“Passion and Passion: Intertextual Narratives in Late Medieval Bohemia between Typology, History,...

LUCIE DOLEŽALOVÁ�

PASSION AND PASSION: INTERTEXTUAL NARRATIVES FROM LATE MEDIEVAL BOHEMIA BETWEEN TYPOLOGY,

HISTORY AND PARODY1

The strong level of intertextuality we witness in medieval culture is no longer conceivable today when we lack the kind of shared textual knowledge exemplifi ed by the awareness of the Bible during the Middle Ages. What is sometimes called a lack of originality or a predilection for variation instead of innovation is an inherent feature of medieval culture that secured its continuity and coherence for over 1000 years. Repeating and re-enacting established patterns was an effi cient way of contributing to this process.

However, typology – the subject of this volume – is not a mere correspondence or parallel between two texts. The ‘new’ one should fulfi ll the ‘old’ one, elevate it to a new level, or even replace it: the idea of supersession is a crucial feature of the notion of typology. The Old Testament is completed in the New Testament but can there be a fulfi llment of the New Testament? The New Testament was used as a model during the Middle Ages – the whole genre of hagiography, for example, is based on this strategy, and there are also prayers, meditations, visions, self-infl icted pain and even exercises that are intended to allow one to imitate, re-enact and experience Christ’s life and suffering2 but these actions, as opposed to typology proper, do not surpass their model, Christ, who is the ultimate, unsurpassable model. The imitation of Christ is thus not an example of typology properly so-called (although it could be called postfi gural or imitative typology)3, but it forms part of ‘typological thinking’ characteristic

1 Research leading to this study was supported by the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports within the Institutional Support for Longterm Development of Research Organizations at the Charles University, Faculty of Humanities, Prvouk P 18. I am very grateful to Jeff Rider and Marek Thue Kretschmer for their kind help.

2 See S.M. ARVAY, Private Passions: The Contemplation of Suffering in Medieval Affective Devotions, Proquest Umi Dissertation Publishing, Ann Arbor 2008, who describes internalizing the Passion through meditation.

3 See M.T. KRETSCHMER’s introductory chapter in this volume, p. 13.

* Faculty of Humanities. Charles University in Prague. [email protected].

246 LUCIE DOLEŽALOVÁ

of the Middle Ages4, and a study of examples of this form of ‘typological thinking’ can contribute to the subject of this volume.

This paper explores three very different Latin texts from early 15th-century Bohemia, each of which takes the Passion of Christ as a narrative model for describing an actual historical event. While the texts differ in their purpose, they share a number of aspects. Together, they exemplify a variety of ways to model a narrative on the Gospel story, and, as I hope to show, an analysis of them leads to several more general conclusions about this practice.

Passio Iohannis Hus

Jan Hus (ca. 1371-1415) was one of the most important fi gures in Czech history5. The Hussite movement that began after he was burnt at the stake during the council of Constance in July 6, 1415 is considered heretical in general church history but in the Czech context it is viewed as a reformation6. The circumstances leading to Hus’s condemnation in Constance have been much discussed. Jiŉí Kejŉ, for example, maintains that Hus failed because he was not ready to face the Sorbonne masters and argue properly during the disputations7. In his own letters from Constance, however, Hus writes that Christ was then his only guide, and thus it is equally possible that Hus simply decided to shape his own last days in imitation of Christ8. If so, the Gospel narrative served him as a means

4 F. OHLY, «Typologie als Denkform der Geschichtsbetrachtung», in U. RUBERG – D. PEIL (eds.), Friedrich Ohly. Ausgewählte und neue Schriften zur Literaturgeschichte und zur Bedeutungsforschung, Hirzel Stuttgart 1995, pp. 445-72, and F. OHLY, Süße Nägel der Passion. Ein Beitrag zur theologischen Semantik, Koerner, Baden Baden 1989 (Saecula spiritalia, 21).

5 For the most recent studies, see, e.g., F. ŠMAHEL (ed.), A Companion to Jan Hus, Brill, Leiden; and ID., Jan Hus: Život a dílo ve dvaceti kapitolách (Jan Hus: Life and Work in Twenty Chapters), Argo, Prague; or P. SOUKUP, Jan Hus, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart (forthcoming).

6 P. SOUKUP, «Kauza reformace. Husitství v konkurenci reformních projektś» (The Case of Reformation. Hussitism in Competition with Reform Projects), in P. RYCHTEROVÁ – P. SOUKUP (eds.), Heresis seminaria. Pojmy a koncepty v bádání o husitství, Filosofi cký ústav AV ÿR, Prague 2013, pp. 171-217.

7 J. KEJň, Husśv proces (The Trial of Hus), Vyšehrad, Prague 2000.8 It is impossible to say whether Hus carefully prepared these steps or decided on

them in the heat of the moment. He was certainly sick and exhausted in Constance, and

PASSION AND PASSION: INTERTEXTUAL NARRATIVES 247

of self-fashioning, and we should speak of ‘historical’ typology, that is, typology that was actually lived9.

The best known, most widespread, widely reused, and adapted account of the death of Jan Hus was written soon after 1415 by an eye-witness, Petr of Mladoļovice (ca. 1390-1451)10. This Passion was almost immediately translated into Czech and infl uenced further reports of the event in both Latin and the vernacular. It can be seen as a hagiographical narrative, although Hus is described not simply as a follower of Christ but almost as a new Christ. It is impossible to say whether Petr simply recognized and penned down the Gospel pattern in Hus’s behavior, or made a creative decision to use the passion as a matrix for his narrative of the Hus’s martyrdom. For example, Hus is described reciting the Psalms just before his death, but it is impossible to know whether Petr actually heard him pray or simply assumed that this was what he was doing on the basis of the Gospels?11 The many direct allusions to and parallels with

thus it is possible that he was inspired to model himself on Christ in a moment of crisis, when he was at a loss about what his next steps should be. This would be in accordance with ideas of Jeff Rider who, basing himself on the analysis of murder narratives from the 12th century, claims that we are least original when we improvise, that we adopt established models of behavior when we are under stress.

9 The time was in many respects ripe for a ‘lived’ approach to the Bible, Hus repeated many times that the Church had gotten too far away from the Bible and should return to following Christ more closely. Just as they had for Francis of Assisi, the Bible, especially the Gospels, became a true guide for Hus and he promoted it as a guide for all Christians. After his death, his followers began to fulfi ll Old Testament prophecies, to imitate Revelations, and they expected that the world would end very soon. This is a very ‘typological period’ of Czech history but it is already a different story. A recent overview of Hussite chiliasm, including its typological features, can be found in P. CERMANOVÁ, «V zajetí pojmu: defi nice husitského chiliasmu» (Caught in a Notion: The Defi nition of Hussite Chiliasm), in RYCHTEROVÁ – SOUKUP (eds.), Heresis seminaria, pp. 139-69.

10 Both the Latin text and its very early Czech translation are edited in V. NOVOTNÝ (ed.), Fontes rerum Bohemicarum 8, Nákladem Nadání Františka Palackého, Prague 1932, pp. 121-49, including an introductory study at xviii-lxv. Accessible at http://147.231.53.91/src/?s=v&cat=11&bookid=182.

11 Cf. NOVOTNÝ (ed.), Fontes, p. 141: «Postquam autem pervenit ad eum locum, in quo passurus erat, fl exo poplite ac manibus oculisque coelum versus sublevatis, supplex precabatur, recitando quosdam Davidis Psalmos, ac praesertim quinquagesimum et tricesimum, versum quoque hunc: In manus tuas, domine, commendo spiritum meum, voce clara et vultu hilari subinde repetens, ita ut facile circumstantes audirent eum».


the life of Christ in his description of the event might thus be either the already mentioned ‘historical’, or ‘historiographical’ typology, that is, typology constructed within a narrative12.

It is interesting to compare the Passio Iohannis Hus to the Passio Lutheri from 1521, an account of Luther’s trial at the Diet of Worms modeled on the Gospels13. Rebecca Semmel14 describes the text in a way that is also applicable to the Passio Iohannis Hus:

The ‘code’ which the parodist15 reconfi gures lies in the res et verba of the four canonical versions of Christ’s passion, the Latin phrases that Jerome employed to render the four Gospels from the Septuagint. These literary forms are the typological elements of the story, the types recorded in the parody. They are types not in the exegetical sense of typology as the fi gural interpretation of history, but rhetorical types whose signifi catio is appropriated and reconfi gured for a Lutheran purpose. This parodist does not so much reinterpret a past event as reinvest a recent one with its borrowed signifi cance: Christ is not a fi gura of Luther, but the pathos and familiarity of his passio is used for Luther’s rhetorical pose. [...] The authenticity of this text’s account, like that of any hagiographical composition, is limited and debatable, but its rhetorical authority borrowed from the Vulgate is immediately recognizable and powerful16.

12 The Gospel pattern might also have been recognized and feared by Hus’s executioners. Petr writes that they decided to burn his clothes and other belongings so that they would not become the bases of a new cult, but one again wonders whether he is simply describing the historical event or adjusting it to correspond to the Gospels? NOVOTNÝ (ed.), Fontes, p. 147: «Interea carnifex quidam vestem Hussii tenebat. Ludovicus autem, simulatque cognovit esse tunicam Hussii, iussit eam ac cingulum, denique quidquid ipsius esset, iniicere in ignem, dicens: ‘Boemi enim id vice sacramenti haberent ac colerent.’ Deinde carnifi ci pollicitus est iacturam hanc compensaturum esse. Postremo omnia igne in cinerem concremata cum pulvere ac terra alcius effosa in bigas imposuere, deinde in Renum praeterlabenten dissiecerunt, quod ipsius nomen prorsus apud fi deles extinguerent».

13 J. SCHILLING (ed.), Passio Doctoris Martini Lutheri: Bibliographie, Texte und Untersuchungen, G. Mohn, Gütersloh 1989 (Quellen und Forschungen zur Reformationgeschichte, 57).

14 R. SEMMEL, «The Passio Lutheri: Parody as Hagiography», Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 95 (1996) 157-74.

15 By referring to the parodist or parody, she does not mean to claim that the text was mocking but simply to point out its high level of intertextual dependence.

16 SEMMEL, «The Passio Lutheri», pp. 159 and 161.


She describes Luther as «the persecuted Christ, the victim paradoxically victorious» and both Luther and Christ as «nonconformists to established religious practice»17. Yet, they are not simply compared: «...this text conspicuously omits the prepositions of comparisons that construct the imitatio Christi by analogy; Luther is not persecuted quasi Christus. Rather, he is equated with Christ. He is the new Christ for the Lutherans, for whom Christian history begins anew at Worms»18. The striking similarities between the two ‘passions’, although they were written more than a century apart, are testimony to the long and fruitful life enjoyed by the narrative paradigm that underlay them both, as well as reconfi rming the well-known parallels between the fi gures of Hus and Luther.

The most intertextual of the Hus narratives is the Passio Iohannis Hus secundum Iohannem Barbatum19. Its authorship has been disputed but it seems established that it was written soon after 1415, perhaps by an eye witness. The text survives in six manuscripts20. This Passion of Hus is linked closely to the Bible by means of allusions and parallels. The border between the Gospel and the historical reality is in fact completely blurred when the procession of the crowd following Hus is said to have reached Calvary21, not a place like Calvary22. Thus, like in the Passio Lutheri, history is presented in such a way as to underline its proximity to the Bible.

The medieval reception of this version offers another crucial point to consider. In one of the manuscripts, Tŉeboļ, State Archive, N 17923, a later

17 SEMMEL, «The Passio Lutheri», pp. 165 and 166.18 SEMMEL, «The Passio Lutheri», p. 167.19 Edited in NOVOTNÝ (ed.), Fontes, pp. 14-24, introductory study on pp. xii-xvii. 20 One of them, ms. Prague, National Library, V G 15, presents a different

redaction. Here, the text is already appropriated so that it can be used as a sermon. It begins with relevant biblical readings which can be used to open the sermon and link Old Testament characters to Christ.

21 Cf. NOVOTNÝ (ed.), Fontes, p. 17: «perveientes ad locum Calvarie, columpne eius corpusculum affi xerunt».

22 This point is stressed in T.A. FUDGE, «Jan Hus at Calvary: The Text of an Early Fifteenth-Century Passio», Journal of Moravian History, 11 (2011) 45-81, whose article also includes an English translation of the text but is otherwise an unreliable study with a number of mistakes.

23 This copy in fact offers the best version of the text and was used by Novotný as a basis for his edition. This manuscript was also edited earlier by F. PALACKÝ (ed.), Documenta Mag. Ioannis Hus vitam, doctrinam, causam... illustrantia, Tempsky, Prague 1869, pp. 556-58.


scribe made a few changes to the text that have a substantial result and turn the story of admiration into mockery. There are so few changes that it is possible to note all of them. Some adjectives describing Hus are turned into their opposites by adding the prefi x «in» or the word «non». Fidelis thus becomes infi delis, christianissimus inchristianissimus, iustus iniustus, pius impius, and castus non castus. The scribe tried to make these little additions inconspicuously as if they were part of the original text and they are indeed visible only because their addition eliminated the spaces between the words. The scribe’s addition of the whole word heresiarchi is, on the other hand, immediately visible in the margin. The passages that are thus affected read:

The passion of our unfaithful and most unchristian master Jan Hus the heresiarch... 24

And:

Oh, lamentable Constance, oh, counsel of Ahitophel! You dismiss [sinners like] Barrabas, Simon (i.e. Magus = the simoniacs), Giezi (i.e. Elisha’s servant = the avaricious), the incestuous, thieves, robbers, you cultivate the impious, embrace them and worship them, but you treat the innocent friend of God as if he were unjust, impious, unchaste! Neither tears nor troubled mind nor words nor writings can torture more. Oh Lord, who besides you can provide the key to such wisdom, with which we, who are shut in, may open the gate of speech?25

This latter passage is accompanied by a marginal note:

Ahitophel hanged himself voluntarily because his counsel was scattered and destroyed by Chusai, (while) Hus killed himself stubbornly and voluntarily because he did not corrupt all Catholics with his doctrine26.

24 Tŉeboļ, Státní archiv, N 179, fol. 7v: «Passio infi delis et inchristianissimi magistri nostri Johannis Hus heresiarchi...» The translations into English here and throughout are mine.

25 Tŉeboļ, Státní archiv N 179, fol. 8v: «O gemenda Constancia, o Achitofelis concilium! Dimittis Barrabas, Symones, Yezitas, incestuosos, fures, latrones, nephandos colis, amplecteris et veneraris, innocentem autem amicum dei, iniustum, impium, non castum sic pertractas! Lacrime et mens anxia nec verba, nec scripta possunt amplius extorquere. O domine, quis nisi tu dare poterit tante sciencie clavem, per quam clausi sermonis hostium possimus apperire?»

26 Tŉeboļ, Státní archiv N 179, fol. 8v: «Architofel volumptarie se suspendit pro eo, quod dissipatum est consilium eius per Chuzi destructum, Hus pertinaciter et


While the original aim of the allusion to the counsel of Ahitophel (2 Sam 16, 23) was to point to a bad and wicked counsel (like the judgment of the council of Constance to which it is linked in the passage), a different aspect of the Ahitophel story is stressed in the marginal note of the Tŉeboļ manuscript, namely his suicide when his bad intentions were revealed. In this way this version uses the same biblical reference but with an opposite purpose: here Ahitophel does not stand for an evil counsel but for the evil Hus who is destined to fail in his vane attempts to seduce Christians.

It is immediately apparent that the changes in this manuscript were not made systematically: e.g. in the second passage, the emotional paragraph about the council of Constance just discussed, we still read that Hus was an innocent friend of God (innocentem amicum Dei). There are more passages that remain in their original positive form than there are passages that the scribe transformed into ones critical of Hus, as if the scribe either gave up rewriting his model as a whole, or thought that the few changes he made were suffi cient to express his sentiments.

The Tŉeboļ manuscript features one other marginal note at the beginning that stresses that Hus was a heretic: «The Talmud seduced the Jews, Muhamad the Agarenes, and Hus the vane Bohemians and peasants» (Talmuth Iudeos, Machomet Agarenos, Hus quoque Bohemos seduxit wanos populosque rusticanos, fol. 7v). There exist many variants of this note, many in verse, some of which also mention Wiclef’s seducing the English; I have so far not encountered any other variant that specifi cally mentions seducing peasants (populos rusticanos) but the tradition of this note needs closer scrutiny27.

volumptarie se ipsum interfecit pro eo, quod sua doctrina omnes homines catholicos non infecit».

27 E.g. Machomet prophanos a fi de pervertit paganos, Talmut Iudeos, Wycleff Anglos Husque... (ÿeský Krumlov, Franciscan monastery, Ms. Z/7). One of the versions seems to be traceable to Mikuláš z Kozlí (Nicolas of Kozli, who died after 1423) but there is no evidence that he had any connection to the Tŉeboļ manuscript. See L. PAVERA – M. LECHOVÁ, (2000), «Mikuláš z Kozlí a jeho rukopis IQ 466» (Mikuláš of Kozlí and his manuscript IQ 466), in J. SVOBODA (ed.), Kapitoly z literárních dėjin Slezska a severní Moravy, Ostravská Univerzita, Ostrava 2000, pp. 14-62, or R. JAKOBSON, «Slezsko-polská cantilena inhonesta ze zaĀátku 15. století» (Silesian-Polish cantilena inhonesta from the beginning of the 15th century), Národopisný vėstník Āeskoslovenský, 26 (1934) 56-84, here 60-62 and 72. Later versions include Luther’s seducing the Germans as well.


Finally, there is an addition that caused a lively debate. The Tŉeboļ manuscript appends rusticum quadratum to the title, which thus reads Passio etc. secundum Iohannem Barbatum, rusticum quadratum. The meaning of rusticus quadratus has been disputed; it appears also in the context of parody and could mean a square hick or a country bumpkin. Some have argued that it is in fact a positive term in the context of a passion text sympathetic to Hus, one that stresses that the country people may seem rough but are sensitive and stand on the right side in this religious fi ght. According to this point of view, rusticus quadratus might be translated as a ‘right’ or ‘proper’ countryman28. Yet, in light of the other adjustments to the manuscripts made by the same hand, and especially the mention of peasants (rustici) as silly followers of Hus in the above-mentioned marginal quote, it is in my opinion safe to assume that rusticus quadratus has a negative meaning here; even if Vidmanová is right and quadratus has primary connotations of perfect and virtuous, it seems to be meant ironically in this case.

The narrative as it is presented in ms. Tŉeboļ N 179 is not at all sympathetic to Jan Hus. Yet, the transformation of the original celebration of a new martyr into a disapproving mockery required very little adjustment. The fact that almost the same text can be used to support or to criticize an idea is manifested in other genres of the same period in Bohemia, too. For example in polemical writings, both sides frequently use the same quotations from authorities (e.g. the Church Fathers) to support opposing views. Satirical and allegorical writings of the time are also easy to adapt so that they support the other camp simply by switching the labels.

It might seem curious that Hus’s adversaries take over this model, but it seems that in their view, the parallel between Hus and Christ shows well that he was a dangerous heretic: it is a sign of utmost pride to compare oneself with Christ. This is not so surprising if we consider that the fi rst and the most famous imitator of Christ was the Anti-Christ, who is modeled on

28 A. VIDMANOVÁ, «Šmaheliana», Listy fi lologické, 118 (1995) 309-14, here 310, says that rusticus quadratus should not be translated as a «square peasant» but as a «perfect peasant» (meant ironically) because quadratus was used to describe a person (usually a ruler) having four primary virtues: manliness, kindness, justice and piety. In a later study, she argues in more detail for translating rusticus quadratus as a proper man; cf. A. VIDMANOVÁ, «Sedlák hranatý nebo chlap jak se patŉí?», Listy fi lologické, 123 (2000) 52-58.


Christ but with the evil intention of seducing the people29. Imitating Christ (in life and in narrative) is thus an inherently ambiguous endeavor, an indication of modesty or pride, devotion or heresy. The literary treatment of the trial and death of Jan Hus in late medieval Bohemia shows well how easy it was to portray the same events from diametrically opposite points of view.

A mock passion narrative is actually a literary type that, as Paul Lehmann states, came into fashion in England around 1300 as a political song30. In late medieval Bohemia, there are at least two more texts that belong to this type but they seem to be signifi cantly different from one another in their cultural connotations.

Passio raptorum de Slapanicz

Passio raptorum de Slapanicz secundum Bartoss, tortorem brunensem (The Passion of the Robbers of Šlapanice, according to Bartoš, the executioner of Brno)31 is a mock passion story that survives in a sole copy in the early 15th-century ms. III E 27 in the National Library in Prague32.

It has always been assumed that it describes a real event – the capture and hanging a group of thieves in Šlapanice (Southern Moravia) at Eastertime in 1401 – although there are no other sources documenting it. While it includes some structural elements borrowed from the biblical Passion, the

29 Cf., e.g., R.K. EMMERSON, Antichrist in the Middle Ages. A Study of Medieval Apocalypticism, Art, and Literature, Manchester University Press, Manchester 1981. The parallels between Christ and the Anti-Christ were often visual as well; for example in a Czech picture Bible from the mid-14th century, Biblia picta Velislai, the Anti-Christ cycle precedes and is visually parallel to the Christ cycle. The only difference is a little devil near the Anti-Christ, and his lack of a halo. The manuscript Prague, National Library, XXIII C 124, is digitized on www.manuscriptorium.com (accessed June 4, 2013).

30 P. LEHMANN, Die Parodie im Mittelalter, A. Hiersemann, Stuttgart 1963, pp. 199-202.

31 Folios 61r-63r. It was edited by F. ŠUJAN, «Pašije šlapanických loupežníkś», Sborník historický, 3 (1885) 245-252 and 301-303. However, this edition contains many mistakes and a new edition is currently in progress. I therefore refer to the manuscript.

32 This codex is a very curious one containing other parodies, e.g. Sermo de sancto Nemine (Sermon on Saint Nobody) copied by the same hand that copied the Passio, as well as a variety of other short narratives, poems and letters.


text features a number of individual (and unconnected) biblical allusions and strives to create a solemn voice like that one fi nds generally in the Bible. For example, the very beginning describes the arrival of the robbers from Poland and reads:

At that time, Kyezolt departed from the borders of Poland, went to Šlapanice, where there was a church, which he entered with arms, he himself and his wicked acomplices with him...͵͵

The councillors of Brno decide that the robbers are guilty͵Ͷ and they decide to go to Šlapanice to attack them. The scribe Kašpar is the only dissenter and shows his reluctance in a mocking allusion to Jesus’ words before accepting the necessity of his ‘sacrifi ce’:

The day before the scribe Caspar said in front of everyone: ‘I was born for this and driven by fate I came to this place not in order to fi ght but in order to write letters. I implore you, my Lord, that, if it is possible, let this cup pass from us, I mean the cup of the present danger and of future gallows. Indeed, the spirit is willing but our whole fl esh and strength are so fragile and weak that we may not be able to withstand such a multitude of citizens. Truly not as we will but as you will, thy will be done!’͵ͷ

The robbers are surprised when they see the attack and react with an allusion to one of Jesus’s parables:

To whom they said: ‘Friends, how came you here not having a wedding-garment? Your arms, javelins and arrows, with which you are furnished, are not indications of friendship but of your rage’͵.

33 Cf. fol. 61r: «In illo tempore egressus Kyezolt de fi nibus Polonie, venit in Slapanicz, ubi erat ecclesia, in quam manu armate intravit ipse et sui complices scelerati cum illo...»

34 Cf. fol. 61v: «Pridiem autem Pessko yppatus dixit: Rei sunt mortis!»35 Cf. fol. 61v-62r: «Pridiem pro omnibus Caspar scriba dixit: ‘Ego ad hec natus

sum et ad hoc fato urgente in hunc locum veni, non ut pugnem, sed ut scribam litteras. Obsecro, mi domine, ut si fi eri potest, transeat a nobis calix iste, calix inquam presentis periculi et futuri patibuli. Spiritus quidem promptus est, caro autem omne nostrum [sic] ac vires adeo fragiles et infi rme, ut tante civium multitudini resistere non possimus. Verum non sicut nos volumus sed sicut tu vis fi at voluntas tua!’»

36 Cf. fol. 62r: «Quibus et dixerunt: ‘Amici quo huc venistis non habentes vestem nuptialem? Arma enim vestra iacula et sagitte, quibus instructi estis, non amicicie sed furoris vestri sunt indicia’».


The robbers are captured and darkness falls upon the land as it does during Jesus’s crucifi xion. It is the cloth of the robbers’ trousers that is torn apart, however – rather than the veil (Matthew 27, 51) – as they shit into them out of fear when they see the gallows:

Fifty-six robbers were captured in that fi ght, and when they were led to Brno with their hands bound and saw the gallows, which is not far from the city, they were so scared to death that they collected everything they had eaten gluttonously for an entire year and voided it. As a result, the cloth of their trousers was rent in two from the top to the bottom so that the chief herald was astonished. Afterwards, there was darkness over all the land, and the earth did quake with the clashing of the arms and the uproar of the people, and many bodies, that had fallen asleep in beds, were raised for the spectacle͵.

There are further mocking allusions, for example the attackers from Brno burn the church where the robbers are hiding and laugh at them saying that they should be able to rebuild it in three hours͵ͺ. The final note of the author (or scribe?) seems to be ironic, too: he says he did not see any of the events but stayed in Brno and wrote this testimony based on what he heard «so that you, too, may believe if you wish» (Hec autem qui scripsit premissa non vidit, sed manens in Bruna audivit ex fama sicque et ex auditis testimonium perhibuit, ut et vos si vultis credatis.) Asking the readers to believe something they did not see, and that the narrator himself has not seen, can be viewed ironically as questioning the whole event, or as an allusion to the unbelieving Thomas of the Gospels, thus playing on the biblical exhortation to unconditionally believe in the unbelievable (cf. John 20, 29). Considering this and the overall way the text is built, the attempts

37 Cf. fol. 62r-v: «Capti sunt in hoc congressu quinquaginta sex raptores, qui dum ligatis manibus ducerentur in Brunnam viso patibulo, quo haud procul a civitate distat, exterriti sunt et facti sunt sicut mortui ita, ut cogerentur totum egerere, quod in unius anni spacio per ingluviem devorarant. Unde accidit, quod velum femoralium ipsorum scissum est in duas partes, a summo usque deorsum, ita ut preses preconum miraretur vehementer. Postea tenebre facte sunt super universam terram, et ex fragore armorum et tumultum populi terra mota est et multa corpora, que in lectulis dormierant, ad spectaculum surrexerunt...»

38 Cf. fol. 62v: «...en ecclesia vestra quam castrum vocastis, igne consumpta est, que vix in tribus horis reedifi cabatur».


of historians to identify names mentioned in the text with documented persons seems futile39.

As a whole, the narrative is not very coherent but the main line of the story is clear. It does not follow the biblical Passion closely – in fact the plot is quite different from that of the Passion – and yet the similarities are obvious. The fact that the parallelism is not too smooth, in my opinion, suggests that the text indeed describes a real event. It is, however, impossible (and, I believe, pointless) to try to describe what had ‘really’ happened. For example, the fact that the event is set at Easter might be simply another literary link to the Bible, or, on the other hand, the capture of the robbers might have indeed taken place during Easter, and the time of year at which it occurred might have been the initial reason for describing it in terms of the Passion of Christ.

Why else might the author have used an established, high style, universal, institutional model to describe a rather insignifi cant historical event? Perhaps simply as a joke: the story brings a ‘high’ biblical narrative down, or, rather, elevates a ‘low’ common event to the heights of sacred history. A comparison with James Joyce’s Ulysses (1922) is not totally out of place here although the novel is obviously much more elaborate than our opuscule.

Passio Iudeorum Pragensium

The Passio Iudeorum Pragensium secundum Iesskonem, rusticum quadratum is structured similarly to the Passion of the Robbers of Šlapanice, but is otherwise totally different40. The text describes a pogrom carried out against the Prague Jews during Easter 1389, an important historical event that is mentioned (although not precisely described) in a number of other

39 See F. HOFMANN, «Pašije šlapanických loupežníkś» (The passion of the Robbers of Šlapanice) in L. SLEZÁK – R. VLÿEK (eds.), K poctė Jaroslava Marka. Sborník prací k 70. narozeninám prof. dr. Jaroslava Marka, Práce Historického ústavu, ŉada C, Miscellanea, vol. 13, Historický ústav AV ÿR, Prague 1996, pp. 149-68. There is a list of names included in the Passion of the Robbers but it is a literary composition with alliteration and rhymes, and features names that have clearly been made up.

40 The suggestion that Jessko, the author of this text, is identical with Johannes Barbatus, the author of the Passion of Hus, has no other foundation than the addition of rusticum quadratum to both titles and has not been generally accepted by scholars. Cf. F. MAREŠ, «Jessko rusticus quadratus», ÿeský Āasopis historický, 9 (1903) 202-3.


sources in Latin, Czech, and German. This particular version survives in three manuscripts but there are several more variants41. Compared to the Passion of the Robbers of Šlapanice, this text is much more sophisticated and contains more twists and paradoxes. At the same time, however, it has rather disturbing connotations for readers in the post-holocaust context.

At the beginning of this narrative, a priest carrying a host enters the Jewish part of Prague (Iudea in the text) and is attacked with stones by Jews who are then imprisoned42. This is a source of unrest among the people and a certain Ieško quadratus then suggests that all the Jews should perish for the sake of the Christians. From that moment on the Christians plan to kill all the Jews:

Then a man from among the crowd of the Christians, called square/proper Ieško since he was a sort of leader for the year and of his time, prophecized, saying: ‘It is profi table for you that all the Jews alike should die for the Christian people, so that the whole race does not vanish.’ Thus, from that day and from that hour they plotted to kill all the Jews, saying: ‘Let us take away their property and eliminate the treacherous race from the land of the living lest God’s vengeance fall upon us’43.

41 The mss. are: Tŉeboļ, Státní archiv, Ms. A 14, fol. 68v-70v, Prague, Knihovna Metropolitní kapituly u sv. Víta v Praze, Ms. O 3, fol. 167r-177r, and Prague, Národní knihovna, Ms. XI D 7, fol. 130v-133r. A new edition is currently being prepared by Evina Steinová. Until it is ready, the text is available only in her unpublished M.A. thesis, E. STEINOVÁ, Passio Iudeorum pragensium: Kritická edícia Pašijí pražských židov, Masarykova Univerzita, Brno 2010. Also accessible at http://is.muni.cz/th/180028/ff_m/ in which she presents working editions of the three variant narratives of these texts, as well as an annotated list of other sources describing or reacting to the pogrom. Some of her conclusions may be found in E. STEINOVÁ, «Jews and Christ Interchanged: Discursive Strategies in the Passio Iudeorum Pragensium», Graeco-latina brunensia, 17 (2012) 93-106.

42 The very beginning reads (cf. STEINOVÁ, Passio Iudeorum pragensium, p. 18): «Vespere autem sabbati, que lucescit in prima sabbati, ingressus sacerdos cum corpore Iesu in Iudeam, Iudei sibi obviam exierunt et portantes in manibus suis lapides clamabant dicentes: ‘Lapidetur iste, quia Filium Dei se fecit.’ Deinde pueri Hebreorum tollentes saxa platearum obviaverunt sacerdoti clamantes et dicentes: ‘Maledictus, quem portas in tuis manibus.’ Videns autem hoc sacerdos dixit cristianis: ‘Ut quid non molesti estis huic genti? Opus enim pessimum operata est in me. Hanc enim habetis nunc vobiscum, me autem raro habebitis’».

43 STEINOVÁ, Passio Iudeorum pragensium, pp. 18-19: «Tunc unus ex plebe cristianorum nomine Ieško quadratus, cum esset quasi pontifex anni et temporis illius,


Ješko’s pronouncements draw on the same biblical passages as the Passion of the Robbers:

But square/proper Ieško said: ‘They are guilty of death. And even if I have to die avenging Christ in the course of their destruction, I will not refuse’. Then Ionas, the leader of the Jews said: ‘My soul is sorrowful to death, indeed to perpetual death’. Then the square/proper Ieško said in response: ‘I will not fully rejoice until my sword and my spirit grow drunk on the blood of the Jews. My spirit is willing for it and my fl esh is not weak’. Turning then to others, he urged them, too, to strenghthen their brothers immediately, to pray and to watch lest they succumb to the Jewish temptation. ‘Not as they will, but as we will. The chalice, which God the Father has prepared for them, will not pass from them but they will drink it. Our will be done’44.

There is also a similar dialogue between the accusers and the accused45,

a similar description of the circumstances46, and an allusion to the same

prophetavit dicens: ‘Expedit vobis, ut omnes pariter Iudei moriantur <pro> populo cristiano, ne tota gens pereat’. Ab illo ergo die et ab illa hora cogitaverunt interfi cere omnes Iudeos dicentes: ‘Ne forte veniat ulcio Dei super nos, tollamus bona eorum et gentem perfi dam de terra vivencium disperdamus’».

44 STEINOVÁ, Passio Iudeorum pragensium, p. 20: «Dixit autem Ieško quadratus: ‘Rei sunt mortis. Et si in exterminio eorum oporteret me mori ob vindictam Iesu, non denegabo’. Ionas autem princeps Iudeorum ait: ‘Tristis est anima mea usque ad mortem, mortem autem perpetuam’. Respondens autem Ieško quadratus ait: ‘Non iocundabor ad plenum, donec inebrietur gladius simul et animus meus de sanguinibus Iudeorum. Spiritus quidem meus ad hoc promptus est et caro non infi rma’. Conversus autem ad alios, hortabatur eos, ut et ipsi protinus confi rment fratres suos, orentque et vigilent, ne in Iudaicam intrent temptacionem: ‘Ut non sicut ipsi volunt, sed sicut nos volumus. Calix, quem disposuit eis Deus Pater, non transibit ab eis, sed bibent illum. Fiat voluntas nostra’».

45 STEINOVÁ, Passio Iudeorum pragensium, p. 20: «At illi Iudei accesserunt ad eos et dixerunt: ‘Amici, ad quid venistis?’ Dixerunt cristiani ad invicem: ‘Ut quid tam diu sumus hic? Ut quid stamus ociosi? Comprehendamus et interfi ciamus Iudeos, ut per hoc impleantur scripture’. Statimque iniecerunt manus in perfi dos Iudeos crudeliter non parcentes eorum rebus nec corporibus. Diviserunt autem inter se vestimenta eorum, unusquisque quantum rapere valuit. Nec sortem miserunt super eos, sed integre et cumulatim ceperunt indifferenter non solum vestimenta, verum tamen omnem thesaurum et suppellectilia eorum cum illis».

46 STEINOVÁ, Passio Iudeorum pragensium, p. 21: «A prima autem hora noctis, igne domos Iudeorum consumente, tenebre facte sunt a solis occasu super universam terram usque ad sequentis diei auroram [Mt 27,45]. O vere beata nox, que spoliavit


biblical passage about rebuilding of temple47. The apparent similarities of the two texts suggest either that one inspired the other, or a strong tradition of this particular literary type, but a more detailed comparative analysis of the two texts is necessary before any conclusions can be drawn.

Although the two passions treat the Gospels in a remarkably similar way, and even allude to some of the same biblical passages, they have provoked very different reactions among scholars: while the robbers’s passion has only been mentioned in passing, the intertextual tension arising from the Passion of the Jews of Prague has received a much more detailed treatment. Barbara Newman has argued that the Passion of the Jews of Prague «maintains an uncomfortable intimacy with its original»48 and

employs a double ironic inversion. On the one hand, the Jews collectively play the role of Jesus, while the Christian mob plays the role of the biblical Jewish mob. On the other hand, the Jews remain Jews (wicked desecrators of Christ’s body), and the Christians, Christians (righteous avengers of Jewish blasphemy). [...] But The Passion of the Jews of Prague, by identifying the Jews simultaneously with Christ and his persecutors, compels a choice. Is the reader to exult in God’s vengeance, as the writer apparently did, or maintain the usual stance of sympathy with the tortured victim? Could John the Peasant have gone too far, driving some readers to feel horror rather than satisfaction?49

And she concludes:

The Passions of Matthew, Luke, and John are not only more radical than The Passion of the Jews of Prague, but they undermine it at every turn, creating a textual unconscious that, despite the author’s best efforts, allows the grace of irony and pity to seep through50.

Iudeos, ditavit cristianos. O sanctissimum Pascha nostrum in quo fi deles incontaminati agni esu, corpore videlicet et sanguine Cristi Iesu, pridie et tunc refecti et a pecatorum vinculis per contritam confessionem liberati ambulaverunt in fortitudine cibi illius, zelantes pro domo et ecclesia Dei et veluti leones ignem ex ore spirantes nec infancie nec caniciei Hebreorum pepercerunt».

47 STEINOVÁ, Passio Iudeorum pragensium, p. 23: «Illi autem, qui vivi post ignem et ferrum remanserunt, reclusi sunt captivi in pretorio. Quod cum vidissent cristiani, moventes capita sua dixerunt: ‘Vach, qui lapidastis Cristum, domus vestre destructe sunt, que vix in tribus aut in triginta annis reedifi cabuntur’».

48 B. NEWMAN, «The Passion of the Jews of Prague: The Pogrom of 1389 and the Lessons of Medieval Parody», Church History, 81 (2012) 1-26, here 11.

49 NEWMAN, «The Passion of the Jews of Prague», pp. 13 and 18.50 Ibidem, p. 26.


While I do agree that this text is potentially subversive, I think that specifi c aspect is brought to the fore by our interpretive community in particular, a community formed in the wake of Derrida’s deconstruction, Kristeva’s intertextuality, and, especially, in the wake of the Holocaust.

On the one hand, it is certainly the case that all texts operate in relationship to, and by recalling other texts. On the other hand, however, the texts I have discussed here do so very explicitly and suggest a specifi c conclusion: when the level of intertextual relationships becomes too high, that is, when most of a text’s words and structures are taken over from a previous text, the text loses control of its readers. When texts are built primarily from words and phrases taken from other texts, they do not offer clear clues to their meanings, which have to be sought around them. The three texts discussed here borrow freely from the biblical Passion narrative to describe actual events. Their intertextual strategies are basically the same and include allusion, adapted quotation, inversion, de-contextualization, or taking over the plot structure. This borrowing makes them unreliable as historical sources but is in itself worthy of a closer inspection, especially since the same method was used both to celebrate and to ridicule an event. In its original version, for example, the Passion of Jan Hus celebrates its Christ-like victim, but it can be turned very easily into a mockery. In the case of the Passion of the robbers of Šlapanice and the Passion of the Jews of Prague, the meaning of the biblical text is turned upside down from the beginning: the punishment is approved and the readers are encouraged to identify with the torturers. Yet, the readers’ decisions about which side to take (i.e., to side either with or against those representing the suffering Christ) are motivated by something outside the texts. The texts are interpreted in the social-cultural-religious contexts in which they were produced and received rather than on the basis of the words of the texts themselves51. Since the differences in the authors’ intentions do not lie at

51 Thus, for example, NEWMAN, «The Passion of the Jews of Prague», p. 24 says: «...the work of John the Peasant provides as clear an insight as we are likely to get into the mentality behind Easter 1389 and other pogroms. It is easy, as we have seen, to identify material causes of the violence: the self-interest of borrowers seeking debt relief, the annoyance of fi scally strapped parish priests, the impotence of the town council, and smoldering resentment against an ineffective king, not to mention the mindless cruelty of mobs». Yet, this claim is not supported by her study, which does open with a consideration of the reasons for the pogrom. None of the causes she mentions is refl ected in the text of the Passion in any way; she discovers them all in other sources. In her reconstruction


the level of the texts, or even at the level of the inter-texts, textual analysis cannot help to elucidate them.

During the Middle Ages in the Latin West, the Vulgate Bible, even though its own text was not completely stable, functioned as a basic cultural and social model narrative. The authors of our texts did not necessarily work with the text of the Gospels in front of their eyes as we tend to assume52, and their readers did not (unlike us) strive to identify every allusion and quotation. Thus, in my opinion, medieval reading was less inter-textual than ours. Medieval readers recognized words and sentences, and even recalled their original contexts, but they simply perceived these intertextual references, rather than searching out their sources and analyzing them, as we do. Relating to the Bible in a variety of ways was omnipresent and unavoidable both in private and in public space. In addition, certain aspects tended to be rather fi xed and the readers would connect specifi c indications with set categories and connotations without questioning them.

Here the suggestion of Stanley Fish about the power of interpretive communities in creating meanings becomes especially relevant53.

These mock passion narratives (together with a number of other highly intertextual texts54) were at fi rst neglected by scholars as either naive or

of what had actually happened, moreover, she employs some ‘information’ from the Passion that is highly debatable and contradicted by other (although no more reliable) sources for the event. In any case, the conclusion that the text provides an insight into the mentality behind the pogrom is unfounded: its date of composition is not certain and it might have been written several decades after the event.

52 For example, this is what Newman supposes about the author of the Passio Iudeorum. Cf. NEWMAN, «The Passion of the Jews of Prague», p. 26: «To read the Passion [of the Jews] as its author must have composed it, with a Gospel book open in front of him...»

53 See S. FISH, Is There a Text in this Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass. 1980; especially relevant is the chapter «What Makes an Interpretation Acceptable?», pp. 338-55, in which examples of contradictory interpretations of William Blake’s poem The Tiger display patterns very similar to the ones discussed here.

54 Such as the Sermo de sancto Nemine, or the Cena Cypriani, cf., e.g., L. DOLEŽALOVÁ, Reception and Its Varieties: Reading, Re-Writing and Understanding ‘Cena Cypriani’ in the Middle Ages, Wissenschaftliches Verlag, Trier 2007 (Bochumer Altertumswissenschaftliches Colloquium, 75); EAD., «The Absolute Alterity in Cult of Saints: Saint Nobody», in A. MARINKOVIý – T. VEDRIŠ (eds.), Identity and Alterity in Hagiography and the Cult of Saints, Hagiotheca, Zagreb 2010, pp. 89-101 (Bibliotheca Hagiotheca Series Colloquia, 1).


silly, while they now enjoy much attention: deep meanings are now being found in them, and the sophisticated strategies of their composition are being revealed. Neither the neglect nor the close attention is founded in the social and cultural background of the texts’ origin: when they were composed, these texts were probably seen neither as silly nor as shocking. They survive in conventional manuscripts alongside other common texts without any signs of complicated reception or questions about their value.

When put into words, virtually all ideals, ideologies, and even simply all ideas are potentially ironic and subversive. At the moment of their inscription, neither their authors nor the interpretive community for which they write are usually aware of these potential ironies and subversive aspects, especially if the aim of their writing is to promote a specifi c idea (that is, e.g., to write propaganda rather than playful literary creations). It is only after a certain time when the community is gradually transformed and the original meaning of a text is exhausted that this potential comes to the fore. Paradoxes are part and parcel of our society, and every text itself suggests its own opposite. That is why parody and satire can be created very effi ciently through even very small and inconspicuous changes to offi cial slogans and statements55.

Once subversion has been perceived, it seems so natural that it is diffi cult to imagine that it was not part of the author’s original intention. Yet, almost any ideology perceives itself to be the ultimate revelation of the truth and does not consider what might come after. Thus, I would argue that whoever modeled the Passion of Hus on the Gospel Passion never imagined that the text might easily be used to ridicule the hero. Nor did the author of the Passion of the Robbers ever expect anyone to

55 For example, in 1932, a Czech journalist Julius FuĀík wrote a report full of admiration for the Soviet Union and entitled it In the country where tomorrow is already yesterday: J. FUÿÍK, V zemi, kde zítra již znamená vĀera, Prague 1932, SNPK. He meant to praise the advancement of the Soviet Union, which was, he thought, always a step ahead of the rest of the world, where what is a hoped-for future for others (tomorrow) is already a reality, or even surpassed (yesterday). The work was, however, immediately subverted in the simplest way possible through a joke in which a Russian asks: «When will things get better here?» and is told: «They already have», an allusion to the lack of hope for the future in the Soviet Union. Similarly, one tends to perceive North Korean propaganda as parody when one encounters it today and can hardly believe that it is meant or taken seriously. We simply belong to a different interpretive community than the ones for which these texts are intended.


feel compassion for the justly punished victims. Nor did the author of the Passion of the Jews of Prague anticipate that making Jews the victims of collective violence and comparing them to Christ would sound so serious and timely in the 21st century.

The point here is not simply that the Bible provided (and continues to provide) an inspiration and a model for the creation of contradictory meanings and even ideologies. I believe that the mere fact that texts like those discussed here were written at all shows that their authors trusted that their message would be recognized behind the borrowed words. Following established patterns and allowing a very high level of intertextuality to enter one’s own text are in fact signs that an author has a high degree of confi dence in the shared knowledge and values of his or her interpretive community; it is a sign of that community’s assumed coherence and self-confi dence. Exactly because a highly intertextual text has little control itself over its interpretation, creating it proves that the author trusted that its intended meaning would be easily grasped and stabilized by the community in which it operated. On the other hand, the different interpretations of these texts today prove that interpretive communities do change, that stability of meaning is only a dream, and this is why the game of interpretation goes on.

Bibliography

S.M. ARVAY, Private Passions: The Contemplation of Suffering in Medieval Affective Devotions, Proquest Umi Dissertation Publishing, Ann Arbor 2008.

P. CERMANOVÁ, «V zajetí pojmu: defi nice husitského chiliasmu» (Caught in a Notion: The Defi nition of Hussite Chiliasm), in P. RYCHTEROVÁ – P. SOUKUP (eds.), Heresis seminaria. Pojmy a koncepty v bádání o husitství, Filosofi cký ústav AV ÿR, Prague 2013, pp. 139-69.

L. DOLEŽALOVÁ, Reception and Its Varieties: Reading, Re-Writing and Understanding ‘Cena Cypriani’ in the Middle Ages, Wissenschaftliches Verlag, Trier 2007 (Bochumer Altertumswissenschaftliches Colloquium, 75).

L. DOLEŽALOVÁ, «The Absolute Alterity in Cult of Saints: Saint Nobody», in A. MARINKOVIý – T. VEDRIŠ (eds.), Identity and Alterity in Hagiography and the Cult of Saints, Hagiotheca, Zagreb 2010, pp. 89-101 (Bibliotheca Hagiotheca Series Colloquia, 1).


R.K. EMMERSON, Antichrist in the Middle Ages. A Study of Medieval Apocalypticism, Art, and Literature, Manchester University Press, Manchester 1981.

S. FISH, Is There a Text in this Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass. 1980.

J. FUÿÍK, V zemi, kde zítra již znamená vĀera (In the country where tommorrow already means yesterday), Prague 1932.

T.A. FUDGE, «Jan Hus at Calvary: The Text of an Early Fifteenth-Century Passio», Journal of Moravian History, 11 (2011) 45-81.

F. HOFMANN, «Pašije šlapanických loupežníkś» (The passion of the Robbers of Šlapanice) in L. SLEZÁK – R. VLÿEK (eds.), K poctė Jaroslava Marka. Sborník prací k 70. narozeninám prof. dr. Jaroslava Marka, Práce Historického ústavu, ŉada C, Miscellanea, vol. 13, Historický ústav AV ÿR, Prague 1996, pp. 149-68.

R. JAKOBSON, «Slezsko-polská cantilena inhonesta ze zaĀátku 15. století» (Silesian-Polish cantilena inhonesta from the beginning of the 15th century), Národopisný vėstník Āeskoslovenský, 26 (1934) 56-84.

J. KEJň, Husśv proces (The Trial of Hus), Vyšehrad, Prague 2000.P. LEHMANN, Die Parodie im Mittelalter, A. Hiersemann, Stuttgart 1963.F. MAREŠ, «Jessko rusticus quadratus», ÿeský Āasopis historický, 9 (1903)

202-3.B. NEWMAN, «The Passion of the Jews of Prague: The Pogrom of 1389

and the Lessons of Medieval Parody», Church History, 81 (2012) 1-26.

V. NOVOTNÝ (ed.), Fontes rerum Bohemicarum 8, Nákladem Nadání Františka Palackého, Prague 1932.

F. OHLY, Süße Nägel der Passion. Ein Beitrag zur theologischen Semantik, Koerner, Baden Baden 1989 (Saecula spiritalia, 21).

F. OHLY, «Typologie als Denkform der Geschichtsbetrachtung», in U. RUBERG – D. PEIL (eds.), Friedrich Ohly. Ausgewählte und neue Schriften zur Literaturgeschichte und zur Bedeutungsforschung, Hirzel Stuttgart 1995, pp. 445-72.

F. PALACKÝ (ed.), Documenta Mag. Ioannis Hus vitam, doctrinam, causam... illustrantia, Tempsky, Prague 1869.

L. PAVERA – M. LECHOVÁ, (2000), «Mikuláš z Kozlí a jeho rukopis IQ 466» (Mikuláš of Kozlí and his manuscript IQ 466), in J. SVOBODA (ed.), Kapitoly z literárních dėjin Slezska a severní Moravy, Ostravská Univerzita, Ostrava 2000, pp. 14-62.


J. SCHILLING (ed.), Passio Doctoris Martini Lutheri: Bibliographie, Texte und Untersuchungen, G. Mohn, Gütersloh 1989 (Quellen und Forschungen zur Reformationgeschichte, 57).

R. SEMMEL, «The Passio Lutheri: Parody as Hagiography», Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 95 (1996) 157-74.

F. ŠMAHEL (ed.), A Companion to Jan Hus, Brill, Leiden 2013. F. ŠMAHEL, Jan Hus: Život a dílo ve dvaceti kapitolách (Jan Hus: Life and

Work in Twenty Chapters), Argo, Prague 2013.P. SOUKUP, «Kauza reformace. Husitství v konkurenci reformních projektś»

(The Case of Reformation. Hussitism in Competition with Reform Projects), in P. RYCHTEROVÁ – P. SOUKUP (eds.), Heresis seminaria. Pojmy a koncepty v bádání o husitství, Filosofi cký ústav AV ÿR, Prague 2013, pp. 171-217.

P. SOUKUP, Jan Hus, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart (forthcoming).E. STEINOVÁ, Passio Iudeorum pragensium: Kritická edícia Pašijí pražských

židov, Masarykova Univerzita, Brno 2010.E. STEINOVÁ, «Jews and Christ Interchanged: Discursive Strategies in the

Passio Iudeorum Pragensium», Graeco-latina brunensia, 17 (2012) 93-106.

F. ŠUJAN, «Pašije šlapanických loupežníkś» (The passion of the Robbers of Šlapanice), Sborník historický, 3 (1885) 245-252 and 301-303.

A. VIDMANOVÁ, «Šmaheliana», Listy fi lologické, 118 (1995) 309-14. A. VIDMANOVÁ, «Sedlák hranatý nebo chlap jak se patŉí?», Listy fi lologické,

123 (2000) 52-58.

“Passion and Passion: Intertextual Narratives in Late Medieval Bohemia between Typology, History,...

Documents

Transcript of “Passion and Passion: Intertextual Narratives in Late Medieval Bohemia between Typology, History,...