Canonic law of the late middle ages considered the participation of the clerics in killing rather strictly. The Lateran Council 1215 established that a cleric was neither allowed to issue or declare a sentence of death nor to draft or write papers in connnection with it. The edition of the Apostolic Penitentiary Supplications Registers enables people to judge the situation in Bohemia in the period from the 1430´s to the end of the same century. In the examined period a very specifi c case of „complicity in killing“ appeared four times – a phenomenon connected with reading and writing knowledge peculiar to clerics. They read written orders and wrote for the needs of fighting sides. The argumentation is similar in all cases. Th e matter was always activity on command, resulting moreover from the specific condition of the person in question (the only literate, servant). He never participated in the fight actually. With regard to the volume of analogous scribe activity which can be supposed in the period in question, these four cases were certainly just a small fragment of the actual participation of clerics. The situation in Bohemia is doubtlessly specific because of the fact that utraquist disciples and clerics who wrote in the hussite services of course didn´t appeal to the Penitentiary. Nevertheless it must be supposed that the Penitentiary solved similar cases even in the Czech catholic environment only exceptionally.
Comparison of one of the commentaries on the Apocalypse which originated at the Prague University and is contained in the manuscript Osek Cist. 37 of the Prague National Library, ff . 1–129, coming from Osek, dating from 1402 and used to this day by experts, with a copy of the same work in the manuscript I Q 16 of the University Library in Wroclaw, created 1378, has excluded the hitherto assumed authorship of Heřman Švab of Mindelheim, as well as the authorship of Heřman of Prague, assumed, not beyond doubt, by Fr. Stegmüller. Temporal relationship and the data of the colophones of both of these preserved manuscripts lead to the conclusion that the author of this Commentary is an other „Doctor Heřman“, Heřman of Winterswick, a member of the Prague university who composed the Commentary sometime in the late seventies of the 14th century.
Comparison of one of the commentaries on the Apocalypse which originated at the Prague University and is contained in the manuscript Osek Cist. 37 of the Prague National Library, ff . 1–129, coming from Osek, dating from 1402 and used to this day by experts, with a copy of the same work in the manuscript I Q 16 of the University Library in Wroclaw, created 1378, has excluded the hitherto assumed authorship of Heřman Švab of Mindelheim, as well as the authorship of Heřman of Prague, assumed, not beyond doubt, by Fr. Stegmüller. Temporal relationship and the data of the colophones of both of these preserved manuscripts lead to the conclusion that the author of this Commentary is an other „Doctor Heřman“, Heřman of Winterswick, a member of the Prague university who composed the Commentary sometime in the late seventies of the 14th century.
After a historic introduction the author deals with the manuscript of the Museum of Western Bohemia in Pilsen (5 MA 11). The manuscript entitled „Inventarium Bibliothecae Archidiaconatus Plsnensis“ came into being at the Pilsen archdean Jan Václav Emerich´s instance. Emerich wrote the book in part (ff . 51r, 54v) himself and in part (ff . 52r–54v) got an unknown scribe (X) to do so. Should an edition of the book be prepared, the complete text by the scribe (X) on ff . 52r–54v will be decisive. This scribe wrote – maybe by mistake.
After a historic introduction the author deals with the manuscript of the Museum of Western Bohemia in Pilsen (5 MA 11). The manuscript entitled „Inventarium Bibliothecae Archidiaconatus Plsnensis“ came into being at the Pilsen archdean Jan Václav Emerich´s instance. Emerich wrote the book in part (ff . 51r, 54v) himself and in part (ff . 52r–54v) got an unknown scribe (X) to do so. Should an edition of the book be prepared, the complete text by the scribe (X) on ff . 52r–54v will be decisive. This scribe wrote – maybe by mistake.
This article deals with the manuscripts of Bonaventura´s Breviloquium held in Czech manuscript collections. The author compares data available from the list of these manuscripts in Opera omnia V (Quaracchi-Florentia 1891) with data from catalogues of individual manuscript collections to make the number of the manuscripts preserved in our libraries more accurate. He recommends the manuscripts themselves should be dealt with to obtain more precise data.
This article deals with the manuscripts of Bonaventura´s Breviloquium held in Czech manuscript collections. The author compares data available from the list of these manuscripts in Opera omnia V (Quaracchi-Florentia 1891) with data from catalogues of individual manuscript collections to make the number of the manuscripts preserved in our libraries more accurate. He recommends the manuscripts themselves should be dealt with to obtain more precise data.
In the culminating and late middle ages funny scenes, the so called drôleries, appear in the borders of illuminated manuscripts. Th eir problems are not explained completely; they seem to contain hidden spiritual meanings. Besides singing birds, which are symbols of the unearthly sphere, fi gures appear most oft en who were taken as negative in middle-ages – owls, apes, beasts of prey, dragons, and clowns. Th e fi gures of antique mythology were perceived as negative too; the cults connected with them were perceived as demoniacism by the Christian society. Drôleries are usually placed in borders which are decorated with an acanth. Th e acanth in time became a symbol of victory over death. It can be also interpreted as Christ´s crown of thorns. In this way the spirit of medieval symbolism indicated that negative forces are driven to the margin and defeated by Christ´s victim.
In the culminating and late middle ages funny scenes, the so called drôleries, appear in the borders of illuminated manuscripts. Th eir problems are not explained completely; they seem to contain hidden spiritual meanings. Besides singing birds, which are symbols of the unearthly sphere, fi gures appear most oft en who were taken as negative in middle-ages – owls, apes, beasts of prey, dragons, and clowns. Th e fi gures of antique mythology were perceived as negative too; the cults connected with them were perceived as demoniacism by the Christian society. Drôleries are usually placed in borders which are decorated with an acanth. Th e acanth in time became a symbol of victory over death. It can be also interpreted as Christ´s crown of thorns. In this way the spirit of medieval symbolism indicated that negative forces are driven to the margin and defeated by Christ´s victim.
The contribution deals with the Tractatus de ordine stellarum fixarum (Prague, National Library, XXVI A 3, c. 1405, fol. 1r–48r). Chosen parts of this text containing ancient star myths are edited here, translated into Czech and compared with Hyginus’ treatise De astronomia for the first time.