Canadian Journal of History/Annales canadiennes d'histoire XXXJJI, April/avril 1998,

pp. 25-47, ISSN 0008-4107 Canadian Journal of History

Abstract/Rsum analytique
"Neither Mine nor Thine": Communist
Experiments in Hussite Bohemia
Thomas A. Fudge

One ofthe consistencies ofHussite history in Marxist historiographyfor much ofthe twentieth century
has been the assertion that the Hussite Revolutionary Movement essentially comprised a social and
economic struggle against the exploitation oflate medievalfeudalism. Central to this struggle was the
communal-communism ofthe radicals at Tbor. Thefollowing study is a re-evaluation ofthat historiographical assertion. The communist tendencies and experiments among the Taborites and later of the
Unitas Fratrum are considered together with their underlying themes, emphases, and influences. An
attempt is made to analyse their decline especially among the Taborites. Comparison is drawn between
the two types ofHussite communism with reference to later communes elsewhere in Europe, though
it would be incorrect either to assign to the Hussites archetypal significance or to regard them as an
episode of Reformationsgeschichte. Such comparisons are beneficial both for understanding the
medievalfoundations ofthe sixteenth century and alsofor a broader grasp ofpre-modern communism
itself. The study concludes that Hussite communism was doomed to failure from the outset due to
inherentflaws. The most crippling ofthose shortcomings was the conundrum that neither property nor
privilege could really be abolished, only transferred. This reconsideration of the theme finds the
Marxist explanation wanting and concludes that in Hussite Bohemia religion proved more important
than economics and that theology was more a decisivefactor than any social critique. The significance
of the study lies in its survey presentation and reconsideration of an important theme based upon
primary sources. It is, further, another corrective in post-Marxist Hussite historiography. It is useful
as a comparison to the work ofBob Scribner, James Stayer, and Werner Pachili on similar movements
in the sixteenth century.
Pour la majeure partie du vingtime sicle, un argument uniforme de l'histoire
l'historiographie marxiste, a t l'affirmation que le mouvement rvolutionnaire hussite consistait en
une lutte sociale et conomique contre l'exploitationfodale de lafin du Moyen-Age. Au centre de cette
lutte, se trouvait les lments communaux-communistes des radicaux de Tbor, L'tude qui suit est une
rvaluation de cette affirmation historiographique. Les tendances et expriences communistes des
taborites et, plus tard, des Unitas Fratrum sont examins avec leurs thmes, emphases et influences
sous-jacents. On a tent d'en analyser leur dclin particulirement chez les taborites. On a tir des
comparaisons entre les deux genres de communisme hussite, en alludant aux dernires communes
d'ailleurs en Europe, quoiqu 'il serait erron d'attribuer une signification archtype aux hussites ou
de les considrer comme tant un pisode de la ieformationgeschichte. De telles comparaisons sont
avantageuses pour comprendre la base mdivale du seizime sicle et aussi pour saisir une meilleure
perception du communisme de l'poque pr-moderne. Cette tude se termine en affirmant que le
communisme hussite tait vou a l'chec au dpart cause de dfauts inhrents. Le plus crasant de
ceux-ci tait l'nigme du fait que ni la proprit, ni les privilges ne pouvaient tre vraiment abolis,
mais seulement transfrs. Cette remise en cause de ce thme constate l'insuffisance d'une explication
marxiste et conclut qu 'en Bohme hussite, la religion s'tait avre beaucoup plus importante que
l'conomie et la thologie, voire mme en tait devenu un facteur plus dcisifqu 'une critique sociale.
L'importance de cette tude rside dans sa prsentation d'une vue d'ensemble et dans sa remise en
cause de ce thme important bas sur des sources primaires. De plus, cette tude devient encore un
autre rectificatifdans l'historiographie hussite post-marxiste. Cet article est de plus trs utile comme
outil de comparaison des travaux de Bob Scribner, James Stayer et Werner Packullsur des mouvements
semblables au seizime sicle.

Canadian Journal of History/Annales canadiennes d'histoire XXXIII, April/avril 1998,

pp. 25-47, ISSN 0008-4107 Canadian Journal ofHistory

Thomas A. Fudge

"NEITHER MINE NOR THINE":

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA*

"Henceforth, at Hradiste and Tabor there is nothing which is mine or thine. Rather,
all things in the community shall be held in common for all time and no one is
permitted to hold private property. The one who does commits sins mortally... No
longer shall there be a reigning king or a ruling lord; for there shall be servitude no
longer. A l l taxes and exactions shall cease and no one shall compel another to
subjection. All shall be equal as brothers and sisters."
Taborite articles 14201

"Also inmaterial concerns some have come to a common decision to renounc

things, to hold nothing of their own, neither private property nor money nor any
other thing, according to the example given by the first Christian leaders, about
whom it is written that they held all things in common, having nothing of their own
but sharing everything with those in need... And whichever among them possess
worldly wealth, let them do with it as the gospels ordain: give to the poor, and
having shared their goods out among them, let them earn their bread by the labour
of their hands, for this is, indeed good ... Ifafter that anything still remains over,
let them share it with their nearest. But if, on the other hand, they are unable to
supply their own material wants, let them take from their brethren, who have
concurred in this decree."
Synodal decree of the Unitas Fratrum 14642
I
Experiments with communist ideas in late medieval and early modern Europe
represent one dimension in the pursuit of utopianism.3 Communalism and the
implementation of communismfrequentlywere allied with reformation tactics. Such
reforms were sometimes socially, but more often religiously motivated. The
religious dimension of utopianism consistently drew on the volatile traditions of

*To the memory of Robert W. (Bob) Scribner, mentor and friend, who suggested this study.

1Josef Macek (ed.), Ktoz js bo bojovnici: eni o Tboie v husitskm revo

(Prague, 1951), pp. 59,61.
2Cited in Peter Brock, The Political and Social Doctrines of the Unity of Czech Brethren in the
Fifteenth and Early Sixteenth Centuries (The Hague, 1957), pp. 80-81.
3Ferdinand Seibt, Utopica: Modelle totaler Sozialplanung (Dusseldorf, 1972).

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

27

apocalypticism, eschatology, antichrist, and millenarianism. From the end of the

eleventh century movements guided by beliefs in these motifs occurred with some
regularity. Joachite prophecy and its derivatives played no small rle. The twelfthcentury Calabrian abbot and hermit Joachim of Fiore ostensibly had perceived the
corning end of the world. Flagellant groups in Italy, French and German territories
and the Low Countries, Brethren of the Free Spirit and the Lollards in England all
shared a belief in the imminent end of the world.4 Heiko Oberman has described
the eve of the European reformations in terms of a "nascent apocalyptic mood"
predicated upon the apocalyptic texture of late medieval thought. These traditions
and convictions spurred forward groups such as the Hussites in their urge to purge
in preparation for the day of the Lord. The calamitous social situation in some
contexts, together with the fervent conviction in the parousia, frequently created a
situation of near desperation.5
Because of such circumstances the intoxicating influence of idealism and utopia
continued to be pressed forward. One pervasive ideal was communism. The
quotations above support this notion. Apocalyptic utopianism forced eschatological
expectations into a variety of concrete historical settings. The idea of communal
living and the sharing of goods likewise became an historical reality, consistently
in theory and sporadically in practice, for much of the fifteenth century. The idea
and practice emerged in Bohemia around 1419 and cannot be considered moribund
until the death of Jan Kalenec in 1547. Thereafter, the communist ideas of the
Hussites passed over into the communities of the Anabaptists, Habrovany Brethren,
and Briiderhofe of the Hutterites in Moravia, where they remained an historical issue
for a full century until 1622.6 Similarly these communities had contact with others
of like persuasion later established in Poland, Transylvania, and the Carpathians.
The axiom "neither mine nor thine" became the watchword for the Hussite attempt
at realizing a viable and practical Utopian society.

'On this see Norman Cohn, The Pursuit of the Millennium (New York, 1970); Richard K.
Emmerson, Antichrist in the Middle Ages (Seattle, 1981); Bernard McGinn, Visions of the End:
Apocalyptic Traditions in the Middle Ages (New York, 1979); and McGinn, Antichrist: Two Thousand
Years of the Human Fascination With Evil (San Francisco, 1994).
5This was the subject of a panel at the Sixteenth Century Studies Conference in Toronto, October
1994 titled "Apocalyptic Angst and Anticipation in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe:
Strategies for Reading the End of the World." The participants and topics were Curtis Bostick, "The
Apocalypse and the 'ABCs': Lollard Strategies for Success in Late Medieval and Early Modern
England"; Thomas A. Fudge, "The Night of Antichrist: Popular Culture, Judgment and Revolution in
Fifteenth-Century Bohemia"; and Andrew Gow1 "From Apocalypticism to Xenophobia: The
Threatening 'Other' of Eschatological Discourse." Bostick's paper remains unpublished, Fudge's
appeared under the same title in Communio Viatorum, 37 (No. 1, 1995), pp. 33-45 and Gow's was
published in expanded form as "The Jewish Antichrist in Medieval and Early Modern Germany,"
Medieval Encounters, 2 (No. 3, 1996), 249-85.
6Bob Scribner, "Practical Utopias: Pre-Modem Communism and the Reformation," Comparative
Studies in Society and History, 36 (October, 1994), 744.

28

THOMAS A. FUDGE
II

The forces unleashed in Bohemia in the context of the early Czech reformation
coincided with various other influences and events both in the lands of St.
Wenceslas and beyond: the papal schism, conciliarism, a weakened monarchy in
the Czech lands and the burgeoning strength of the nobility, widespread poverty,
the execution of "St. Jan Hus," a heightened perception of ecclesiastical corruption,
popular heresy, the influence of radical preachers, apocalyptic fervour and an
imminent sense of the need for change and reform. The radicalizing of the reform
movement included in its agenda a critique of medieval social order, new
theological emphases and a conscious attempt to establish the primitive church in
Bohemia. In this latter aspiration the Hussites combined an impressive social
critique and the ideals of the apostolic church, with the result that rudimentary
experiments with communist ideals emerged as an option.
Despite several innovative developments, communism did notfigurein the
reforming agenda up until the time of Hus. A theoretical equality of all people was
advanced but was not implemented. Widespread protests against social abuses and
in defence of peasants' rights remained unaccompanied by concrete action. The
on-going attack on the sinfulness of those who accumulated vast wealth and
oppressed others in the process remained verbal and in sum had little impact at the
popular level. The reason for this is clear: Hus and his predecessors perceived the
problem as primarily moral, not social. Poverty was never declared evil and the
social structure was not thought to be inherently skewed. Indeed, the social order
of the Middle Ages saw itself and accepted itself as the divinely ordained natural
order of society.7 The early Czech reform movement acquiesced in this view. Hence,
it could attack only the abuses of the system, not the system itself. With the advent
of the Taborites the system itself faced severe challenge.
Ill
As the brilliance of the sun, or the wetness of the water, so . . .
marriages were held in common. In the manner of beasts they
mated for a single night. No one knew the meaning of saying
"mine," but as those who live in the monastic life they referred
to all goods as "ours" in word, heart and in deed. None of their
quarters were bolted and the doors were not closed in the face of
the poor. Among them exists none who are ... destitute.8
What sounds like a description of Hussite Tabor was written nearly three centuries
earlier by Cosmas of Prague (c. 1045-1125), Bohemia'sfirsthistorian. For a time
in 1419 and 1420 the description is, in the main, accurate apropos to Tbor. The

7Aron I. Gurevich (trans. G.L. Campbell), Categories of Medieval Culture (London, 1985), p.
198.
5Cosmas of Prague, Chronica Boemorum, Book 1, Chapter 3, in Monumenta germanica histrica,
Scriptores rerum germanicarum n.s., 2, Berthold Bretholz (ed.) (Berlin, 1923), pp. 8-9.

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

29

social emphases and communist experiments at Tabor have long been a cause
clbre in modern Czech historiography.9 According to Vavfinec of Bfezov, the
conservative Hussite chronicler, the priests of Tabor began preaching a unique
advent of Christ among the elect. Those within the safety of the five designated
cities of refuge Plzeft, Klatovy, Zatec, Louny, and Slany would survive the
wrath of God. From all over Bohemia and Moravia multitudes of people thronged
to the Taborite priests. Having sold their possessions they brought the money and
placed it at the feet of the priests.10 In 1419 several mass gatherings occurred in
which elementary communist principles were invoked; everyone was called
"brother" or "sister" and social distinctions were ignored.11 Food was shared in
common, therichersupplying the poor. No difference was made between "mine"
and "thine," though the communal sexual use of women was not practised at this
point. But later, as noted proleptically by Cosmas of Prague, this did occur on the
fringes of Taborite society. By the term communism I mean a community of goods.
James Stayer has defined that idea as the attempt to practice the principles outlined
in the Acts of the Apostles, chapters 2 and 4.12 His definition is appropriate for
fifteenth-century Bohemia.
The phenomenon of selling possessions and donating the proceeds to the priests
at Tabor was not an isolated occurrence. The conservative Hussite, Jan Pribram
corroborated Vavinec's account and noted that a similar event occurred at Pisek,
a centre with a history of radical sectarian devotion, where community chests were
established.13 Where did this particular communism originate? The motif can be
traced to two sources. First, it developed out of the Hussites' intense desire to
establish the primitive church in Bohemia. Priest Jan Zelivsky, preaching in the New
Town of Prague at the Church of St. Mary of the Snows, articulated this desire
forcefully: "0 that the city of Prague would now be the example for all believers,
not only in Moravia, but in Hungary, Poland, Austria... !'"4 Jan Pribram wrote in
disgust that the radical Taborites considered themselves the sole holy, universal,
church and community in all Christendom.15 Pribram's charge must not be
dismissed for this is precisely how the radicals viewed themselves. Nor were they
alone in this assumption. A century later the Hutterites claimed that the practice of

9See for example, JosefMacek1 Tbor v husitskm revolucnm hnut, 2 vols. (Prague, 1955-56).
'0Vavfinec of Bfezov (ed. Jaroslav Goll) Historia Hussitica, in Fontes rerum bohemicarum, V,
(Prague, 1893),355-56.
"For the coalescing of radical trends resulting inflightto the hills, see FrantiSek Smahel,
Husitska revoluce, 4 vols. (Prague, 1993), II, pp. 276-318.
12James M. Stayer, TTie German Peasants ' War and Anabaptist Community of Goods (Montreal
and Kingston, 1991), p. 9.
'3Jan Pribram (ed. JosefMacek), 2ivot knzt tborskych, in Ktozjs boa bojovntci, pp. 264-65.
For the radical activity in Pisek see Josef Macek, "K potkum tborstv Pisku," Jihocesky sbornik
historicky, 22 (1953), 113-24.
14"0 utinam nunc tempore isto Praga avitas esset forma omnibus credentibus, non solum in
Moravia sed in Ungaria, Polonia, Austria... !" This appears in his sermon for 13 Aug. 1419. Prague,
National and University Library MS. V G 3 fol. 46v.
15"ale sami sie magi za czierkev s. obecznu vseho krzestianstya . . ." Pribram, O poslusenstvi
Vienna, Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek MS. 4314 fol. 1491.

30

THOMAS A. FUDGE

common goods marked out the true believers and in 1529 Clemens Adler, the
Anabaptist leader in Silesia, underscored this idea.16 Not long thereafter, radicals
in Poland expressed similar convictions, insisting that private property was
wickedness.17 Given the Taborites' biblicist enthusiasm, the communist practices
of the early apostolic community was enough to warrant its imitation in Hussite
Bohemia.
However, a simple "thus saith the Lord" would hardly have been sufficient to
attract so many adherents to Tbor. The second source provides a solution. Without
doubt the chiliast enthusiasm which swept the radical sectors of Hussitism had
strong appeal. The promise of a world utopia, coupled with the combined pooling
of resources for the betterment of society, attracted its followers.18 After a lifetime
of giving one's productivity over to the lord of the land, and in the face of mounting
political and economic difficulties, there were those willing toriskwhat little they
had on the prophecies and visions of the radical priests.19 Understandably, the
majority of those attracted to this particular communistic lifestyle were the socially
disinherited and disadvantaged. No one could expect "the lame devil," Oldnch
Rozmberk, to ride into Tbor and surrender the nine towns, twenty-six small
villages and almost seven hundred whole and partial villages he controlled,20 or to
grant freedom to the eleven thousand peasants under the control of the Rozmberk
empire.21 Nonetheless, we know that in addition to peasants, there were village
magistrates, grooms, potters, priests, servants, barbers, carpenters, town councillors,
cobblers, blacksmiths, burghers, and cooks involved in Taborite activities.22 How
many were advocates of communist ideals is impossible to determine. But those

16See Werner O. Packull, Hutterite Beginnings: Communitarian Experiments during the

Reformation (Baltimore and London, 1995), passim. The conclusion about the Hutterites is on p. 289
while the Adler citation appears on p. 119.
17In 1575 Marcin Czechowicz (1532-1613)fromLublin wrote Rozmowy chrystyaiiskie wherein
the social ideas of the Polish Brethren were articulated. Stanislas Kot (trans. Earl Wilber Morse),
Socinianism in Poland: The Social and Political Ideas of the Polish Antitrinitarians (Boston, 1957),
p. 71.
18For the chiliast influence within radical Hussite communities see Howard Kaminsky, "Chiliasm
and the Hussite Revolution," Church History, 26 (March 1957), pp. 43-71 and Ernst Wemer, "Popular
Ideologies in Late Mediaeval Europe: Taborite Chiliasm and Its Antecedents," Comparative Studies
in Society and History, 2 (April 1960), 344-63.
19On the extent and severity of economic difficulties in rural Bohemia see Smahel, Husitska
revoluce, I, 433-53.
20These figures are accurate at the time of Oldfich's death in 1462. Nonetheless, they provide
indication of the vastness of Rozmberk wealth. See Linda L. Blodgett, "The 'Second Serfdom' in
Eastern Europe: A Case Study of Seigneurial Administration on the Rozmberk Estates in Southern
Bohemia," unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Indiana University, 1978, p. 84. "The lame devil" was the
nickname the Taborites gave to Rozmberk and evidently refers to a physical disability. See Otakar
Odlozilik, The Hussite King: Bohemia in European Affairs 1440-1471 (New Brunswick, N.J, 1965),
p. 28.
21The figure is given in Kenneth J. Dillon, Kings and Estates in the Bohemian Lands 1526-1564
(Brussels, 1976), p. 9. Again, the figure is intended only as representational and not actual for 1420.
22These were some of the types of people apprehended by the enemies of Tbor and subjected
to interrogation. See FrantiSek MareS (ed.), Popravknihapnvz Rozmberka, m Abhandlungen der
kniglichen bhmischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, volume 9 (Prague, 1878), 25-52 passim.

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

31

wishing to escape the hegemonic strictures of medieval society could place their
hopes in the vision of a chiliast, apostolic, communist Bohemian society.
It was not incidental that these early Hussites forsook the cities and towns and
fled to the hills. Clearly such gatherings in the towns would have come under the
scrutiny and censure of the authorities. Moreover, if we are to believe the figures
of chroniclers, the sheer numbers present at these gatherings dictated the wide open
spaces. Beyond this, was the conviction that towns were symbolic of all that had
gone awry in society. The town milieu not only exacerbated social divisions but also
conflicted with notions of apostolic poverty. Many leading intellectuals in preHussite Bohemia expressed grave reservations about the cities, towns and the
prevailing ethos within. Jan Hus made clear that in great cities, evil people gathered
and succeeded in turning towns into seats of the devil.23 Hussites later conceived
the town even less favourably. Jan Rokycana and Petr Chelcicky both spoke
critically and bitterly about urban centres. The latter insisted that the city embodied
Antichrist.24 Considering the physical demarcation of towns and cities and the type
of popular beliefs which grew up around them, it is not surprising to find these
urban centres demonized. The boundaries of cities were marked clearly. The walls
or ramparts identified the social autonomy of the town. Troops kept watch by day
and night. When night fell the walls glimmered with the light of torches. Gates were
shut from dusk until dawn. No one could enter or leave during those hours without
permission. Climbing the walls was punished severely. Even approaching the walls
during the night constituted a criminal act. The walls of towns symbolized security
and formed a boundary between the community and the rest of the world.25 Walls
kept the city in and the rest of the world out. The city of God and the city of
Antichrist could not, and should not, be mixed.26 So the radicals fled from the urban
darkness to the light of the hills, where the Hussites anticipated the end of time and
the climax of human history, in an artificially constructed apocalyptic utopia.
The experiment at Tbor not only sprangfroma desire to witness the primitive
church in Bohemia redivivus, but alsofromimpulses for a more just social order.27
The proposed renovation would conceivably set the stage for the arrival of the
eschaton. The apocalyptic mood in Bohemia found a context for establishing this
idea among the Taborites. An experiment developed wherein social divisions and
structures of hierarchy were swept away: payment for rent and service forbidden,

23Building on the biblical motif of the city of Babylon, Hus maligned the underlying structures
of urban activity. See his "On Simony," in Advocates ofReform from Wyclifto Erasmus (ed. Matthew
Spinka), (Philadelphia, 1953), p. 267.
24Sit' viry, ed., Emil Smetnka (Prague, 1929), pp. 294-97 and Frantisek Smahel, "Antiidel
msta V dle Petra Chelickho," Ceskoslovensky asopis historicky, 20 (1972), 71-94.
25Robert Muchembled (trans. Lydia Cochrane), Popular Culture and Elite Culture in France
1400-1750, (Baton Rouge, 1985), pp. 110-11.
26The two cities formed a motif in Hussite propaganda. Juxtaposing pictures appear in the Jena
Codex. Prague, National Museum Library MS. IV B 24, fols. IOv-11'. Brief description in Thomas A.
Fudge, "Visual Heresy and the Communication of Ideas in the Hussite Reformation," Kosmas:
Czechoslovak and Central European Journal, 12 (1996), 132.
27On the Hussite idea of a just society see Smahel, Husitska revoluce, vol. 2, 61-80.

32

THOMAS A. FUDGE

all goods to be held in common, material wealth collected before newcomers could
be admitted to the community, certain former laws disregarded, all debtors released
from their obligations, lord-peasant relationships dissolved, all persons henceforth
became brothers and sisters, and private property was outlawed in the quest for a
new social order. A popular song combined the social critique of the aforementioned
"Priest Jan, the apostate monk of Zeliv," and the sentiment being expressed at
Tabor.28
According to the wisdom of the masters, they would have told
God to arrange matters in this way: the poor should neither eat
nor drink, should sleep neither at night nor day, but always work
and pay their lords. The lords, after listening to the priests, would
require more and more dues. Then, when using up the peasant,
they could turn his body into that of a beast of burden and subject
him to forced labour. This is how the wretched have come to be
in anguish in every land, especially the Czechs, on account of the
conceited priesthood.29
How could the problem be rectified? Tabor provided an answer. The overarching
rubric of Hussitism contended that the establishment of the primitive church ethos
was the ultimate ideal. This notion was advanced by the Prague university master
and Hussite lawyer, Jan of Jesenice, according to whom the land should return to
apostolic simplicity where all things are held in common.30 Thus the Taborite
leaders instructed the people to cease paying rents and being subject to their lords.
"Now you will freely take possession of their towns,fish-ponds,pastures, forests
and everything they own."31 Jan Pribram noted further that Taborites advocated the
violent abolition of the nobility: "All lords and knights should have their throats cut
and their goods ravaged. This has happened with many of them [nobles] being
murdered."32 The idea of communal goods posed a serious threat to the stability of
hierarchical society and called into question the nature of medieval social structure.
This was not lost on the detractors of the radical Hussites. A century later, drastic
measures were enacted to discourage both religious dissent and social innovation
as they related to a community of goods. On 20 August 1527 the Habsburg ruler,
Ferdinand I issued a decree against the Anabaptists calling for those who taught the
sharing of property to be executed by beheading.33

28"sacerdos Iohannes monachus apostate de Zeliv." The appellation refers to Priest Jan Zelivsky.
See Amedeo Molnr, "Zelivsky, prdicateur de la rvolution," Communio viatorum, 2 (Winter 1959),
327.
29Slychal-Ii kto od poctka, in Zdenk Nejedly, Djiny husitskho zpvu, volume 6 (Prague,
1956), 181-83.
30See the text "Mgri Joannis de Jesenic Quaestio" in Jifi Kejf, Dvstudie o husitskm prvnictv
(Prague, 1954), p. 64.
"Pribram, ivot kn tborskych, pp. 263-66.
32Ibid., p. 271.
33Discussed in Packull, Hulterite Beginnings: Communitarian Experiments During the
Reformation, pp. 187-96. The reference is on p. 190. For the Hutterites in the context of religious
intolerance see Jaroslav Pnek, "The Question of Tolerance in Bohemia and Moravia in the Age of the

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

33

Taborite radicalism resonated elsewhere in eastern Europe over the next

century. Dissenters in Poland found a patron in Jan Sienienski in 1569 at Rakow
where, driven by apocalyptic anticipation, they attempted to establish a "New
Jerusalem." Their commune outlawed distinctions of rank and estate, condemned
obedience to state authority and law courts, and advocated complete withdrawal
from society. The emphasis fell upon manual labour, equality, pacifism, and
community of goods. Rakow perceived itself as a pattern for the kingdom of God.34
The idea of community chests which arose at Tabor spread. At Pisek "one or
two chests" were set up and "the community of people nearly filled them."35
Additionally there were also chests at Vodnany.36 Howard Kaminsky has suggested
that the community chests probably had their origin in several sources:first,in the
practical problem of distributing resources to large crowds of people; second, in the
tradition of communal sharing in the primitive church; and third, in the idea that
entrance into the new community of Christ should be made without the trappings
of the old Babylon. In other words, the chests functioned as a practical renunciation
of the old world.37 The priests of Tbor, among them Vaclav Koranda of Plze,
Mikuls of Pelhrimov "Biskupec," Martfnek Hska, and Jan of Jicn, were the main
leaders in this new communist experiment. At Tbor, barrels and tubs were set up
in the main town square next to the church. All who joined the Hussite commune
were required to place their superfluous personal belongings in the barrels and tubs.
Vavfinec of Bfezov reported that the people of Tbor elected certain men as
overseers of the collection and distribution of goods. Biskupec and other priests
were to faithfully ao^minister the goods of the community according to need.38 While
that priestly management of the common chests was established early on at Tbor,
it is interesting to note that the funds and goods at Pisek were under the administration of a layman. "The administrator of the chest [at Pisek] was ... Matej Louda
of Chlumcany,"39 a political and military leader. These administrators managed all
property and made available commodities into common possessions. Communal
expenses were covered by the common treasuries. Concomitant with this was the
promulgation of the principle that all leaders, priests, town administrators, and
military commanders must be elected by the common assembly of people. The
communist ideals set forth at Tbor, Pisek, Vodany, and other towns were, in the

Reformation" (trans., Petr Charvt), in Ole Peter Grell and Bob Scribner (eds.), Tolerance and
Intolerance in the European Reformation (Cambridge, 1996), pp. 244-46.
"Stanislas Lubieniecki, History of the Polish Reformation, trans., George H. Williams
(Philadelphia, 1995), p. 280, Kot, Socinianism in Poland, pp. 26-30 and Peter Brock, Pacifism in
Europe to 1914 (Princeton, 1972), pp. 114-61. For documents in translation see George H. Williams,
ThePolish Brethren, 2 vols. (Philadelphia, 1984).
35PHbram, ivot knzt tborskych, pp. 264-65.
36Communal chests at Tbor, Pisek and Vodftany are corroborated by Vavfinec, Historia
Hussitica, p. 438 and Stare letopisy esk z vratislavskho rukopisu (ed. FrantiSek Simek) (Prague,
1937), pp. 27-28.
37Howard Kaminsky, A History ofthe Hussite Revolution (Los Angeles/Berkeley, 1967), p. 332.
38Vavfinec, Historia Hussitica, p. 438.
39Pfibram, ivot knzt tborskych, p. 265.

34

THOMAS A. FUDGE

beginning, a huge success. Crowds of peasants and poor people flocked to Tbor
daily in such numbers that many nearby villages became entirely deserted and in
time disappeared altogether.40 It seemed that an apostolic community had been
established. An anonymous song, hostile to the Hussites, conceded that the
Taborites had achieved an ideal of sorts: "They meet together in peace, unity and
love, sharing eggs and bread with one another."41 Later witnesses corroborated the
essential context of Taborite communism: "they attempted to live after the example
of the primitive church, possessing all goods in common, with one making provision
for the other, and referring to all members as brothers."42 The emphasis went well
beyond Christian charity and focussed on communal sharing.
These emphases were repeated during the time of the European reformations.
In 1525, the chronicle of Johannes Kessler of St. Gallen reported that most of the
village of Zollikon on Lake Zurich converted to the Anabaptist faith. Like the early
Christians the villagers removed locks from doors, made all things common and
implemented a community of goods.43 Likewise at Rakw, in the 1570s, the Polish
communists endeavoured for a time to imitate apostolic social practices.
As we have seen, originally the common chests were filled by those flocking
to Tbor, Pisek, and other centres of radical activity. So strong was their commitment to the Hussite program that these converts sold all their belongings, renounced
their past, and gave their money to the communal fund.44 These original contributions could not sustain the needs of the growing community for long, however.
During 1419 and 1420 Taborite religion was imbued strongly with
chiliast-apocalyptic ideas.45 The end of the world was forecast, the return of Christ
envisioned, all evil in the world was predicted to be at an end, the wicked would
be annihilated,fireand sword would devour the enemies of boz zkon [the Law
of God].46 Those who adhered to the Law of God were urged to flee to the
mountains since salvation would come only to those in the hills and ultimately they

40Macek, Tbor v husitskm revolunim hnuti, pp. 304ff.

4lText in Macek (ed.), Ktozjs bo bojovnici, pp. 34-35.
421VoIuerunthi quondam ecclesie primitive moribus vivere et in communi tenebant omnia; fratres
se invicem appellabant et quod uni defuit alter subministravit..." Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini, Letter
to CardinalJuan Carvajal, 21 August 1451 in Der Briefwechsel des Eneas Silvius Piccolomini,vo\. 3,
(ed. Rudolf Wolkan) in Fontes rerum austriacarum, vol. 68 (Vienna, 1918), p. 26.
43Cited in Stayer, The German Peasants ' War and Anabaptist Community of Goods, pp. 95-96.
44To refer to early Hussitism as merely a programme is to run theriskof failing to come to terms
with its complexity. It should perhaps be referred to as "myth" in an anthropological sense. On this see
Thomas A. Fudge, The Magnificent Ride: The First Reformation in Hussite Bohemia [St. Andrews
Studies in Reformation History] (Aldershot, 1998), pp. 123-77.
45Smahel, Husitska revoluce, vol. 3, pp. 19-36 surveys the chiliast dimension of the Hussite
movement.
46On this important principle within Hussite history see Thomas A. Fudge, "The 1Law of God':
Reform and Religious Practice in Late Medieval Bohemia," in The Bohemian Reformation and
Religious Practice, vol. I, (ed. David R. Holeton) (Prague: Academy of Sciences of the Czech
Republic, 1996), pp. 49-72.

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

35

would dwell with the saints and, chief among the saints, Master Jan Hus.47 But the
arrival of the eschaton failed to occur amid growing hostility. Consequently the
Hussites, in April 1420, elected four men as military captains: Mikulas of Hus,
Zbynek of Buchov, Chval of Machovice, and Jan Zizka. These troops, later known
as the "warriors of God," came to be regarded as a social estate alongside the
traditional categories of medieval society. In their early battles and raids, especially
at Vozice and the seizure of the fortress of Sedlec and Rab Castle, all luxuries were
destroyed: treasuries laid waste and clothing, jewels, and other goods destroyed. The
early chiliast-millenarian views were still active in the Taborite mentality: all riches
must be subordinated to the primary task of establishing and defending the Law of
God. The same phenomenon occurred in Prague on 30 July 1419 when the New
Town councillors were defenestrated in the presence of Priest Zelivsky and Jan
Zizka. The bodies of the town officials lay dead on the street, their hats and chains
of office untouched.48 This idealism soon fell away and the plunder of war became
a means for sustaining the common chests.49 Under torture, Jan Polk of Prachatice
admitted that he had been in collusion with Taborites and together with Zizka had
attacked castles. "The horse-shoe maker" Jan of Recice, with Pavlik of Chvalkov,
Petr of Pelhrimov, Janek of Chvojnov, Oldnch of Cectice and others, confessed to
destroying property belonging to the Rozmberks. Pribik Tluksa of Kamen took part
in Taborite raids while Jan of Zeleznice, "a keeper of horses," admitted to helping
Zizka "steal and rob." Buzek confessed that he was the leader of petty raids on
Rozmberk territory.50 Clearly, these forays were intended not only to harass the
enemy, but also to maintain the community chests. The Hussite warriors never
succeeded in gaining permanent integration into Bohemian society yet their
existence remained crucial in the 1420s. Zizka's warriors presented a different form
of challenge to social order.51
Jan Pribram, the anti-Tborite Hussite, accused the priests of Tbor of seducing
and deceiving the common people. For Pribram, the communist ideals were nothing
more than a cleverly conceived plot to benefit "falesni svuodce" (the false
seducers).52 Pribram went so far as to accuse those "ukrutn selmy" (violent

"From the Taborite articles of 1420 and ratified by Taborite leaders on 10 December. The Latin
articles appear in Vavfinec, Historia Hussitica, pp. 452-65, and Johann Joseph Ignaz von Dollinger,
ed., Beitrage zur Sektengeschichte des Mittelalters, volume 2 (Munich, 1890), 691-700. A longer
Czech list appears in Macek (ed.), Ktozjs bo bojovnci, pp. 57-66. The list provided by Vavfinec
is a late redaction excluding the chiliast-communist tenets. I have also used the following manuscripts:
Prague Castle Archive MS. D 74 fols. W-87v; Prague, National and University Library MSS.: IE 32
fols. Ir - 84v; III G 17 fols. 65r-107v; V F 24 fols. 64r-143r and X G 20 fols. 10'-59v.
48See the excellent analysis by Kaminsky, "The Prague Insurrection of 30 July 1419," Medievalia
et Humanistica 17(1966), 106-26, but especially pp. 111-14.
49Vavfinec, Historia Hussitica, p. 381.
50Thesefiveconfessions were exacted from prisoners captured by the Rozmberks. MareS (ed.),
Poprav kniha pan v z Rozmberka, pp. 28, 30, 41, 45, 48.
51See the discussion in Wojciech Iwaczak, "The Burghers as the creation of the Devil? The
Three Social Estates and the Problem of the Town in the Middle Ages," trans., AIeksandra RodzinskaChojnowskazlcfa Poloniae Histrica, 67 (1993), 21-22.
52Pfibram, ivot kn tborskych, pp. 265-66.

36

THOMAS A. FUDGE

animals), and especially Matj Louda of Chlumcany the administrator at Pisek, of

dishonesty and duplicity with regard to the common funds. As far as we know, there
were no regulating safety devices in place to monitor the distribution of the common
chests. Embezzling common funds could have been an easy affair within the
existing Taborite system. On the other hand, Kaminsky has rightly observed that
no other source remotely supports Pribram's allegation, which "seems highly
unlikely in a period characterized by so high a degree of fanatical idealism."53
Notwithstanding, cases of abuse in the later Hussite period and among the sixteenthcentury Hutterites can be found.54 Sometimes the experiments became subjects of
caricature. A woodcut of the later sixteenth century depicted Hutterite communism
as a dovecote of witches. While Jacob Hutter gesturesfromthe highest window the
Hutteritesflyaround in wild sorcery-like fashion while a fox watches from below.55
Communist extremists at Tbor, called Adamites, pushed for even more
thorough-going communism in the abolition of the traditional family structure. Not
willing to live in the monastic spirit, whose "rule was the work of Antichrist,"56 the
Adamites called for the communal sharing of women. "Pfijde a bude takov lska
V lidech, ze vsechny veci bud mezi rumi v spolku a obecny, i zeny ..." (Behold,
the time is upon us when there will be much love among the people and all things
will be held jointly and in common, even women .. .).57 Another source describes
the Adamite communal sharing of women thus : "They held their women in common
and no one could know a woman without the consent of the leader, Adam. When
a brother burned for a sister with strong desire, he would take her by the hand and
go to the elder saying, 'my spirit is on fire with desire for her. ' Then the elder would
reply, 'go, be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth'."58 The sexual libertinism
of the Adamites and the communist idea concerning women was never accepted
by the wider community at Tbor, despite later accounts which associated Adamite
practices with all of Tbor.59 Similar propaganda followed other communities
holding common goods. Johannes Cochlaeus reported to Erasmus that the Swiss
Anabaptists made everything common, including young women and wives.60

53Kaminsky1 A History of the Hussite Revolution,^. 332.

54See the references in notes 75 and 76 below.
55The woodcut appeared on the title-page of Christoph Andreas Fischer, Vier und funfzig
Erhebliche Ursachen Warumb die Widertaufer nicht sein im Land zu leiden (Ingolstadt, 1607).
56The term isfromJan Zelivsky's sermon of 9 July 1419. Amedeo Molnr (ed.), Jan elivsky
Dochovan kzniz roku 1419 (Prague, 1953), p. 243.
57Simek, ed., Star letopisy cesk z vratislavskho rukopisu, p. 28.
5S"Connubia eis promiscua fuere . . ." Aeneas Sylvius, Historia bohmica in Aeneae Sylvii
Piccolominei Opera Omnia, (Basel, 1571), p. 109. Further the letter of Jan Zizka describing Adamite
practices. Zizka's information was exactedfroma prisoner during the 1421 Adamite persecution.
Vavfinec, Historia Hussitica, pp. 517-19.
59Windecke claims that Hussites accepted the heresy of going about naked. This unfairly suggests
that all of Hussitism accepted this practice. His account datesfromcirca 1440. Eberhard Windecke,
Denkwiirdigkeiten zur Geschichte des ZeitaIters Kaiser Sigmunds, (ed. Wilhelm Altmann) (Berlin,
1893), p. 129.
""Omnia fore communia, vxores, virgines, bona temporalia etc." 8 Jan. 1528, in Opus
Epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterodami, (eds. P.S. Allen and H.M. Allen) (Oxford, 1928), vol. 8, 288.

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

37

Eventually the Adamites were driven from Tbor and destroyed by Ziikafirstat
Klokoty in April and then later near Jindfichuv Hradec and Straz in October 1421.
Sexual egalitarianism, however, didfindwider acceptance and survived longer than
the communal sexual sharing of women. Hussite women did function in leadership
rles. John Klassen has noted references in the literature of the period which suggest
that treatises were composed by women.61 Stepan of Dolany, abbot of a Carthusian
house in Moravia, asserted that there were women preachers even in Prague62 while
Ondfej of Brod, Catholic professor of theology at Charles University, claimed that
Hussites hired women to preach.63 An anti-Hussite rhyme also stated the same thing:
"They make preachers out of cobblers (sevcv), millers (mlynrv), butchers
{feznkv), bakers (pekawv), tanners (kozeluhv), barbers (Iazebnikov) and other
craftsmen (jinych semeslnkv). Even women are allowed to preach."64 Among the
Adamites, Rohan shared leadership in tandem with a woman named Maria.
The stern critique of social structures by popular preachers shaped the Hussite
social experiments. Jan Zelivsky, "the preacher of poor, deprived and oppressed
people,"65 accused prelates and magistrates of perpetuating the sufferings of
common people. According to Zelivsky these oppressors, exalted by the Donation
of Constantine and simoniacal heresy, would not proclaim God's kingdom to the
poor.66 The communists at Tbor declared their readiness to do so. Not only did the
Taborites preach the Kingdom of God, they attempted to begin it with the
communist ideals of south Bohemia.67 Without external force this radical resolve
was abruptly and dramatically contravened. The vision of a Utopian society had been
disrupted from within. On St. Gall's Day, 14 October 1420, Taborite leaders in the
strictest terms collected all the usual rents and dues from the peasants at Tbor.68
The article "all taxes and exactions shall cease," as noted earlier, was summarily
violated and contravened. The disappointment and utter chagrin of the peasants over
this unexpected development was understandably intense. St. Gall's Day was the

6lJohn Klassen, "Women and Religious Reform in Late Medieval Bohemia," Renaissance and
Reformation n.s. 5, (No. 4, 1981), p. 206. On Hussite women see Anna Kolfova-Csafov, ena v
hnut husitskm (Prague, 1915). On the rle of women at Tbor and among the chiliasti see Macek,
Tbor v husitskm revolucnim hnut, vol. 2, pp. 83-86.
"Epistola ad Hussitas, in Bernard Pez (ed.), Thesaurus anecdotorum novissimus seu veterum
monumentorum, vol. 4 (Augsburg, 1723), pt. 2, col. 519.
aTractatus de origine Hussitarum, in Jaroslav Kadlec (ed), Traktt Mistra Ondfeje z Brodu o
pvodu husit Visiones bannis, Archiepiscopipragensis, et earundem explicaciones (Alias Tractatus
De origine Hussitarum) (Tbor, 1980), p. 11.
64Vaclav Nebesky, "Verse na Husity"; "Dv stare satyry" Casopis eskho museum, 26 (1852),
149.
65This is Zelivsky's self-description. See Molnr, "Zelivsky, prdicateur de la rvolution," p. 327.
Miloslav Ransdorf thinks the title is not accurate of Zelivsky's rle. See his Kapitolyzgeneze husitsk
ideologie (Prague, 1986), p. 202. Elsewhere onefindsZelivsky's public career in Prague described as
a dictatorship. Smahel, Husitska revoluce, vol. 3,91-111.
66See Zelivsky's sermons for 17 April and 8 June 1419 in Molnr (ed), Jan elivsky Dochovan
kznroku 1419, pp. 29, 181.
67For an overview of the communist vision of the Taborites see Smahel, Husitska revoluce, vol.
2, pp. 114-34.
68Vavfinec, Historia Hussitica, p. 438.

38

THOMAS A. FUDGE

usual day for collecting peasant rents. The communist peasants felt certain they had
been set free from this burden. It was not to be. Indeed, the burden increased.
Several sources report that the Taborites collected the customary payments as well
as additional dues.69
There is no unimpeachable evidence to suggest that the Taborite leaders acted
arbitrarily in a self-serving quest for gain. There is abundant evidence, however,
to suggest that by its very nature Taborite communism could not succeed
indefinitely. There are essentially three reasons for the collapse of the communist
ideals at Tbor. First, there was the superficial pluralism which created instability.
The best example is the Taborite Adamites who wanted to draw the early communist
ideals out to their logical conclusion. The mainstream community was prepared
neither to follow nor to tolerate the new innovations. The proto-nationalism in the
Hussite agenda likewise maintained the historic rift with the Germans. Only
Germans who embraced the Hussite programme wholeheartedly were fully trusted
and welcomed into the reforming communist programme. Though it has been
pointed out that Hussitism had its supporters in Germany,70 the evidence clearly
suggests that a thin line of demarcation separated the two peoples. In Prague, for
example, German Hussites in 1420 had a separate churchthe Church of the Holy
Ghost.71 Second, a loss of vision with respect to the communist ideals and the
Hussite myth, together with a tendency toward corruption, undermined the
experiment at Tbor. We have already alluded to Pribram's unsubstantiated
allegation of dishonesty at Pisek among the administrators of the common chests.
An old chronicler reported that Hussite soldiers looted towns and robbed people for
personal advantage.72 After 1425 Taborite preachers claimed that some people were
interested only in profit.73 Mikulas Biskupec described the loss of vision thus: "...
as long as they were poor (they were willing to be part of the program). But as soon
as they had filled their bags with money, they... turn to eating, drinking, ease and
entertainment. "74 An extreme example is the petty nobleman, Mikulas Trcka of Lipa
who, through military service in the Hussite armies, gained control of nine castles,
fourteen towns and 320 villages.75 This conundrum would laterbe found in Hutterite
communities, although admittedly not to the same degree. WilhelmReublinalleged
that in the Hutterite commune at Slavkov (Austerlitz) great inequity abounded.

69Chronicon Tboriarum, in Hfler, ed., Geschichtschreiber der Husitischen, volume 2, pp.

484-85 and Pribram, ivot kn tborskych, p. 266.
70MacekjllKohlasuhusitstv vNmecku," Ceskoslovensky asopishistoricky,4(1956), 191 and
Ferdinand Seibt, "Die Zeit der Luxemburger und der Hussitischen Revolution," in Handbuch der
Geschichte der bhmischen Lander (ed. Karl Bosl) (Stuttgart, 1967), vol. 1, pp. 524-25 and 529-30.
7lVavfinec, Historia Hussitica, p. 410.
12Stan letopisov cesti od r. 1378 do 1527, (ed. FrantiSek Palacky) in Scriptores rerum
bohemicarum, vol. 3 (Prague, 1829), p. 88.
73Miloslav Polvka, "Popular Movement as an Agent of the Hussite Revolution in Late Mediaeval
Bohemia," in History and Society (eds. Jaroslav PurS and Karel Herman) (Prague, 1985), pp. 279-80.
7iPostilla (ed., FrantiSek M. BartoS), "Tborsk bratrstvo let 1425-1426 na soude svho biskupa
MikulSe z Pelhfimova," Casopis spolenostipftel staroatnost eskych v Praze, 29 (1921), 113.
7sFrantiSek Smahelj La revolution hussite, une anomalie historique (Paris, 1985), pp. 115,117.

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

39

Reublin charged that some communal members ate "peas and cabbage" in separate
chambers while in more elegant dining rooms the leaders and their families had
"roasted meat,fish,poultry, and good wine!" A l l of this went on while small
children in the community were malnourished. Predictably, tension threatened
communal stability.76 Such disparity cannot readily be found among the Polish
Brethren at Rakw, nonetheless difficulties emerged there as well.
It is worth considering that the original vision among the Hussites not only
became lost but may have beenflawedwith inchoate corruption even at the outset.
Clearly, except in unusual cases, certain types of people advanced within the
communities of equality. The priests at Tbor continued, as in the evil towns of
Antichrist, to exercise significant social power and authority. Women only occasionally escaped patriarchy. Equality was contextually determined. It is also manifest
that those arrivingfirstat Tbor secured for themselves dwellings more centrally
located and archaeological investigations have shown that these earliest houses were
substantially larger than those secured by late-comers.77 Even in the earliest days
of apocalyptic utopianism some were more equal. In this the Hussites were not
unique in the history of pre-modern communist experiments. Despite the
proclamation of economic equality at Munster in the 1530s, no attempt was made
to put everyone on equal footing.78 Furthermore, Jan of Leiden and his royal court
"made a mockery of the egalitarian pretensions of community of goods." In Stayer's
words, the Miinster experiment was little more than "a shabby faade which
imperfectly disguised the persistence of gross privilege."79 At Tbor there remained
both exploitation and deferential egalitarianism.
The grave weakness of the communist experiment at Tbor lay in its nature.
Taborite communism was not full-blown communism. Indeed, the Taborite experiment was limited to consumption communism, not production communism. Family
units worked for themselves and contributed surplus to the general supply.
Essentially, the communism at Tbor was established not on production concerns
but rather in terms of the needs of the poor. This limited enterprise created an
unstable communism and led to the contradictory configuration of rich and poor
which predicated the general collapse of the Utopian vision. Tbor could not survive
as a communist enterprise on such shaky socio-economic foundations. With the
early abolition of all traditional means of income and theriddingof all instruments
of production to await the apocalyptic climax, it became apparent all too soon that
no society could exist indefinitely under such principles. The wealth of the common

76Reublin's letter of 26 March 1531 to PilgramMarpeck has been published in John C Wenger,
"LetterfromWilhelm Reublin to Pilgram Marpeck, 1531," Mennonite Quarterly Review, 23(1949),
67-75. Discussion in Packull, Hutterite Beginnings: Communitarian Experiments during the
Reformation, pp. 215-19.
77See FrantiSek Smahel, "Archeologick doklady stfedovk duchovni kultury," Archaeologia
histrica, 15 (1990), 295-310 and DQiny Tabora, 2 vols. (Cesk Budjovice, 1988, 1990).
78Scribner, "Practical Utopias: Pre-Modem Communism and the Reformation," p. 758.
79Stayer, The German Peasants' War and Anabaptist Community of Goods, pp. 12-13. The
Hutterites disavowed the Munsterites and their practices as a "demonic enterprise." FrantiSek Hruby,
Diemarhrischen Wiedertaufer (Lepigzig, 1935), pp. 7-8.

40

THOMAS A. FUDGE

chests could last only so long. Without the development of industry, trade or an
economic polity of governance to replenish the chests, the experiment could not
continue. Similarly it may be said that Anabaptists in Central Germany in the
sixteenth century failed to solve the problem of how to effectively organize their
sharing of goods.80 Remarkably enough, Tbor, as a community, did not dis-appear.
With the development of a system of crafts, Tbor became, economically, quite
similar to other Bohemian towns.81 With the initial establishment of Tbor,
communist ideals had become articles of faith. By the end of 1420, Tabor's radical
theology remained, but her communist ideals had been expunged from the statements of doctrine.
When Aeneas Sylvius visited Tbor thirty years later, communism had long
been extinct. Nevertheless, Aeneas reported two vestiges of the old ideals. First,
people of different inclinations, mainly heresies according to Aeneas, lived together
in peace.82 Second, the Taborite clergy were supported by gifts from the community
since they did not own property.
The Taborites stock a building for them at public expense with
grain, beer, pork-fat, vegetables, wood, and all necessary
furnishings, and they add to this a three-score of groschen each
month for each priest, out of which sum the latter may buy fish,
fresh meat, and, if they wish, wine. They offer nothing on the
altar; they condemn all tithes; and they do not observe the
offering offirst-fruitseither in name or in fact.83
It is entirely possible that the funds of the common chests evolved into church
funds. Since there is no evidence to suggest that contributions to the common
priestly fund were obligatory, it seems reasonable to connect the survival of original
communism, which extended to the entire community, with the communally
supported common stores for the priests of Tbor.84
The ideals of early Tbor attempted to harmonize the demands of the Christian
faith with the realities of Bohemian society and thus produce an alternative to
religious and social problems.85 The implementation of its communist ideals in 1420
was doomed from the beginning. But the experiment would be tried again in
Bohemia, within a generation, by another community imbued with the original spirit
and fervour of the Taborites.

80Scribner, "Practical Utopias: Pre-Modern Communism and the Reformation," p. 756.

81Kaminsky, "Chiliasm and the Hussite Revolution," p. 62.
82Aeneas Sylvius, Letter to Cardinal Juan Carvajal, 21 August 1451 in Der Briefwechsel des
Eneas Silvius Piccolomini, vol. 3, p. 56.
83Ibid., p. 25. Translation in Kaminsky, "Aeneas Sylvius Among the Taborites," Church History,
28 (Sept. 1959),290-91.
84Kaminsky, ibid., p. 291.
85Kaminsky, "The Religion of Hussite Tbor," in The Czechoslovak Contribution to World
Culture, ed., Miloslav Rechcigl, Jr. (The Hague/London/ Paris, 1964), p. 223.

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

41

IV

In 1452 Jifi of Podebrady, the later Hussite king, forced the capitulation of T
Its fortifications were dismantled and its main leaders, Mikulas Biskupec and Vaclav
Koranda of Plzen were imprisoned. Withinfiveyears the delayed offspring of Tbor
was born. Sometime in 1457 or 1458 a group of people under the leadership of
Rehof Krajci (Gregory "the tailor") of Prague, c. 1420-74, established a community
at Kunvald in northeast Bohemia. Originally this group was called Bratn zakona
Kristova (The Brethren of the Laws of Christ) but later became known as Jednota
Bratrska (The Unity of Brethren) or the Unitas Fratrum.
The glory of Tbor was gone forever, but her spirit was far from dead. In the
early years of the Unitas Fratrum it was the spirit of Tbor and Petr Chelcicky
which provided the main impetus.86 According to James Stayer, similar influences
may be detected in the early example of the Swiss Anabaptists and groups later who
pursued communist ideals. Following Chelcicky, the "Brothers and Sisters of the
Laws of Christ" decreed that none of their members should participate in state
governance because the state created inequalities. Christians must not rule,
accumulate wealth, engage in trade or keep inns. This latter prohibition was linked
to the general negative perception of the profession. The Kunvald community used
the Taborite designation of "brother" and "sister" for members of their group.87 In
its earliest stage the Unitas Fratrum was no more than a loose federation of groups
kept together by the zeal of their leader and founder, Rehof, and their desire to live
according to the gospel.88 This entailed the principle, advanced partially by both the
Taborites and Chelcicky, of complete human equality. There were to be no social
divisions of "rich" and "poor." Hence, it became mandatory on the grounds of
communism, pacifism, and anarchism for those holding property, wealth, and rank
to renounce all symbols of status before joining the community. Our knowledge of
this practice comes from statements by four leading members of the community.
In the spring of 1480, Michael, Jan Tborsky, Prokop of Jindrichv Hradec, and
Toms of Lanskroun were apprehended at Kladsko by order of the duke of
Munsterberg. The brothers had been enroute to visit Waldensian communities in
Brandenburg. The examination of the brothers was held on 4-5 June and conducted

86For the Unitas Fratrum, their beliefs and practices, see Jaroslav Bidlo (ed.), Akty Jednoty
bratrsk, 2 vols. (Brno, 1915-23) containing documentsfrom1437-1524; Antonin Gindely (ed.),
Dekrety Jednoty Bratrsk (Prague, 1865), containing synodal decrees up to 1636; Joseph Theodor
Miiller, Geschichte der Bhmischen Brder, 3 vols. (Herrnhut, 1922-31); Rudolfftican(trans. C
Daniel Crews), TheHistoryofthe UnityofBrethren, (Bethlehem, PA and Winston-Salem, N.C., 1992)
and Brock, The Political and Social Doctrines of the Unity of Czech Brethren.
87It is well known that the terms "brother" and "sister" became commonplace in Czech religious
groups throughout thefifteenthcentury. The practice originated in the early days of Taborite religion.
See Millier, Geschichte der Bhmischen Brder, vol. 1, p. 72.
88Otakar Odlozilk, "A Church in a Hostile State: The Unity of Czech Brethren," Central
European History, 6 (June 1973), 112.

42

THOMAS A. FUDGE

by Roman priests.89 The restrictions of the community regarding property

discouraged many of the nobility, who may have otherwise been inclined, from
joining the Unitas Fratrum prior to 1470. Two known exceptions were Methodius
Strachota and Jan Kostka of Postupice. The former "on joining the Brethren . . .
gave up his castle at Orlice (near Kysperk, where his family had their seat) and lived
in poverty as a nobleman's secretary and later as a miller."90 Trade was forbidden
as was earning interest onfinancialloans. The underlying Christian principles of
charity and mutual aid were stressed in the formative years. The early apocalyptic
zeal so characteristic of the Taborite years had not faded. The conviction of living
at the end of the age continued to provide motivation for the ongoing pursuit of
utopianism.
At a synod in Rychnov in 1464, many of these tenets received official
formulation. The communism of goods in keeping with the primitive church and
the Taboriteswas deemed obligatory. As noted earlier, all material concerns were
to be renounced, private property relinquished, all things both money and goods
were to be held in common; everything was to be shared with the poor and the
community was to provide for all the needs of its members. A reformed social
practice provided the Kunvald community with its viability. The Unitas Fratrum
severely criticized the Waldensian priests for their apparent failure to practice
communist ideals. In 1471 the Czech communists, in their tract Kterakse lid maji
miti k msk Cirkvi (How people should conduct themselves toward the Roman
Church), launched a forceful attack against the Waldensians. "They take from their
people and, neglecting the poor, amass much wealth. For it is indeed not only
against the faith for a Christian priest to lay up treasurefromearthly things, but even
to inherit property from his parents. Rather should he distribute it as alms, not
forgetting the poor in need, for otherwise according to the writings of the
apostles he has abjured the apostolic faith and thereby excluded himself from
grace."91 Unlike the Adamites, the Unitas did not advance communist notions about
the dissolution of the traditional family unit or the communal sharing of women.
Unmarried members lived and worked together according to gender. The Rychnov
Synod in 1464 emphasized mutual obedience in religious and communal affairs.92
By 1467 the Unitas Fratrum instituted their own separate priesthood at the
Synod of Lhotka near Rychnov. The reform community elected Matej as their
leader. He was consecrated by Priest Michael of Zamberk, a sympathetic Roman

89The report, with Latin sources, has been edited and published. Jaroslav Goll (ed.), "NTaer
prameny k nbozenskym djinm v 15. stoletC Vstnk kralovsk cesk spolecnosti nuk (1895), pp.
1-12.
90Brock, The Political and Social Doctrines ofthe Unity of Czech Brethren, p. 98 with references
to the Czech sources.
"Jaroslav Goll (ed.), Quellen und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Bohmischen Brder
(Prague, 1878), vol. 1, 102-4. Translated in Brock, ibid., p. 79.
92For a partial translation of the text and commentary see Marianka S. Fousek, "The
Perfectionism of the Early Unitas Fratrum," Church History, 30 (December 1962), 397-400 and
passim.

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

43

priest.93 With Matej at the helm, together with Prokop of Jindnchuv Hradec, Martin
of Krcin, Tuma Pfelousky, Elias Chfenovicky, Augustin Halar of Chrudfm, and
Veliky Vit, the Unitas progressed. Certain households [zbor] were designated as
centres for the poor and elderly. Consistent with the rule established by Brother
Rehor, the brethren continued to engage only in crafts and agriculture as
occupations.94 Despite sporadic persecution in the 1460s by both Roman and
Utraquist Churches, the Unitas Fratrumflourished.In 1479 the brethren numbered
probably fewer than 2,000.95 By 1500 that figure had climbed to about 10,000 with
related communities in Moravia and Poland, in addition to those in Kunvald,
Prague, Klatovy, Lenesice, Benatky, Nemecky Brod, Rychnov nad Knznou, Krcin
near Litice, Vinance, and other unspecified locations. Moreover, the UnitasFratrum
had secured the powerful protection of families such as Kostka of Postupice, Krajif
of Krajek, and Ctibor Tovacovsky of Cimburk.96
Like the Taborites, the Unitas Fratrum practised only partial communism. Even
in the early years, private ownership was not forbidden in the strict sense and in time
the principle was abandoned altogether, except among the clergy. The communal
sharing of goods was more or less voluntary after the initial hard-line. The death
knell to communist ideals among the Unitas Fratrum can be traced to three sources.
First, the brethren had, through the consequences of industry, thrift and frugality,
created considerable wealth and no mean reputation in the Czech lands, despite their
association with heresy and separatism. Now, many people wished to join the
brethren. This precipitated a relaxing of communal standards, especially concerning
social issues. The Edict of Brandys in 1490 allowed community members to hold
public office and opened the door to further reforms of the social policy of the
Unitas. The result was an irreparable split between the moderate Vasistrana (Major
Party) and the extremist Mensi strana (Minor Party). With the virtual extinction of
the extremists many of the old communist ideas were deletedfromthe rule of faith
of the Unitas Fratrum.97 The texture of the apocalyptic thread had changed yet
again.
As death neared, the leader of the Minor Party, Brother Amos, conferred
priestly orders upon Jan Kalenec (f c. 1547) and appointed him his successor. Jan
Kalenec tried to revive the old doctrines among the brethren without success.
Kalenec established connections with the Moravian Anabaptists and the Habrovany

93The long-held idea that this ordination ceremony included a Waldensian bishop, thus linking
the Unitas Fratrum to the historic succession of the episcopate, has been demolished by the recent
researches of David R. Holeton. He demonstrates that the name of the presiding bishop cannot be
found in the sources until the 1560s and when the named individual is investigated it becomes evident
that he perished at the hands of the Inquisition in Vienna on 19 August 1467. See Holeton's study,
"Church or Sect?: The Jednota bratrsk and the Growth of Dissent from Mainline Utraquism,"
Communio Viatorum, 38 (No. 1, 1996), 28-34.
94Odlozilik, 77ie Hussite King: Bohemia in European Affairs 1440-1471, p. 274.
95Ferdinand Hrejsa, Dejiny kfest' ansivi v Ceskoslovensku (Prague, 1948), vol. 4, 38-39.
96Odlozilik, ibid., p. 276.
97For the schism in the Unitas Fratrum see Brock, ibid., pp. 103-81 with references to the sources.

44

THOMAS A. FUDGE

Brethren and influenced significantly the social tenets of the latter's practice.98
These communities would enjoy a long, if troubled, history. From the late 1520s
different forms of communal experiments were pursued at Slavkov (Austerlitz).99
Kalenec also had contacts with the Briiderhofe, the communist experiments in
Moravia under the influence of Jacob Hutter. Kalenec favoured communism but
could never re-establish the practice in Bohemia. After his death the Minor Party,
with its radical tendencies, disappeared altogether.
V
The idea of establishing a practical utopia through communalism in Hussite
Bohemia may be traced to two main sources: religious idealism and economic
considerations. The lure of primitive Christianity captured the imagination of those
disenchanted with the late medieval church. The yearning for a better life, challenge
of utopia, promise of the coming kingdom of God, and millennial reign were forces
challenging culture and society. One way in which the Hussites believed they could
achieve their goals was through communist experiments. The heady influences of
the reform fervour from the 1370s onward prompted an intense search for salvation.
This, together with the eschatological expectations of the Tborites, provided the
movement with an urgency unmatched in the later period. There was a hidden order
in the flux of the Hussite century. What made for stability in sectarian communities
that were founded with radical social ideals and then compromised with individualism and private property? The answer must lie in some dimension of the persistent
apocalyptic conviction which gripped, successively, each attempt to realize the
kingdom of God through social renovation. The pursuit of utopia was prompted by
the apocalyptic mood. That pursuit took different forms but the common quest
remained.
Anti-Hussite crackdowns and royal repression from 1415 to 1419 served only
to galvanize the heretics and strengthen their resolve to implement the utopianism
they envisioned. Blood became seed and injustice was met by the world-denying
scheme of communism. It was this consensus which became the explosive force in
Bohemia and similar convictions led to the German Peasants' War in 1525. The
communist-religious programme of the Hussites, which centred in equality, became
a defining feature and connecting link in the two eras of rebellion. For south
Germany the link had been established through the dissermnating efforts of the
merchant and lay bishop Friedrich Reiser.100

wBrock, ibid., p. 251.

99The definitive study is the aforementioned one by Packull, Hutterite Beginnings:
Communitarian Experiments During the Reformation.
100Jiirgen Bucking, "The Peasant War in the Habsburg Lands as a Social Systems-Conflict," in
The German Peasant War 1525: New Viewpoints ( eds. Bob Scribner and Gerhard Benecke) (London,
1979), pp. 162-65. See also FrederickG. Heymann, "The Hussite Revolution and the German Peasants'
War - An Historical Comparison," Medievalia et Humanstica, n.s. 1 (1970), 141-59.

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

45

Yet not all Hussites were motivated by religious concerns. In fact, it is not even
safe to assume the majority were. The unstable economyrifewith growing problems
and rising discontent played a pivotal rle in the appeal of Hussite communism to
the average Bohemian and Moravian of the fifteenth century. Poverty, inflation,
rising prices, static wages, debt, taxes, joblessness, political insecurity, social
disadvantage, and cultural upheaval caused people under the Czech crown to
consider the plans and promises of the Hussite prophets.101 Economic concerns,
however, did not become motivation for experiments in communalism all at once.
The Bohemian economy experiencedriseand fall for more than two generations.
But there were extreme situations. Between 1400 and 1420 the Czechgroschen had
rapidly devalued by 20 per cent.102 The year before the founding of Tabor taxes had
been demanded seven times of the citizens of Prague.103 The economic desperation
of some provided sufficient impetus for the trip to Tbor. As in fifteenth-century
Bohemia, so the reasons for joining communist communities in the sixteenth century
were many and varied. Religious conviction, economic motivation, and social
affinity seem to be the most common. Yet there were reasons altogether unedifying,
like the men who abandoned wives, men and women who ran off together, outlaws,
or those who for various and sundry reasons simply wished to disappear.104
Despite the religious and economic inducement, many in Hussite Bohemia did
not exercise the radical communist option presented by the followers of Hus.
Puritanical intolerance, dogmatic uniformity, cultural isolationism, dictatorship of
the communal leadership, and a stringent renunciation of all worldly possessions
and alliances was too much for some. For others their allegiance to the Roman
Church precluded fraternizing with condemned heretics. For still others the fear of
an attractive, but unknown, situation was sufficient to keep them where they were,
in an unattractive, but well-known context. The shortcomings, drawbacks, and
essential nature of the communist communities of Hussite Bohemia reflect to large
measure the same configuration of sixteenth-century communities in Germany,
Moravia, Poland, and Transylvania.105
These brief analyses offifteenth-centuryCzech communism make abundantly
clear that these experiments at best were partial, inconclusive, and in a perpetual
state offlux.Furthermore, in both cases Taborite and Unitas Fratrum they
were vitiated by political and theological considerations. The inchoate communism
which was realized at Tbor was possible because there was no hindering coercive
force in the country powerful enough to disrupt the experiment. The Unitas Fratrum

101On these issues see Fudge, TTie Magnificent Ride, pp. 18-33 and John Klassen, "The
Disadvantaged and the Hussite Revolution," International Review of Social History, 35 (1990), 24972.
102FrantiSek Graus, Chudina mstsk v dobpedhusitsk (Prague, 1949), pp. 179-89.
103Ibid., p. 96, and JiH KejitHusite (Prague, 1984), p. 51.
104Scribner, "Practical Utopias: Pre-Modem Communism and the Reformation," pp. 765-69 for
an analysis of those who joined the Hutterite communities.
105See for example Scribner, "Practical Utopias: Pre-Modern Communism and the Reformation,"
Stayer, The German Peasants ' War and Anabaptist Community of Goods and Williams, The Polish
Brethren.

46

THOMAS A. FUDGE

enj oyed the protection of King Jiri of Podebrady in the early years and the patronage
of powerful nobles later in the century. Certainly, the experiment at Tabor was the
more intensive, dynamic and successful of the Bohemian attempts at communal
living. Nonetheless, it was doomed by its early chiliast orientation. The failure of
its communist ideals was joined to the conviction that the parousia was near. Hence,
the necessary step from consumption communism to production communism was
not considered indeed the very notion was a non sequitur in chiliasm until
that transition had to be superseded by more drastic measures. The Unitas Fratrum
were not fuelled by the same apocalyptic-chiliast fervour as the Tborites. Instead,
they saw the Utraquists as going back too close to Rome and thus, yearning for the
perceived purity and simplicity of the early church, broke away from the Utraquist
Church. Like the Tborites of old they abandoned the city of Antichrist and
attempted to establish the city of Christ in the Bohemian hinterlands.
If communist principles were never fully achieved, the same could be said
about egalitarianism. If communism at Tabor was oligarchic, it remained largely
voluntary among the Unitas Fratrum. Tabor attempted to be more democratic and
egalitarian vis--vis women, while the Unitas remained exclusively patriarchal.
While there were schools for both boys and girls at Tbor, it was only among the
extremist wings like the Adamites that women actually functioned in conspicuous
leadership roles. These problems in the Bohemian experiments of the fifteenth
century would be found among similar communities in the sixteenth century.
Suggestions that Hutterite communities were democratic cannot sustain the contrary
evidence which would seem to imply they were essentially oligarchic and
patriarchal.106
It is fair to say that the driving forces at Tbor were more theological than
social and primarily religious rather than economic. Among the Unitas there was
a slightly greater social and economic emphasis, due to the influence of Chelcicky.
Nonetheless, communism in Hussite Bohemia was religiously, more than socially,
motivated. In the end, communism was little more than a sideline to the central
Hussite agenda; it was not the heart of Hussitism. Important as it may have been
a n d arguably it was very importantcommunism was of secondary significance
to following the teachings of St. Jan Hus, practising the cult of the chalice,
establishing and defending the Law of God and reviving the apostolic church in the
gloomy dimness of "the night of antichrist."107 Nevertheless, the communist ideals
of Tbor and the Unitas Fratrum presented a challenge to late medieval Europe and
in so doing facilitated social and religious reform which both captured the attention

'"'Assumption of democracy advanced by Hans-Dieter Plumper, Die Giitergemeinschaft bei den

Tauferdes 16. Jahrhunderts (Gppingen, 1972), p. 145. Refuted by Scribner, "Practical Utopias: PreModern Communism and the Reformation," p. 763, Stayer, The German Peasants' War and
Anabaptist Community of Goods, and especially Packull, Hutterite Beginnings: Communitarian
Experiments during the Reformation.
107llNox signt vicia, et specialiter in nocte tempore Anticristi, sicut nunc est." The term is Jan
elivsky's from his sermon for 19 April 1419. Molnar (ed.), Jan elivsky Dochovan kznz roku
1419, p. 37.

COMMUNIST EXPERIMENTS IN HUSSITE BOHEMIA

47

of Europe and the imagination of those seeking, in hope, the advent of a differ
world.
University of Canterbury