The Letters of John

THE LETTERS OF JOHN HUS THE LETi TERS OF JOH N H US. WITHINTRO- DUCTIONSAND EXPLANATORY NOTES by Herbert B. Workman, M.A. Principal of Westminster Training College, Author of "The Age of Wydif" and "The Age of Hus" and R. Martin Pope, M.A. LONDON: HODDER AND STOUGHTON, 27 PATERNOSTER ROW 19o4 U_DLI/_A U._dVERSITYLIBBAK% "Fe_tas semloer_i_, _ _ s4__s4_ _m_o_et._ e_ mzt_ra, ut, quo magis obso_z_z_r, eo magis _, et_v_ ma_s depr_m_ur, eo maO_ de_aeur" DOC_crA, lo. 39, _, p. 95 "S_o, _uo_ _,.c@ _i o_'_i_ur" PREFAOE THE translation of The Letters of Hus in the present volume, though both authors are jointly responsible for the form in which it is now presented, is almost wholly the work of Mr. Pope. The Life, Introduc- tions, Collation of Texts, Chronological Arrange- ment, and Notes have been contributed by Mr. Workman, who is solely responsible for this portion of the book. The Lettvrs of Hus have never yet been adequately translated into English. The only extant translation is one by Mackenzie, published in Edinburgh in 1846. This is a rendering, not of the original, but of the French of Bonnechose's edition of the :Letters. Un- fortunately Bonnechose's work is based upon the very imperfect edition of 1558--Historia et Mo_t_- ment_ J. H_s et Hieron. Pragens_ (also with different pagination and some additional matter, 1715).1 No translation has hitherto been attempted from the text i This is the edition usually cited by us in the notes and elsewhere as _lfo_t. or Jfonum_ta. We give always the pagination of the 1558 edition, which will also be found in the margin of the 1715 edition. The text of the Mo_n_ is that used bT all hist--, inclndin_ Neander, before Palack_. As the 2krmtum_tt incorporates the whole of the _/#_/_v P//sdan_ (i_fea, p. 2), we have not thought it need_l to give the readings of this earlier and less complete edition. ¥ vi PREFACE of Palaclr_, which is not only more complete but also has the merit of presenting the letters in their approximate chronological arrangement. In Bonne- chose's co//ee_ion, where the order of the eclifion he used is strictly followed, early letters often come at the end, and the letters of the two captivities are sadly confused. Sometimes also simple expressions have proved a stumbling-block to Bonnechose, e.g., the word stubam (i_nfra, p. 152). The Czech of his edition(Nuremberg, 1558),which is,so to speak,the Czech of Frankfort-atte-Bowe,is leftseverelyalone; for no Palack_ had as yet made it intelligible.Am instancewillbe found on p. 206. The text we have chieflyfollowed is the great edition of Palack_ (Oocumenta Mug. Joanais H_, vitam, do_rinam, causam in Cansta_ti_n_ Goncilio a_am iUustrantia Ed. Ft. Palace: .Regni Bohemia_ HistqrlograThus , Prague, 1869)--usually cited by us in our notes as Doe., or, where questions of text are concerned, as P. The readings,however, that are to be found in HSfler's Geschichtschrelbev der husitischen Beweguq_g in BShmen (in the "Fontes rerum Austria- carum," Vienna, 1865, 3 vols.)--cited as H6fler or H.--seem to us in some cases to be preferable. The two editions have been collated--so far, that is, as readings are concerned which would make an essential difference in translation. A few of these differences, as also a few of the readings of the Mon_ta, are indicated in the notes. In spite of the severe criticism to which Palaeky subjected the PREFACE vii Geschichtschrdber in his Geschichte des Hussi_nthums (1869), HSfler_s text is one of considerable value, and contains many letters that had not previously been published. For the translationof the few Czech letters,we have depended entirelyon J. Kvieala's Latin rendering in Palack2,carefullycompared with HSflerTs German translation in the Geschichtschreiber. The Letters of Hus present not a few difficulties to the translator.Firstof all, thereisthe nervousness, terseness,and rapidityof his style,especiallyIn the letters of the Trial. Allusions which would be plain to his correspondents have often, by the lapse of time, become obscure. In such cases it is not easy to give a rendering which is intelligible, or which escapes the tendency to a loose paraphrase. Ia certain other cases Hus deliberately wrote obscurely in orderto escapethe consequences of the capture of his correspondence. Another difficulty,apart from the occasionalcorruptnessof the text,arisesfrom his Latinity. It goes without saying that the style lacks classicalgrace and correctnessI and, as com- pared with the earlier medimval writers such as Ansehn or John of Salisbury,or such latercurialists as Dietrichof l_iem, it is full of pitfallsfor the unwary. In our judgment, the Latin of Wyclif is the Latin of one who had ceased to think in that language; the Latin of Hus, though apparentlymore i _.g., the use of s8 and s/hi, the conjunctions qu_a and _ (conjunctive and disjunctive), are a source of much perplexity to those unfamiliar with the Latinity of the later Middle Ages. For the Latin of Wyclif, see some excellent remarks by Dr. Paole, JDe 6_v. 2}ore., i. xviii..xiz. viii PREFACE natural, is not that of a scholar, but is rather of the colloquial order, which tends to fal_ into a rugged and homely _ta/8. There are also a few isolated words that, so far as we can discover, have escaped the notice of lexicographers. These we have indicated in _he notes. The constant quotations in the letters from the Fathers, the Vulgate, and other sources have given us no small difficulty. As regards f_he Vulgate, Hus differs very widely from the present Clementine- Sextine text. In the lack of data it has been impossible to decide to what extent the difference is due to a faulty memory, or to the use by ttus of manuscripts somewhat differing from the Paris recension that was the standard of his time. As a matter of fact, the quotations of Hus from the Scriptures are generally only verbally accurate in the few letters for which we must depend alone on the doctored text of the Mo_u_z/z_ or Ep/ato/_ P_4ss_m_. In turning the Vulgate into English we have generally quoted the Douai-Rheims version. The quotations from the Fathers have proved an even greater r]ifficulty. Hus's knowledge of these authors was not first hand, nor will the student deem it sufficient to indicate the original source. The question must always be faced, _9"hat was the connecting link between Hus and the original ? Loserth, in his valuable monograph (Wydif and H_, 1884), established the deep dependence of Hus upon the _reat En6lish Reformer. We are inclined to PREFACE ix think _at our notes will establish an equal dependence of Hus upon the great medieval text-book, Gratian's Decr_, 1 and in some cases where Loserth held that the Bohemian was copying the Englishman, we suspect that both were copying from Gratian. The tracking out of these quotations has involved hours of labour--how many hours can only be guessed by those who have attempted a similar task themselves. In the two or three cases where our toil has been useless, we must plead the excuse of Dr. Johnson, "Ignorance, madam, sheer ignorance," urging in our defence, however, that Hus's quotations themselves are sometimes so inaccurate that even others better qualified would not be without difficultyin marking theirsource. The criticwill note that whereas in his notes _o the LettersMr. Workman gives authoritiesfor his statements,no authoritiesare given for any statements in the introductions. The reason for the differenceis that this is an edition of the Lettersnot, a Life of Hus. We have only sketched such portions of the Hfe of the great Bohemian Reformer as may be needful for the elucidation of _he Z_rs. For the sources of any statements as to the life of Hus, or in connection with the Council of Constance, we must referthe reader to Mr. Worlrman's Age of H'g.s_,and especiallyto the In our quotationsin the notes we have always used the edition of Misme. ' /_ D_w_ of t_ /_f_ : vol. i.,/_ Age of WyoZif;voLii., x PREFACE bibliographies it contains of both ancient and modern works. In the chronological arrangement of the Letters we have in the main followed PalackjT. In the cases where we have differed from him we have tried to indicate our reasons. In Appendix B the student will find tables adjusting the different numbering of the letters in this translation and in Palack2, and also giving the dates according to Pa]acky. In some cases, as the notes will show, the data for determining the chronology of a letter are very slight, often amounting to little more than a general impression impossible to put into words, and which possibly would appeal differently to different minds. In lieu of an index we have provided a full table of Contents,and a tolerablycomplete system of crossreferencesin the notes. This edition of the Lettersof flus,though we trustitmay be of some serviceto the more serious student, is intended primarily for the general reader. Our object is to make Hus himself,the man as he lived and laboured, more real; to present a portrait of the Reformer, such as letters alone can give, painted by the subject himself. Here and there the reader may possibly feel out of touch. He may complain that there is too much of the sound of a trumpet, the voice of words, and echoes of struggles long since dead. To some extent this is true of the letters written during the P_FAOE xi exile_Par__.).

Load more