have shown the skill which at that period usually distinguished papal envoys.
It has already been mentioned that the Táborites, after the death of their great leader, divided into two parties, one of which continued to bear the name of Táborites, while those belonging to the other called themselves the Orphans. In consequence of this scission the two parties chose different leaders. Hvězda of Vicemilic became the first commander of the Táborites, while Kuneš of Bělovic; who belonged to the Orebite community, led the Orphans, whose strength was mainly in the north-eastern district, of which Králové Hradec is the centre. That religious differences largely contributed to this scission has already been stated. The contemporary chroniclers, however, also tell us that the division among the two parties of the many cities which had acknowledged Žižka’s supremacy led to considerable troubles.[1] These dissensions appear to have been temporary and not of great importance. On the other hand desultory warfare between the united Táborites and Orphans and the Praguers continued almost uninterruptedly during the greater part of the year 1425. On this occasion; as on previous ones, the Táborites took up arms because they suspected Korybutovič and the men of Prague of negotiating secretly with the Pope. In September 1425 the Táborites besieged the castle of Vožic; which, though situated very near the town of Tábor, was still in the hands of Sigismund’s partisans. The garrison; commanded by Materna of Ronov, defended itself bravely, even after the forces of the Orphans, under Kuneš of Bělovic, had joined the Táborites. The Utraquists here seem, according to the account of a contemporary chronicler,[2] to have made considerable use
- ↑ “In the year 1425 after Žižka’s death there was great discord between the Táborites and the Orphans, and they seized the towns (that had been common property) and fortified them against one another” (“Scriptores rerum Bohemicarum,” Vol. III. p. 64).
- ↑ Bartošek of Drahonic. See my Lectures on the Historians of Bohemia, pp. 47–48.
