and cash to the effort. It was a hard sell. Those princes who did participate all wanted a role in the leadership despite having little military talent. The end results were separate, ill-co-ordinated armies led by incompetents. Sigismund, the pretender king of Bohemia, managed to miss every crusade. The Bohemians, on the other hand, were very well led. Until 1424, their commander was the military genius Jan žižka, an extraordinary leader and creative tactician. His successors, Procop Holý and Procůpek, while lacking žižka's brilliance, were good, solid commanders.

There is an interesting story of Cardinal Henry Beaufort's petition to the Privy Council to be permitted to raise funds from English citizens to provision a crusade. He was eventually allowed to do so, but had first to present to the council a tally of all funds raised. The money could then be spent to purchase material for the crusaders, but the funds could be spent only in England. Some things never change!

The author seems to relish referring to the Bohemians as "Hussite heretics." It grates. The only doctrinal difference between the two sides was whether to give the chalice to the laity. The legates of the Council of Basel in 1434 accepted that this was permissible. So if the Bohemians were orthodox on this issue in 1434, they were equally orthodox in 1418 when Martin V, presumably through ignorance, branded them as heretical. Furthermore, Utraquism was instituted by Jakoubek of Stříbro, not by Hus, who counseled from Constance against it. It is much more accurate to talk about Czech Utraquists than about Hussite heretics.

The quality of the translation is uneven, in one case caused by reliance on a Czech translation of a document rather than on its Latin original. Feast days are sometimes confused, that of Saint James the Greater is said to fall on May 1 and that of Matthias in September. In commenting on the bull proclaiming the first crusade, the author notes, "The usual plenary indulgence guaranteed that whoever took up arms against the heretics would receive absolution of all their sins." The bull which follows puts it somewhat differently: "Those who respond, through absolution and true penance, shall have one hundred days of penance remitted. . . ."