The Native Literature of Bohemia in the Fourteenth Century/Lecture 3

by Albert Henry Wratislaw

III.

he fourteenth century is the era of the rise of Bohemian prose. Its first beginnings were simple and inconspicuous enough. Following the order of Erben’s “Vybor z Literatury Czeské,” we come first to the “Book of the Old Lord of Rosenberg.” This is more valuable to the legal antiquary than to the student of literature. Only extracts are given by Erben, but it is printed entire with a Latin translation in A. Kucharski’s “Pomniki Pravodawstwa Slowianskiego” (Warsaw, 1838). As it is the earliest relic of Bohemian prose, I give one or two extracts just to exhibit its nature.

“XIII. How to cite a Vagabond.

“58. It is the law to cite a vagabond at three markets. When anyone is cited to Prague as a vagabond, it is the law to cite him at the first market, then it is the law to cite him at a second market in the town, where he has obtained the beadle from the inferior office to cite him with him. Then both beadles together have to cite him together at a third market in the district, in which lies the town nearest adjoining to the inferior office.”

“59. If a vagabond is cited, it is the law to cite him conscientiously at markets, and by the same law as other people who have houses are cited, but for this reason he is cited at three markets, because a vagabond has nowhere any house or property, only he wanders, because he is not settled, and therefore he is not cited from anywhere.”

“XV. An Abbot.

63. It is the law to cite an abbot by beadles in the monastery, and afterwards to complete his citation as a bachelor in a case of inheritance. When an abbot is cited for anything, it is the law to cite the abbot first, the prior by name second, the provost or cellarer (klucznik, key-bearer) by name third, and moreover to say: ‘and the whole convent.’”

“64. It is the law to cite an abbess who presides over nuns as an abbot or provost.’”

Some of the rules, by which citations served at the houses of the persons to be cited were governed, are worth noticing, for instance:—

“35. When the beadles cite, and they are told the lady is at mass or at a banquet or on a visit, the citation is legally performed; it is not invalid, because she will soon return home, and the household is at home.”

“38. If the beadle meets the lady travelling with the lord on the highway, he has no right to serve a citation, but always in the mansion where she resides and dwells.”

In a manuscript written about the middle of the fourteenth century are found several prose legends, from which I have selected the united legends of St. Cyril, St. Methodius and St. Ludmilla of Bohemia, passing over those of saints more or less common to Christendom.

“When the Almighty Lord willed that through the bright beams of his Holy Spirit the Christian faith should spread itself throughout all the world, then in those times, in which the reverend master St. Augustine^[1] was alive and flourished in the world, there arose a godly man by name Quirillus, who went into that country which hight Bulgaria, and converted the people to the Christian faith; and afterwards he went into Moravia and converted the Moravian people also to God. But because the people of those times were dull towards the service of God, the holy Quirillus bethought himself by help of the Holy Spirit to organize the service of God in the Slavonic tongue, and translated all the scriptures of the old and new law; and this order holds in Slavonic countries even unto the present day. Afterwards the holy Quirillus, leaving in Moravia his brother, who was named Methodius, went to Rome for devotion; and there the holy father, the pope, and other wise men reproved the holy Quirillus for that he had ordained to chant the service of God in Slavonic. To whom the holy Quirillus excused himself, saying, ‘Every spirit ought to praise God in every tongue. And since the Lord hath ordained the Slavonic tongue as well as other languages, as the Lord put it into my mind, so have I by this act converted many wanderers to the holy faith.’ Hearing this and admiring his firm faith, they confirmed and ordained that the service of God should be chanted in these countries even unto this day, of which confirmation the holy Quirillus obtained letters from the holy father the pope, and sent them into these countries, and afterwards he entered into the spiritual order and died serving God diligently. But his brother Metudius, who had remained in Moravia, was made archbishop by the king of Moravia, whose name was Swatopluk, and had under him seven other bishops. In those times the land of Bohemia was still in error of faith and worshipped pagan idols. And then there was a celebrated woman of natural genius, but a witch, by name Libussa, by whose ordinance the city of Prague was founded. And afterwards when the Bohemians elected prince a peasant ploughman, but a very wise man, by name Przemysl, then they gave Libussa in marriage to him; from which source hath come the lineage of Bohemian princes and kings famous throughout the whole world even unto this day. Afterwards, after many years, there came from this source a duke of Bohemia, by name Borzivoj, a kindly man, of goodly stature, full of wisdom; he took unto himself for lady of his land the daughter of Slavnik, of the district of Melnik, by name Ludmilla; she in her youth also worshipped pagan idols. And when, once upon a time, the Bohemian duke Borzivoj went to the royal court of Swatopluk, in Moravia, the king gave him a welcome and invited him to dinner; but allowed him not to sit among the Christians, saying, ‘According to pagan custom it appertaineth to thee to sit on the floor in front of the table.’ On whom the Archbishop Metudius took compassion, and being ashamed for him, saith unto him: ‘Eh! being so great a prince, art thou not ashamed that thou art thrust away from an honourable seat, and on account of the idols of thy erroneous faith sittest dishonourably upon the ground?’ ‘What matters it?’ he replied; for what doth your Christian faith avail? To whom the holy Metudius saith, ‘If thou wouldst, thou couldst well better this: renounce thy devilish idols, and thou wilt be a lord over thy lords, and wilt subdue all thine enemies beneath thy power, and thy posterity will come gloriously to might; for there is a prophecy prophesied long ago concerning the Bohemian princes.’ To whom the duke saith, ‘If this be so, why dost thou not christen me at once? or what hindereth?’ The holy Metudius saith, ‘Naught hindereth us, only be ready to believe with constant heart in God the Father Almighty, and in his Son Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Spirit, who is the enlightener of all faithful souls; and this do, not only from desire of temporal prosperity, but for the salvation of body and soul and abiding with God for ever.’ Hearing this holy speech, the Bohemian prince by the strengthening of the Holy Spirit earnestly desired the archbishop to christen him. And on the morrow the holy father Metudius, seeing the constant desire of the prince, christened him, with thirty servants who had come with him. Then, having confirmed himself in the holy faith, he took with him a priest, whose name was Kaïk, and returned to Bohemia, and caused a church to be built in the name of the holy Clement, above the castle which is called Gradist, and made that priest minister thereof. And meanwhile the land of Bohemia abundantly accepted the holy faith. Not many days afterwards the holy father Metudius came into Bohemia and christened the holy Ludmilla with many others, whereby the holy faith spread itself mightily in the land of Bohemia. The devil, seeing a multitude of souls liberating themselves from his power, excited the Bohemian lords against the priests, and that faithful prince was driven out of the land of Bohemia on account of the Christian faith. Wherefore he immediately arose and went to King Swatopluk and the Bishop Metudius in Moravia, and there being by them honourably received spent some time with them. But since the spite of human cunning, though it flourisheth for a time, cannot endure long, the older lords in the land of Bohemia recalled their duke back again with honour, and he on his return built a church in the name of the Holy Queen in the city of Prague, as he had vowed to the Mother of God in his exile in Moravia. This godly man was of the first princes of the land of Bohemia who founded houses of God, and appointed priests with clergy and with spiritual persons for the service of God. And afterwards he had three sons and three daughters by his holy lady Ludmilla, according as the holy father Metudius had prophesied to him, that his children were to be born in all that was good. And meanwhile Duke Borzivoj spent his days in great honour, and departed after commending himself to God, and in his stead his son Sbyhniew received the principality of Bohemia. He also, even as his father, established churches and priests and gloriously exalted the Christian faith, and departed, and Wratislaw, father of the holy Wenceslaw, was prince in Bohemia in his stead; and he built a convent in the Castle of Prague in the name of St. George for spiritual damsels. Meanwhile the holy Ludmilla, after the death of her lord, remained in purity even unto her end, serving God diligently, keeping under her body by fasts, kneeling, prayers, and various doings, in charitable works for the sake of the Lord, lovingly nourishing the poor, priests, and pilgrims, giving alms to the sick and prisoners, to the suffering and needy, so that she may be called a shining star that illuminated all the land of Bohemia with the bright beams of her holy example. And as the holy Ludmilla had in her guardianship her grandson, the holy Wenceslas, her daughter-in-law, a merciless pagan, envying this, wickedly bethought her in her heart how to destroy the holy Ludmilla, and turn that holy child, the holy Wenceslas, to pagan idols, and meanwhile extirpate the Christians in the land of Bohemia; even as she afterwards attempted this, driving the priests out of the land and commanding the church doors everywhere to be fastened up. The holy Ludmilla observing this migrated to the Castle of Tetin, and there, after receiving the whole sacrament,^[2] commended her soul to the Lord. And in that same hour two merciless executioners, sent for her death, broke open the doors of her chamber, and without any shame began insultingly to drag away their gracious princess. To whom she said, What do ye? have ye forgotten what good I have done you?’ This said the noble saint, grieving more for their sin than for the loss of her own life; but paying no regard thereto, they put a cord round her holy neck and began to strangle her. To whom she said, as she best could, ‘Rather cut off my head, that rolling in my blood for the sake of my Jesus Christ, I may obtain the crown of the holy martyrs.’ Paying no regard thereto, the merciless executioners encompassed her holy neck and strangled her, and angels took her soul and carried it to the joy of heaven. And afterwards many holy wonders were wrought through the holy Ludmilla upon various people, and are wrought even unto the present day. And some years afterwards the holy Wenceslas brought her holy body from Tetin to Prague, and buried it honourably at St. George’s, in the convent of the spiritual damsels.”

Part of the Scriptures—for instance, the Gospels and Psalter were translated into Bohemian as early as the tenth century, but the whole Bible does not appear to have been translated before the fourteenth century; at any rate no manuscripts of earlier date are known. There exists also a Life of Christ, apparently from an unknown Latin prototype, carefully composed in accordance with the four Gospels, and only in one place referring to the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus. The writer has, however, allowed himself a good deal of licence in filling up the outlines of the Gospel history. I give a specimen:—

“(85.) And when Jesus came that evening to Bethany, his mother came out weeping to meet him, and embraced him lovingly. Afterwards she sat down with him to supper. Here his mother ate more tears than food, neither did she do aught else but gaze continually into his face. That evening Jesus spake openly to the apostles, how he was to be sold and betrayed to death. O, bitter supper of thine, dear mother, when thou didst hear such news! Here saith St. Anselm: If the Mother of God could have known who was about to betray her son, she would have taken a rope upon her neck and fallen on the ground before him weeping, and saying, ‘Dear Judas, have pity on me, unhappy woman! If thou desirest of me a cup of money, I will gladly work for thee with my hands all my days, and give thee all my wages. If that is not enough, sell me to some one without injury to my honour, and enslave me somewhere in service, only have pity upon me, and betray not my dear son!’ And Anselm saith likewise, that had she seen the betrayer of her son she would have wept so piteously before him, that even had he been more hard-hearted than the devil she would have brought him to compassion. The Son of God would not therefore reveal this to her, lest that should have been broken up by her which had been written respecting his passion for the salvation of the whole world; but he looked at her that evening and comforted her with these words, saying, ‘Weep not dear mother! I shall remain with thee all day tomorrow.’ That night Jesus was at Bethany, conversing graciously with his mother and disciples, but Judas was not there, but was already on the way to compass his death.”

Among the works of the celebrated Albertus Magnus (ob. 1280), who was bishop of Ratisbon from 1260 to 1262, a high place is held by the “Paradise of the Soul” or “Book of the Virtues.” In the fourteenth century this work was freely translated, or rather imitated and enlarged, by an anonymous Bohemian writer, so that the forty-two chapters of the original have become sixty-two in the translation. I give as a specimen part of chapter xx., “Of Truth,” which will exhibit the principles inculcated by the literary men of Bohemia:—

“Truth is sure and faithful, when heart, mouth, and actions are in unison. For whoso has one thing in his heart and another in his mouth, and fulfils not by deeds what he speaks with his mouth, that man is not truthful. As the Lord himself saith in the Gospel: ‘Not every one that saith unto me twice, Lord! Lord! will enter into the kingdom of heaven.’ That is to say, whoso only speaks with his mouth and holds faith in his heart, and fulfils it not by deed, that man is not faithful and will not enter into the kingdom of heaven. As saith St. Paul: Be followers of me, and follow those people who teach with the heart, with the mouth, and by their works. That man is faithful and sure who fulfils what he promises to God and to men, without any alteration, save if he alters his promise for something better, as the heavenly king sometimes alters his judgment over sinful men, when they repent. As it was altered for King Ezekias, whom he had informed by the holy Esaias the prophet, that he must die, but afterwards for his weeping and for his prayer added to him fifteen years; and he had announced by Jonas to the great city of Nineveh destruction after forty days, but afterwards forgave them. It may incline us to the love of truth, that our dear Lord names himself the Truth, saying, ‘I am the way and the truth; and whoso loveth the truth walketh in the light of God.’ For truth is the light of our soul, and truth is the countenance of God. And therefore whoso hath more of truth and loveth truth, is like to good money, which hath good silver and a good image. Likewise falsehood is the countenance of the devil; therefore a false man is like money which has a fair image but bad silver; so also a false man hath a fair countenance and an evil life. And as a hundred bad coins are not worth one good one, so likewise a hundred false men are not worth one good one. Firm truth is the rule of the whole life, and indicator of all good actions; and whoso loveth the truth hath a fair mouth and tongue; and likewise the false man defileth his mouth more with falsehood than if it were full of filthy worms, in the eyes of the soul and of good people, to whom falsehood is very disgusting; for good and pure men have a life of righteousness, and their life is not counter to truth, and their deeds and works are faithful and true. And therefore true men love truth also in others. For everybody associateth himself to another according to his works—the faithful to the faithful, the good to the good, the wicked to the wicked, and that because each loveth that which is like himself. And therefore he who is faithful would be glad if all were faithful, that therein they might be like him. It may incline us to truth that it conquers all things. For everything changes, but truth never; as saith the Lord himself in the Gospel, ‘Heaven and earth can be changed rather than my words.’”

This will perhaps be a sufficient specimen of a work which partakes more or less of the nature of a translation, however free, and with whatever additions it may have been enlarged. We come now to works, written originally in Latin in Bohemia, and translated either by the original writer or a contemporary hand into the native language. Such are both the “Chronicle of Pulkava” and the “Autobiography of the Emperor Charles IV.”

Pribik or Pribislaw, of Hradcin, surnamed Pulkava, was first of all a notary of the Archbishop of Prague, then director of the collegiate school of St. Giles at Prague, and finally from the year 1378 rector of Chudenice, where he died in 1380. He wrote a Bohemian chronicle originally in the Latin language, which in the year 1374, at the special request of the Emperor Charles IV., he corrected and enlarged by interweaving some important documents and an old chronicle of the land of Brandenburg, which had then just been united to Bohemia. Later still, it appears that he translated it into the Bohemian language himself. As the Latin is undoubtedly the original, I give but a brief specimen of the work:—

“Chapter LXXV.
“How King Przemysl by the faithlessness of his lords was slain in Austria, and of other matters.

“In the year of the Lord 1278, King Otakar, being sorry that he had given up those lands (Austria, Styria, and Carinthia), and being craftily encouraged and instigated by some dishonourable counsellors of his, determined to have them back again, or give his life for it. Therefore, collecting an army, he invaded Austria, and laid it waste with fire and rapine. Without moving from the district of Lawen, he stood some days in the open field, and then marched to the town of Drosendorf, and pitched his camp there. Rudolf, learning this, and crossing the Danube with his army, posted himself on the frontiers of Moravia; when Otakar too had come to a hill in a wood near unto the river Morava, knowing nought certain concerning the King of the Empire.^[3] Therefore, by the instigation of that dishonourable and faithless villain, Milota, he (Rudolf) sent spies to ascertain how it was there; for this Milota, a dishonourable scoundrel, had some old anger in his heart against the king, although the king had made him lord and ruler in all Moravia. Thus then, when the King of the Empire, day after day, by the contrivance of this traitorous Milota, perceived King Otakar with his men in security, and when he had made himself strong with his own men, he suddenly approached, and with speed surrounded the army. King Otakar seeing the large army of the King of the Empire, and observing that many dishonourable traitors had joined it, of whom he had been formerly warned by the King of the Empire, because he had been brought up at his court, paid no regard thereto, but drew his army together; and thus, not waiting for the main body of his people, nor having any evil suspicion of Milota, committed himself to the chances of battle, having hope to obtain victory, and boldly determined to fight. Thus when the armies met on both sides, they began to fight with a good will; but meanwhile, on a sudden, that dishonourable traitor Milota, forgetting the many benefactions of the king, withdrew with his men from his king and lord. In such an evil moment of this battle did the wicked traitors dishonourably flee. Then took place a great and very hard battle, when some of the Bohemians fell to the ground, and others fled from their king. Wherefore the king was there defeated and slain in that battle, on the day of St. Rufus; and the King of the Empire mourned his death greatly. Thus, then, the king was carried to Prague, and buried honourably in Prague; and his son Wenceslas reigned in his stead, being only five years old, a young child; and the Margrave of Brandenburg took charge of him, as a powerful guardian, as his father had appointed.

“This year, John, Bishop of Prague, died, and Tobias, the five-and-twentieth bishop, became bishop in his stead.

“In these times the land of Bohemia was very ill-governed, for many Saxons and other Germans invaded the land, and so terribly harassed the Bohemians that many fled from their houses, and lived in the forests. Wherefore, because they ploughed not the lands, there was great hunger in the land; and, from the cruelty of those Germans, the land was greatly injured, and many churches, too, were destroyed. And this continued thus until the lords took counsel with the Margrave of Brandenburg, and intrusted the government of the land to the Bishop Tobias; and so the Saxons and other Germans were driven out of the land, and the people were freed from their oppressions.”

The Emperor Charles IV. appears to have written his autobiography in Latin, for the instruction of his successors on both thrones—that of Bohemia and that of the Empire—in the year 1863, beginning with his birth in 1316, and ending with the year 1346, when he was elected King of the Romans. It was translated into Bohemian in the fourteenth century, and, apparently, not long after its appearance in Latin. Unfortunately, a considerable portion is lost, and has been supplied by an inferior pen. Both as a historical and as a literary document, the value of this autobiography is very great; but as it is not altogether an original Bohemian work, I shall content myself with a brief extract from chapter xiv.:—

“At this time, when our father had lost one eye, he began to feel weakness in the other, and went incognito to physicians at Montpellier, to see whether he could be cured; nevertheless he, at this time (1340), became blind. And at this time we were going to the aid of the King of Spain, against the King of Granada, and had already sent on our people and armaments through Agace to Montalban; but our father detained us at Montpellier, secretly preventing us from going further. And when our father could not be cured, we went with him to Pope Benedict XII., at Avignon, to negotiate with him about the Peter’s pence, which are paid in the bishopric of Breslau. But that was not arranged then, but remained in dispute. But afterwards the dispute was settled, which there was between the Church of Rome and the aforesaid bishopric for the aforesaid money. But when we were there, we confessed to the Pope concerning the vision which we had had about the Delfin of Vienne,^[4] when we were in Italy, as is aforesaid. But at that time it seemed to us to be better to keep silence, for several reasons, than to reveal and relate it to our father. And when we were with the Pope, Peter, Cardinal of the holy martyrs Nereus and Achilles, of whom mention has previously been made, since he celebrated mass on Ash Wednesday, as has been afore related, entertained us in his house, we being at that time Margrave of Moravia, when we were staying with Pope Benedict. He said to us on one occasion, when he was with us in his house, ‘Thou wilt yet be King of the Romans.’ We answered him, ‘Thou wilt first be Pope.’ And both these things came to pass, as will be related below.”^[5]

The coronation service of the King of Bohemia was originally drawn up in Latin by the Emperor Charles IV., and was afterwards translated into Bohemian. The following brief extract may be interesting, as showing the originally elective nature of the Crown:—

“Then shall the archbishop say, with moderated and solemn voice, ‘Wilt thou hold, and by righteous actions preserve the Christian faith given by Christian men?’

“Answer; ‘I will.’

“Again he shall ask him: ‘Wilt thou govern and defend the kingdom intrusted to thee by God, according to the righteousness of thy ancestors?’

“Answer: ‘As, being strengthened by the Divine aid and the comfort of all his faithful ones, I shall be able, so do I promise all faithfully to do.’

“Then shall the archbishop speak to the people in these words: ‘Will ye also submit yourselves to N. as prince and ruler, and be obedient to his command, according to the word of the holy Apostle, who saith, Let every soul be subject to the higher powers, whether to the king as supreme?’

“Then shall it be said by the clergy and people standing round with one voice: ‘Willingly, willingly, willingly.’”

The rules of practice of the tribunal of the realm (ordo judicii terræ) were originally drawn up in Latin, between 1348 and 1355, in two recensions, and afterwards in Bohemian, but in a very free translation, which sometimes abridges, sometimes enlarges, and sometimes altogether alters the original. Like the book of the old Lord of Rosenberg, it is the work of a contemporary writer, but not of a legislator, and it therefore never had any legal validity; still it exhibits for us not only the practice of the tribunals, but also many principles of law which were formerly observed in Bohemia, and thus belongs to the class of the most important records of mediæval jurisprudence, both in Slavonic countries in particular and Europe in general.

When I read the earlier part of this work for the first time, I found myself transported to the great appeal of Bolingbroke versus Mowbray, in Shakespeare’s “Richard II.,” so similar are both the forms and principles of procedure. As that carries us only up to the conflict, which is put an end to by the intervention of the king, I shall select my specimens from the description of the conflict itself and the subsequent proceedings.

“(22.) And when the appointed time comes, then the appellant, being ready for battle, must take his oath first, as the lords shall give him the formula. And if he makes an error in the oath, then shall he lose his cause. If then he gets through in his oath, then the appealed, being also ready for battle, must swear to his innocence. If he makes an error in the oath, then shall he lose his cause and his life. And if he gets through, then shall they forthwith fight without armour, only in tunics and hose, with swords and behind shields, in lists prepared for them, as is the custom.

“(23.) Here mark that from time immemorial this was the rule: If the appealed made error in the oath, and did not rectify it after three attempts, he should lose both his cause and his head. In contravention of this, from favour, the lords determined for one in the time of the late emperor that he was not to be beheaded immediately for that oath, but lost his cause, and the appellant gained his. But instead of being beheaded, the appealed is to be put into perpetual prison, that the Burggrave of Prague do keep him until death, as is right for a prisoner; and if the Burggrave of Prague be his relative by birth, then he must be put into other ward, where it seemeth good to the king and the lords of the land, and there he is to be kept as is right for a prisoner, until the king and the lords of the land shall have fully ascertained his innocence, or until the appellant and his friends have released him from guilt and entreated the king and the lords for him that he may be released.

“(24.) And if one of the twain dare not fight, before he enters into the lists he must entreat the lords to grant him a conference with the Burggrave of Prague; which Burggrave must accompany him safely for three miles from the castle of Prague, so that he may escape from the violence of his enemies.

“(25.) But if they have both entered into the lists and have begun to fight, and if one of them be wearied, he must ask for a respite, and must be hearkened to therein. Then the Burggrave of Prague must place between them a pole, that neither may reach at the other over it for the space of an hour; which pole two officials, a beadle and a judge, must hold in readiness, and should either desire it, it must be ready thrice for a respite, and always for the space of an hour.

“(26.) And if one overcome the other, then must he cut off his head, and place his head between his feet; unless a better arrangement has been come to between them with the king’s will and the assent of the lords. And when he has beheaded him and placed his head between his feet, then must he kneel on one knee and thank the king and the lords for right justice, and place two hellers (coins) upon him, and present him with them. And thus he is victorious over him, and obtains justice in the cause. And this must be entered for him in the records, that no relative may avenge him. If then any one doth avenge him, that man shall forfeit life and goods to the king’s majesty and all the lords, and never shall he or his children enjoy the benefit of the tribunal of the land.”

Then (27 and 28) come rules of procedure in case the appealed person is afraid to fight, or does not appear on the appointed day.

"(29.) If then all this be done and the appealed does not come to terms with the appellant and the officials, then must the appellant, wherever he finds the appealed, take or slay him, and fastening a billet of wood to him, must tie him by the feet to a horse’s tail, without taking off any of his clothes, and drag him under the gallows at Prague. And he must inform the officials, and take an officer of the court to view him. And when the officer has acknowledged it, he must enter it in the records, and no man must avenge him.

“(30.) Here mark, that if the appealed be found with his wedded wife, and she embrace him or conceal him with her dress, he may not be taken from her nor suffer any harm. And, likewise, if he be by the tomb of St. Wenceslas in the Cathedral at Prague, or in the presence of the Queen of Bohemia, he may not be taken, but may enjoy quiet.”

“(37.) If a burgess appeal a peasant, they must do battle with clubs and great shields, for they are both of the serf order, and it has been ordained from time immemorial that for such battle they must not use swords.”

“(40.) If a widow appeal one of equal nobility with herself for the homicide of her husband or any relative, she must proceed against the appealed in the same manner as a man. If then she shall have to do battle with him, then must the appealed stand in a shaft dug in the ground up to the girdle, with a sword and a great shield, and in that shaft turn himself as best he can and defend himself against her. And she must also be with a sword and a shield in circular lists prepared for the purpose. And neither may he go out of the shaft nor she out of the lists until one has overcome the other. If then one of them goes out, he loses his right. And a maiden of eighteen years old or older, if she wishes to do battle thus with her enemy, may enjoy the same right.”

We come now to the work of a great lawyer, written originally in the Bohemian tongue, the “Exposition of the Common Law of the Land of Bohemia,” by Andrew of Dubá. The office of Chief Justice in Bohemia was hold from 1343 to 1394 by Andrew of Dubá, who resigned it in the latter year, but lived eighteen years afterwards, still taking part in the grand assizes of the realm. This appearing to be a very long space of time for one and the same person, Dr. F. Palacky conjectured that it was not one person, but two—a father and son, the former of whom was Chief Justice till 1361, and the latter till 1394. If this conjecture be correct, the work under consideration must have proceeded from the pen of the latter, and that probably, according to Erben, about the year 1400. To a foreigner, and also in a literary point of view, the dedicatory address to King Wenceslas IV. is the most interesting portion of the whole. This begins:—

“To the most illustrious prince and lord, the lord Wenceslas, monarch of the Romans and King of Bohemia, my most gracious lord and inheritor by birth of the Crown of Bohemia; I, Andrew the elder of Dubá, present my humble service ready for obedience to Thy Majesty. Herein, as Thy faithful servant and by natural fealty a subject of Thy Crown of Bohemia, for Thy honour and Thy renown and that of the whole land of Bohemia, and for the common good, I have written down my recollections, which I have heard from my forefathers and from many aged lords who have loved the common law (právo, jura) of the land of Bohemia, and have myself, being many years in the office of chief justice, in the time of Thy father and Thyself, learned, conducted, and held it faithfully, with my faithful associates and other officials of that day; principally in order that Thy honoured memory and the order of the land may not be impaired through me, aged man that I am. For I think that there are few of the Bohemian lords who remember what their fathers held for law; and not remembering or knowing, they also direct their minds and thoughts according to their own will in their offices, harshly obtaining money, contrary to ancient ordinance. And through this the Crown of Bohemia is hindered and injured, mainly in the service of knights and gentlemen, Thou in Thy monarchy, the community of persons spiritual and lay in honour and wealth, the poor and orphans in their inheritance, and the common law of Bohemia in its order. And against whom is the common outcry but against Thee? Against whom is complaint to God, but against Thee? Of whom is there an evil memory but of Thee? Thou canst easily rid Thyself of this and not be guilty thereof, only receive instruction and do thine endeavour; command those, to whom Thou shalt give or hast given offices and takest an oath from them, to practise the truth of God, in that truth and to that truth exercising the ancient common law without invention of new rules of right. Not therein to seek for money, contrary to ancient ordinance; within that ordinance to do mercy, and not to be partial, being always ready for each man according to his need, for it is for that that they receive and hold. Likewise command that they summon not people before themselves for their own matters; likewise that their deputies keep not people’s agents with them, who conduct lawsuits and privily take counsel with them. Command likewise that they attend to Thy rightful escheats according to law; that, where Thou or any one in Thy stead is rightly entitled, they neglect him not; that, where Thou art not rightly entitled, there be forthwith for the sake of Thy reputation a final sentence pronounced upon Thy claim, that it may be satisfied in law. Likewise, above all, put a stop to outcry in the court of justice of the country on account of Thy officials. For where an official excuses his lord, and does not excuse himself by means of his lord, it is good; but where the official says, “That isn’t through me,’ and the lord holds his peace, ’tis an ill sign. Therefore because Thou art the pillar and light of all justice and the punishment of all the bad, beware of the occurrence of this through Thy officials. To all the lords Thou art lord, to all the cunning a sage, to all the unrighteous a snare, to all the good gracious and a very gift of God. I say likewise, if Thy sworn officials have commandment from Thee, and receiving it do not carry it out in practice as Thou hast commanded, Thou hast outcry against Thee (as is the case at this day on account of certain disorders)—command Thy faithful council to see to this and bring it from worse to better. Dear lord! what I write or shall write, that I am not afraid to speak and proclaim before every man; for I do this for no other cause, but for Thy honour and the common good of the land of Bohemia. “There are four officers appointed by Thee in the constitution of the land who are called ‘chief;’ for they are appointed by Thee, the chief lord, chosen and their offices endowed for Thy peace and honour, and that of Thy crown and of all the community of the land of Bohemia, to do right in that which is intrusted to them, first to Thee, and then to poor and rich; and the record of what the lords decide or what people agree to voluntarily is intrusted to them. This they write in books, which are called ‘tables’ (dsky), by their clerks. These lords have or receive their offices from Thee, and make oath to be faithful to Thee and the whole land of Bohemia; from Thee they have honour and wealth, from Thee and from the community they receive a fixed payment for their labour. Three of these must be noble lords: the Burggrave of Prague, the Chief Beadle, and the Chief Justice; but the fourth, the Chief Secretary, must not be a noble lord, but an ordinary man, well educated, and moreover well learned therein. And what each of these has to receive and the distribution of their power, I will write below.”

Then follows a description of these officers, their underlings, their duties and their fees, with various remarks upon their disabilities; and the writer concludes his dedicatory address with the following remarkable words:—

“If Thou wilt be free and clear from the common outcry, and have advantageous thanks from all the community and all the lords together, bid them read this and do thus, and make an ordinance excluding Thy officers from Thy council, and proclaim it to the community while Thou art in health, and Thou wilt be happy in body and in soul. And if Thou wilt hear or bid Thy council to hear, I will point out many an instance in an office where ten kops^[6] have been taken instead of one, and a hundred instead of ten; wherefore punish those on account of whom Thou hast outcry against Thee. And if Thou wilt hear me myself, I will tell Thee still more to Thy advantage and honour.”

As regards the origin of the Bohemian common law, Andrew of Dubá says:—

“The common law of the land of Bohemia is of ancient date, even from the time of paganism, and principally from the ploughman Przemysl and from those lords who lived at that time. And of this there is certain proof; for many pagan customs are retained in it, as purgation by hot iron or casting into water. And this custom stood without interruption to the time of the Emperor Charles and the priest Arnost, first archbishop of Prague.”

He proceeds to divide the judicial system of Bohemia into three grand divisions, the Súd dvorsky, or “Court tribunal,” corresponding to the old Court of Exchequer with us, the spiritual tribunals, and the zemské pravo svobodné, the “free common law of the land,” corresponding to the courts of King’s Bench and Common Pleas. Everybody, he says, is bound to proceed in due form of law instead of taking the law into his own hands. “But, alas! many leave the law and carry out their own will otherwise. Why so? Only because guilt hath not punishment; and where guilt gets off easily, there evil will is glad to dominate, upon which punishment ought always to be inflicted.”

Ludvik Tkadleczek and his beloved Adliczka, lived in the first half of the fourteenth century at the court of the widowed Queen Elizabeth, at Königgrätz. Adliczka was the belle of her age, and when she was married to another, Tkadleczek (Weaver) commenced his melancholy lamentations, and immortalized his lady-love, her beauty, and her virtues, with his pen, which by a play upon his own name he designated a weaver’s shuttle. This book is very remarkable for the vigour and flexibility of its language, and also for the amount of learning and extent of reading displayed in it in the various arguments of “The Complainer” and “Misfortune,” in the course of their long altercation. It was soon translated into German, and this translation appears among the earliest productions of the early German press. I shall give two specimens of this very original writer, one selected by myself, the other by the editor of the “Vybor.” Adliczka is thus described by Misfortune:—

“She was all good, all honourable, she was worthy of all honour. For I, Misfortune, was present at her birth. Happiness was immediately beside her with all her court, and with her full suite, and with all her good customs. For they were at once given to her there and everywhere where she afterwards dwelt. For that superexcellent, widely renowned queen of highest race, who is named Honour, sent her mantle, embroidered with various imperishable flowers, to her by her highest confidant, whose name is Circumspection. This mantle she adorned with indescribable work, for it hath never fitted any damsel or dame, save only her who hath faithfully watched over her honour, according to her rank, without spot, who hath never failed in point of honour towards God or man; whereas to each who has failed in honour, that mantle has been too short, too strait, and ill-fitting. With that she herself has clothed all those damsels and dames who have possessed honour and have been worthy of it before themselves and before God and before men. She had also sent her a green wreath, which always kept its colour, summer and winter, and never, from her youth up, became sere, faded, or withered, even unto the married state. And this was brought to her by one of that queen’s damsels, who hight Purity. As an attendant of the queen on the day when she was born, I too, Misfortune, was present at all these things, to see whether she would be committed to me in some measure, but after waiting long I retired with shame. I was there when all the court ladies of all Happiness took her into their fellowship. I was there when she in return promised each of them faithfully to hold true fellowship with them, each according to her rank. First to the queen herself, who hight Honour; to her she has kept her faith like a woman good and true even unto the present day. To Wisdom, to her she holds unto this day as to her mother. Modesty, her she chose for her own special companion. To Gentleness, her she obeys and follows as her elder sister. To Purity, from her she never strayed till she entered into the married state. To Circumspection, to her she committed herself from youth up as to a father. To Kindness and Friendliness, to them she always clung, and was always with them, as well among common people of the lowest and poorest as among people of the highest rank. Truth, her she placed in her tablets, neither will she take her out of her tablets until death. Sincerity without any mental reserve, of her she took so fast hold that she will not leave her for anyone. In naught did He who created her forget her; everything good was collected in her, so that at her baptism whoever promised anything for her, stated it honourably without any hesitation,^[7] in every respect. I, Misfortune, was by her, but not banefully, everywhere on the look-out to see whether she was in aught committed to me; but the Creator himself assigned her a guardian angel, who always watchfully protected her. ***** “Now the Complainer tells Misfortune that he is the man who has been so cruelly and shamefully separated from his comfort, and by that separation deprived of all comfort in this world.

“Ah, ah, Misfortune! I am that unhappy man, I am that person who have been the true and entire servant and true guardian of honour, and ready servant, without aught of indolence, of her of whom thou sayest so much that is noble, so much that is good, so many unheard-of and excellent virtues. I am that Weaver who now address thee, and cry aloud against thee on account of my comfort, on account of all my joy, of which thou hast deprived me. Alas, for thee, and over alas! Thou hast separated me from her, thou hast separated from me the comforting, the excellent object of my love. She it was with whom I was for several years, and yet meseemeth, as if I had been with her an hour. She it was whom I always endeavoured to please, and whom I guarded with all my might. She it was who was my teacher, my friend—all that appertaineth to kindness, that was she to me. She it was who was always with me, and I with ber, but now she has removed herself from me. Thou, Misfortune, hast done this evil. She who was my protecting shield against all my earthly adversaries has now quitted me, has left me in orphanhood, and all through thee.’”

I proceed now finally to give a portion of the extract selected by K. J. Erben to exhibit the beauties and peculiarities of Tkadleczek in the “Výbor,” which is certainly a very quaint and curious passage:—

“Now Misfortune replies to the Complainer, and saith, that whatever she has done, she has done well and rightly according to her rule; and not only so, but nothing that is born in the world, be it old man or young, noble or ignoble, learned or illiterate, lay or spiritual, can be without misfortune or escape it, live he as he may.

“The impudent ape went up to the lion while he was sleeping, gave him a slap in the face, and tried to run away; the lion woke up, caught the ape, and pulled off his tail, and now the ape is docked and tailless. The swift hare came to the lion, gave him a nip, and endeavoured to escape; but the lion chased and caught him, took him by the head and pulled his ears, and now the hare has long ears. The cat was playing with the dog and scratched him, and now the dog bears ill will to the cat. Thus art thou also doing, Weaver; thou desirest to assail me, and as it were to overwhelm me with thy harangue, as if thou desiredst to beat me down by force, and as if thou hadst power over me. Beware of me, lest thy skin be torn off. Beware of the anger of the dog, and more than that of the dog. And knowest thou not this, that Solomon saith, that ‘A knave or servant subject to his superior may not be above his lord’? Hast thou not heard and read in an epistle of a certain magister, the monk Bernard, who writeth of the order of householders, saying, ‘A servant who opposes his lord in his actions and customs, and in his authority, ought not to be kept, but to be driven away evilly and disgracefully, as a present and future evil’? And thinkest thou that I shall sit down by this, that thou being under me, and in my power, and now in my charge, shouldst thus abominably oppose me? Take care of thy skin, take care of thy tail, beware of the dog! Know therefore that I will cut this short, and tell thee aloud that what I have done with regard to and against thee, I have done rightly and well. And not only in thy case, but whithersoever I turn in the world, I exhibit my power on every side, I leave a remembrance behind me. Read the composition of that wise man, who hight Falisthenes, who saith, ‘There is naught so mighty upon earth, whether in wealth or in strength, but that it sometimes hath adversity or injury from the contrariety of the world.’ And what is the contrariety of the world but myself, Misfortune, who have been sent forth by God himself to assail various people with various contrarieties, one to-day, another tomorrow? one I have in my power, another I let go for a time. For this end was I sent forth, that I might leave no one, either of high rank; no emporor, king, prince, margrave, count; or of inferior rank; no honourable, no knight, squire, gentleman; or of the lowest rank, no citizen, no peasant; as well in the spiritual order as in the lay; or in the female sex, without remembrance of me: and that I might show my power not only on men, but sometimes also on dumb cattle, and in the case of dumb beasts. Neither do I respect anyone for his high and noble family. Nor do I pass over anyone for the wisdom of his deep thoughts. Neither do I dread any hero, nor feel shame before any philosopher, nor do I spare any beauty; nor is graciousness or ungraciousness, or sorrow, or youth, or age, or aught without my assault; nor childhood, nor youth, nor manhood. And thinkest thou, because thou art in the sphere and condition of early manhood, that thou canst prevail over everything and that everything can be according to thy will? Tell me, Weaver, if thou wilt thus maintain a contrary argument with me, and sayst, that much good has perished from thy comfort through me. Yea, Weaver, hast thou ever read in any books that there was over any man in the world who was alive after the manner of ordinary nature, that was without my assaults, save only those glorified people and saints who lived by the grace of God above the ordinary custom and above nature? Thou mustest say, that thou hast neither heard nor read of such anywhere; thou hast thyself, moreover, never known such a person. How much more fortunate then dost thou desire to be, that I may honour thee more, than the Emperor Julius, or the King Alexander, or the excellent, truly excellent, Emperor Charles, at this time King of Bohemia? Who, powerful as they were, could not at times escape my power and my contrariety. Prithee inquire how many of my misadventures have happened to those only whom thou knowest, and of whom thou hast heard in thine own days, whether of higher or lower rank; and neither thou nor anyone else will be able to express in writing or words how many times this has happened to them. And passing over all other misadventures, write down only those which those kings who have been in the land of Hungary have had from me: there will be no end to them. Ah! if thou wilt, as thou canst, recollect thine own adversities only in thine own mind; how many of them hast thou also had from me? For it would have been more proper to cry out against me about them, or to argue with me about that which once threatened thy life, thy property, thy honour, and all the good that thou hadst, and it would have been convenient to speak of that rather than of that damsel of thine. Therefore, Weaver, hold thy peace, speak no more with me of thy darling. Take me not for so weak a power, think not that I am thine equal, think not that it is as thou thinkest. Know that I rule thee and every man mightily by my power. Thou seest thyself that I pass by nothing, I let nothing pass me without an answer from me. I do as the sun, that shines to the whole world, and is light in itself; to young and old, to Pagan and Jew, to Christian and Greek, to good and bad, to poor and rich alike. Even so there is none of these that has not at some time experienced my assaults. Endure them, likewise, Weaver, according to custom!”

 

 

1. Probably a confusion between Augustine of Hippo and the Augustine who converted the English. So that the anachronism is not quite so glaring as at first sight.
2. Probably an allusion to communion in both kinds, according to the custom of the Greek Church.
3. It must be remembered that Rudolf of Hapsburg was never crowned Emperor by the Pope, and was therefore only King of the Romans.
4. From whom the Dauphin of France obtained his title. Charles had seen him struck by an angel in a dream on horseback in the midst of his army, and he was actually killed in that very position by a shot from a crossbow.
5. Peter de Rosières was afterwards Pope Clement VI.
6. A kop is a sum of 60 groschen.
7. This appears to have been looked upon as an omen, corresponding conversely to a zmutek or trip in the formula of an oath.