Book contents
- The Cambridge Companion to Christian Heresy
- Cambridge Companions to Religion
- The Cambridge Companion to Christian Heresy
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- Part I Approaches and Evidence
- Part II Case Studies
- References
- Index
- Cambridge Companions to Religion (continued from page ii)
- References
Part II - Case Studies
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 July 2025
Edited by
Book contents
- The Cambridge Companion to Christian Heresy
- Cambridge Companions to Religion
- The Cambridge Companion to Christian Heresy
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- Part I Approaches and Evidence
- Part II Case Studies
- References
- Index
- Cambridge Companions to Religion (continued from page ii)
- References
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Companion to Christian Heresy , pp. 113 - 384Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Select Bibliography
Brakke, D. 2010. The Gnostics: Myth, Ritual, and Diversity in Early Christianity, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Layton, B. 1995. ‘Prolegomena to the study of ancient Gnosticism’, in White, L. M. and Yarbrough, O. L. (eds.) The Social World of the First Christians: Essays in Honor of Wayne A. Meeks, Minneapolis, 334–50.Google Scholar
Meyer, M. and Robinson, J. M. (eds.) 2009. The Nag Hammadi Scriptures: The Revised and Updated Translation of Sacred Gnostic Texts, New York.Google Scholar
Robinson, J. M. (ed.) 2000. The Coptic Gnostic Library: A Complete Edition of the Nag Hammadi Codices, Leiden.Google Scholar
Smith, G. S. 2015. Guilt by Association: Heresy Catalogues in Early Christianity, Oxford.Google Scholar
Williams, M. A. 1996. Rethinking ‘Gnosticism’: An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Category, Princeton.Google Scholar
Williams, M. A. 2016. ‘Gnosticism emergent: The beginning of the study of Gnosticism in the Academy’, in DeConick, A. D. (ed.) Religion: Secret Religion, Macmillan Interdisciplinary Handbooks – Religion, Farmington Hills, MI, 3–22.Google Scholar
Select Bibliography
BeDuhn, J. 2007a. ‘A war of words: Intertextuality and the struggle over the legacy of Christ in the Acta Archelai’, in BeDuhn, J. and Mirecki, P. (eds.) Frontiers of Faith: The Christian Encounter with Manichaeism in the Acts of Archelaus, Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies 61, Leiden, 77–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coyle, J. K. 2007b. ‘A clash of portraits: Contrasts between Archelaus and Mani in the Acta Archelai’, in BeDuhn, J. and Mirecki, P. (eds.) Frontiers of Faith: The Christian Encounter with Manichaeism in the Acts of Archelaus, Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies 61, Leiden, 67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, I. and Lieu, S. N. C.. 2004. Manichaean Texts from the Roman Empire, Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511616891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gulácsi, Zs. 2010/14. ‘The prophet’s seal: A contextualized look at the crystal sealstone of Mani in the Bibliothèque nationale de France’, Bulletin of the Asia Institute 24: 161–85.Google Scholar
Harrison, G. and BeDuhn, J.. 2001. ‘The authenticity and doctrine of (Ps?) Mani’s Letter to Menoch’, in Mirecki, P. and BeDuhn, J. (eds.) The Light and the Darkness: Studies in Manichaeism and Its World, Leiden, 128–72.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, D. W. 2017. ‘Approaches to orthodoxy and heresy in the study of early Christianity’, Religion Compass 11. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec3.12227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieu, S. N. C. 1992. Manichaeism in the Later Roman Empire and Medieval China, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 63, Tübingen.Google Scholar
Lieu, S. N. C. 1994. ‘An early Byzantine formula for the renunciation of Manichaeism: The Capita VII Contra Manichaeos of “Zacharias of Mitylene”’, in Lieu, S. N. C. (ed.) Manichaeism in Mesopotamia and the Roman East, Religions in the Graeco-Roman World 118, Leiden, 203–304.Google Scholar
Select Bibliography
Ayres, L. 2004. Nicaea and Its Legacy: An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology, Oxford.10.1093/0198755066.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berndt, G. M. and Steinacher, R. (eds.) 2014a. Arianism: Roman Heresy and Barbarian Creed, Aldershot.Google Scholar
Brennecke, H.-C. 1988. Studien zur Geschichte der Homöer: der Osten bis zum Ende der homöischen Reichskirche, Beiträge zur historischen Theologie 73, Tübingen.Google Scholar
Burrus, V. 1991. ‘The heretical woman as symbol in Alexander, Athanasius, Epiphanius, and Jerome’, The Harvard Theological Review 84.3: 229–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flower, R. 2016. Imperial Invectives against Constantius II: Athanasius of Alexandria, History of the Arians, Hilary of Poitiers, Against Constantius, Lucifer of Cagliari, On the Necessity of Dying for the Son of God, Translated Texts for Historians 67, Liverpool.10.3828/978-1-78138-328-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galvão-Sobrinho, C. R. 2013. Doctrine and Power: Theological Controversy and Christian Leadership in the Later Roman Empire, The Transformation of the Classical Heritage 51, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
Gwynn, D. M. 2007a. The Eusebians: The Polemic of Athanasius of Alexandria and the Construction of the ‘Arian Controversy’, Oxford.Google Scholar
Hanson, R. P. C. 1988. The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy, 318–381 AD, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Heil, U. 2011. Avitus von Vienne und die homöische Kirche der Burgunder, Patristische Texte und Studien 66, Berlin.10.1515/9783110251555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y. R. (ed.) 2021b. The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea, Cambridge.10.1017/9781108613200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyman, J. R. 2008. ‘Arius and Arians’, in Ashbrook Harvey, S. and Hunter, D. G. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Studies, Oxford, 237–57.Google Scholar
Muehlberger, E. 2015. ‘The legend of Arius’ death: Imagination, space, and filth in late ancient historiography’, Past & Present 227.1: 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parvis, S. 2006. Marcellus of Ancyra and the Lost Years of the Arian Controversy, 325–345, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whelan, R. E. 2018. Being Christian in Vandal Africa: The Politics of Orthodoxy in the Post-Imperial West, The Transformation of the Classical Heritage 59, Oakland, CA.Google Scholar
Williams, D. H. 1995. Ambrose of Milan and the End of the Arian-Nicene Conflicts, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Select Bibliography
Bonner, A. 2018. The Myth of Pelagianism, Oxford.10.5871/bacad/9780197266397.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, A. 2003a. ‘How to read heresiology’, Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 33: 471–92 (repr. in D. B. Martin and P. Cox Miller (eds.) The Cultural Turn in Late Ancient Studies: Gender, Asceticism and Historiography, Durham, NC, 2005, 193–212).10.1215/10829636-33-3-471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, A. 2003b. ‘Jews and heretics – a category error?’, in Becker, A. H. and Reed, A. Y. (eds.) The Ways That Never Parted, Tübingen, 345–60.Google Scholar
Frede, H. J. 1973–4. Ein neuer Paulustext und Kommentar, 2 vols., Vetus Latina. Die Reste der altlateinischen Bibel. Aus der Geschichte der lateinischen Bibel 7–8, Freiburg.Google Scholar
Greer, R. 1989. The Fear of Freedom: A Study of Miracles in the Roman Imperial Church, Pennsylvania State University Park, PA.Google Scholar
Henderson, J. B. 1998. The Construction of Orthodoxy and Heresy: Neo-Confucian, Islamic, Jewish, and Early Christian Patterns, Albany, NY.Google Scholar
Iricinschi, E. and Zellentin, H. M. 2008. ‘Making selves and marking others: Identity and late antique heresiology’, in Iricinschi, E. and Zellentin, H. M. (eds.) Heresy and Identity in Late Antiquity, Tübingen, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, K. L. 2008b. ‘Social and theological effects of heresiological discourse’, in Iricinschi, E. and Zellentin, H. M. (eds.) Heresy and Identity in Late Antiquity, Tübingen, 28–49.Google Scholar
Kurtz, L. 1983. ‘The politics of heresy’, American Journal of Sociology 88: 1085–1115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, R. A. 2004. ‘Social and historical setting’, in Young, F., Ayres, L. and Louth, A. (eds.) The Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature, Cambridge, 399–413.Google Scholar
Martinetto, G. 1971. ‘Les premières réactions antiaugustinienne de Pélage’, Revue des Études Augustiniennes 18: 83–117.Google Scholar
Mathisen, R. W. 1993. ‘For specialists only: The reception of Augustine and his teachings in fifth-century Gaul’, in Lienhard, J., Muller, E. and Teske, R. (eds.) Augustine: Presbyter Factus Sum, New York, 29–41.Google Scholar
Rebillard, É. 2000. ‘Sociologie de la déviance et orthodoxie: Le cas de la controverse pélagienne sur la grâce’, in Elm, S., Rebillard, É. and Romano, A. (eds.) Orthodoxie, christianisme, histoire, Rome, 221–40 (repr. and trans. as ‘Deviance theory and orthodoxy: The case of the Pelagian controversy on grace’, in É. Rebillard, Transformations of Religious Practices in Late Antiquity, Farnham, 2013, 159–77).Google Scholar
Select Bibliography
Abramowski, L. 1961. ‘Zur Theologie des Theodors von Mopsuestia’, Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 72: 263–93.Google Scholar
Beeley, C. A. 2011. ‘The early Christological controversy: Apollinarius, Diodore, and Gregory Nazianzen’, Vigiliae Christianae 65.4: 376–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behr, J. 2011b. The Case Against Diodore and Theodore: Texts and Their Contexts, Oxford.Google Scholar
Bevan, G. A. 2016. The New Judas: The Case of Nestorius in Ecclesiastical Politics, 428–451 CE, Leuven.Google Scholar
Brock, S. P. 1996. ‘The “Nestorian” Church: A lamentable misnomer’, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 78: 23–35.10.7227/BJRL.78.3.3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brock, S. P. 2016. ‘Miaphysite, not monophysite!’, Cristianesimo nella storia 37: 45–52.Google Scholar
Macomber, W. F. 1958. ‘The Christology of the Synod of Seleucia-Ctesiphon (AD 486)’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica 24: 124–54.Google Scholar
McGuckin, J. 2004. Saint Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy: Its History, Theology, and Texts, Crestwood, NY.Google Scholar
Norris, R. A. 1963. Manhood and Christ: A Study in the Christology of Theodore of Mopsuestia, Oxford.Google Scholar
Price, R. and Gaddis, M. 2005. The Acts of the Council of Chalcedon, 3 vols., Translated Texts for Historians 45, Liverpool.Google Scholar
Price, R. and Whitby, M. (eds.) 2009. Chalcedon in Context: Church Councils 400–700, Translated Texts for Historians, Contexts 1, Liverpool.Google Scholar
Winkler, D. W. 2016. ‘“Miaphysitismus”: Anmerkungen zur ökumenischen Sinnhaftigkeit eines Neologismus’, Cristianesimo nella storia 37: 19–29.Google Scholar
Select Bibliography
Bibliander, T. 1542b. A godly consultation vnto the brethren and companyons of the Christen religyon, Basel.Google Scholar
Bibliander, T. 2007. Le Coran à la Renaissance: plaidoyer pour une traduction, trans. H. Lamarque, Toulouse.Google Scholar
Dimmock, M. 2013. Mythologies of the Prophet Muhammad in Early Modern English Culture, Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9781139507530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mango, C. A., Scott, R. and Greatrex, G. (trans.) 1997. The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor: Byzantine and Near Eastern History, AD 284–813, Oxford.Google Scholar
Miller, G. J. 2013. ‘Theodor Bibliander’s Machumetis saracenorum principis eiusque successorum vitae, doctrina ac ipse alcoran (1543) as the sixteenth-century “Encyclopedia” of Islam’, Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations 24.2: 241–54.10.1080/09596410.2013.772329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roggema, B. 2009. The Legend of Sergius Bahira: Eastern Christian Apologetics and Apocalyptic in Response to Islam, Leiden.10.1163/ej.9789004167308.i-580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, D. et al. (eds.) 2009–2022. Christian-Muslim Relations: A Bibliographical History, 40 vols., Leiden.Google Scholar
Select Bibliography
Auzépy, M.-F. 2008. ‘State of emergency (700–850)’, in Shepard, J. (ed.) The Cambridge History of the Byzantine Empire, c. 500–1492, Cambridge, 249–91.Google Scholar
Barber, C. 2002. Figure and Likeness: On the Limits of Representation in Byzantine Iconoclasm, Princeton.Google Scholar
Brubaker, L. and Haldon, J. 2011. Byzantium in the Iconoclast Era c. 680–850: A History, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Cameron, A. 2008. ‘The violence of orthodoxy’, in Iricinschi, E. and Zellentin, H. M. (eds.) Heresy and Identity in Late Antiquity, Tübingen, 102–14.Google Scholar
Cormack, R. 2012. ‘Looking for iconophobia and iconoclasm in late antiquity and Byzantium’, in May, N. N. (ed.) Iconoclasm and Text Destruction in the Ancient Near East and Beyond, Chicago, 471–84.Google Scholar
Elsner, J. 2012. ‘Iconoclasm as discourse: From antiquity to Byzantium’, The Art Bulletin 44.3: 368–94.Google Scholar
Flood, F. B. 2012a. ‘Christian mosaics in early Islamic Jordan and Palestine: A case of regional iconoclasm’, in Evans, H. C., with Ratliff, B. (eds.) Byzantium and Islam: Age of Transition 7th–9th Century, New Haven, CT, 117–21.Google Scholar
Gouillard, J. 1967. ‘Le synodikon de l’orthodoxie: édition et commentaire’, Travaux et Mémoires 2: 1–316.Google Scholar
Griffith, S. 1992. ‘Images, Islam and Christian icons: A moment in the Christian/Muslim encounter in early Islamic times’, in Canivet, P. and Rey-Coquais, J.-P. (eds.) La Syrie de Byzance a l’Islam VIIe–VIIIe Siècles, Damascus.Google Scholar
Herrin, J. 2014. ‘What caused Iconoclasm?’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History 65.4: 857–66.10.1017/S0022046913001589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, M. (ed.) 2021a. A Companion to Byzantine Iconoclasm, Leiden.10.1163/9789004462007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krannich, T., Schubert, C. and Sode, C. 2002. Die ikonoklastische Synode von Hiereia 754, Tübingen.Google Scholar
Mathews, T., with Muller, N. 2016. The Dawn of Christian Art in Panel Paintings and Icons, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Parry, K. 1996. Depicting the Word: Byzantine Iconophile Thought of the Eighth and Ninth Centuries, Leiden.10.1163/9789004476189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sansterre, J.-M. 1994. ‘La parole, le texte et l’image selon les auteurs byzantins des époques iconoclaste et posticonoclaste’, in Testo e immagine nell’alto medieovo, Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo 41, 197–240.Google Scholar
Select Bibliography
Anastos, M. 2001. ‘Constantinople and Rome: A survey of the relations between the Byzantine and the Roman Churches’, in Anastos, M., Aspects of the Mind of Byzantium, ed. Vryonis, S. and Goodhue, N., Aldershot, no. VIII, 1–119.Google Scholar
Bayer, A. 2002. Spaltung der Christenheit. Das sogenannte Morgenländische Schisma von 1054, Cologne.Google Scholar
Blanchet, M.-H. 2014. ‘“Schismatiques” et “hérétiques”: Les qualifications appliquées aux Latins à Byzance’, Mélanges de l’École française de Rome. Italie et Méditerranée modernes et contemporaines 126.2: 239–50, http://mefrim.revues.org/1870.Google Scholar
Bucossi, A. and Calia, A. (eds.) 2020. Contra Latinos et Adversus Graecos: The Separation between Rome and Constantinople from the Ninth to the Fifteenth Century, Leuven.Google Scholar
Chrissis, N. G. 2019 ‘Broken brotherhood: Schism and crusades in Greek-Latin relations’, in Giantsi, N. and Flogaitis, S. (eds.) The Presence and Contribution of the (Eastern) Roman Empire in the Formation of Europe, Athens, 115–50.Google Scholar
Gemeinhardt, P. 2002. Die Filioque-Kontroverse zwischen Ost- und Westkirche im Frühmittelalter, Berlin.10.1515/9783110896626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolbaba, T. 2001. ‘Byzantine perceptions of Latin religious “errors”: Themes and changes from 850 to 1350’, in Laiou, A. E. and Mottahedeh, R. P. (eds.) The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World, Washington, DC, 117–43.Google Scholar
Kolbaba, T. 2008. Inventing Latin Heretics: Byzantines and the Filioque in the Ninth Century, Kalamazoo, MI.Google Scholar
Morini, E. 2013. ‘L’Union vue par les “antiunionistes”. L’orthodoxie ecclésiologique et l’incohérence de l’orthodoxie de Lyon à Florence’, in Blanchet, M.-H. and Gabriel, F. (eds.) Réduire le schisme? Ecclésiologies et politiques de l’Union entre Orient et Occident (XIIIe–XVIIIe siècles), Paris, 13–39.Google Scholar
Neocleous, S. 2019. Heretics, Schismatics, or Catholics? Latin Attitudes to the Greeks in the Long Twelfth Century, Toronto.10.1515/9781771104012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riedl, A. 2020b. Kirchenbild und Kircheneinheit. Der dominikanische ‘Tractatus contra Graecos’ (1252) in seinem theologischen und historischen Kontext, Berlin.10.1515/9783110697667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schabel, C. 2011. ‘The quarrel over unleavened bread in Western theology, 1234–1439’, in Hinterberger, M. and Schabel, C. (eds.) Greeks, Latins, and Intellectual History 1204–1500, Leuven, 85–127.Google Scholar
Schabel, C. 2015. ‘Pope, council and the Filioque in Western theology, 1274–1439’, Medieval Encounters: Jewish, Christian and Muslim Culture in Confluence and Dialogue 21: 190–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siecienski, A. E. 2010. The Filioque: History of a Doctrinal Controversy, Oxford.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195372045.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whalen, B. E. 2007. ‘Rethinking the Schism of 1054: Authority, heresy and the Latin rite’, Traditio 62: 1–24.10.1017/S0362152900000519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Select Bibliography
Dixon, C. 2022. The Paulicians: Heresy, Persecution and Warfare on the Byzantine Frontier, c.750–880, Leiden.10.1163/9789004517080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, B., Hamilton, J. and Hamilton, S. (eds.) 2004. Hugh Eteriano: ‘Contra Patarenos’, Leiden.10.1163/9789047405993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, J., Hamilton, B. and Stoyanov, Y. (eds. and trans.) 1998. Christian Dualist Heresies in the Byzantine World, c.650–c.1450, Manchester.10.7765/9781526112873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Illert, M. 2021. Presbyter Kozma, Gegen die Bogomilen Orthodoxie und Häresie auf dem mittelalterlichen Balkan, Turnhout.10.1484/M.SBHC-EB.5.125215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leszka, M. J. and Marinow, K. (eds.) 2018. The Bulgarian State in 927–69: The Epoch of Tsar Peter I, Łódż.Google Scholar
Puech, H. C. and Vaillant, A. (eds. and trans.) 1945. Le traité contre les Bogomiles de cosmas le Prêtre, Paris.Google Scholar
Roach, A. P. and Angelovska-Panova, M. 2013. ‘The Bogomils’ folk heritage: False friend or neglected source?’, in Roach, A. P. and Simpson, J. R. (eds.) Heresy and the Making of European Culture: Medieval and Modern Perspectives, Farnham, 129–52.Google Scholar
Shepard, J. 2000a. ‘Bulgaria: The other Balkan ‘empire’, in Reuter, T. (ed.) The New Cambridge Medieval History, Vol. 3: c.900–c.1024, Cambridge, 567–85.Google Scholar
Wakefield, W. L. and Evans, A. P. (eds.) 1969. Heresies of the High Middle Ages, New York.Google Scholar
Select Bibliography
Arnold, J. H. 2016. ‘The Cathar Middle Ages as a methodological and historiographical problem’, in Sennis, A. (ed.) Cathars in Question, York, 53–78.10.1515/9781782048176-004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biller, P. 2016a. ‘Goodbye to Catharism?’, in Sennis, A. (ed.) Cathars in Question, York, 274–313.10.1515/9781782048176-015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buc, P. 1998. ‘À propos de Communities of Violence de David Nirenberg (note critique)’, Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales 53: 1243–9.Google Scholar
Feuchter, J. 2002. Review of ‘Pegg, M.G., The Corruption of Angels. The Great Inquisition 1244/45’, H-Soz-u-Kult, http://hsozkult.geschichte.hu-berlin.de/rezensionen/id=880.Google Scholar
Feuchter, J. 2007. Ketzer, Konsuln und Büßer. Die städtischen Eliten von Montauban vor dem Inquisitor Petrus Cellani (1236/1241), Spätmittelalter, Humanismus, Reformation 40, Tübingen.Google Scholar
Feuchter, J. 2016. ‘The Heretici of Languedoc: Local holy men and women or organized religious group? New evidence from inquisitorial, notarial and historiographical sources’, in Sennis, A. (ed.) Cathars in Question, York, 112–30.Google Scholar
Moore, R. I. 2007. The Formation of a Persecuting Society: Authority and Deviance in Western Europe, 950–1250, 2nd ed., Oxford.10.1002/9780470773987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, R. I. 2012. The War on Heresy: Faith and Power in Medieval Europe, London.10.4159/harvard.9780674065376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nirenberg, D. 1996. Communities of Violence: Persecution of Minorities in the Middle Ages, Princeton.Google Scholar
Pegg, M. G. 2001b. The Corruption of Angels: The Great Inquisition of 1245–1246, Princeton.10.1515/9781400824755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pegg, M. G. 2008. A Most Holy War: The Albigensian Crusade and the Battle for Christendom, Oxford.Google Scholar
Zerner, M. (ed.) 1998. Inventer l’hérésie? Discours polémiques et pouvoirs avant l’inquisition, Nice.10.1484/M.CEM-EB.5.105915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zerner, M. (ed.) 2001. L’histoire du catharisme en discussion: le ‘concile’ de Saint-Félix (1167), Nice.10.1484/M.CEM-EB.5.105916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Select Bibliography
Arnold, J. H. and Biller, P. (eds.) 2016. Heresy and Inquisition in France, 1200–1300, Manchester.Google Scholar
Benedetti, M. and Cameron, E. (eds.) 2022. A Companion to the Waldenses in the Middle Ages, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 103, Leiden.10.1163/9789004420410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biller, P. 2006. ‘Goodbye to Waldensianism?’ Past & Present 192: 3–33.10.1093/pastj/gtl004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollbuck, H. 2022. ‘“Ut ex vetustis membranis cognsosco”: Matthias Flacius Illyricus and his use of inquisition registers and manuals’, in Biller, P. and Sackville, L. J. (eds.) Inquisition and Knowledge, 1200–1700, Heresy and Inquisition in the Middle Ages 10, York, 211–37.Google Scholar
Feuchter, J. 2007. Ketzer, Konsuln und Büβer: Die städtischen Eliten von Montauban vor dem Inquisitor Petrus Cellani (1236/1241), Spätmittelalter, Humanismus, Reformation 40, Tübingen.Google Scholar
Grundmann, H. 2019. ‘The profile (typus) of the heretic in medieval perception’, in Deane, J. K. (ed.) Herbert Grundmann (1902–1970): Essays on Heresy, Inquisition and Literacy, Heresy and Inquisition in the Middle Ages 9, York, 16–29.10.2307/j.ctvktrxp2.7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambert, M. D. 2002. Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation, 3rd ed., Oxford.Google Scholar
Merlo, G. G. 1984. Valdesi e valdismi medievali: Itinerari e proposte di ricerca, Turin.Google Scholar
Patschovsky, A. 1994. ‘The literacy of Waldensianism from Valdes to c. 1400’, in Hudson, A. and Biller, P.. (eds.) Heresy and Literacy, 1000–1530, Cambridge, 112–37.Google Scholar
Sackville, L. J. 2011. Heresy and Heretics in the Thirteenth Century: The Textual Representations, Heresy and Inquisition in the Middle Ages 1, York.10.1515/9781846158469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D. J. 2010. Crusade, Heresy and Inquisition in the Lands of the Crown of Aragon (c. 1167–1276), The Medieval and Early Modern Iberian World 39, Leiden.10.1163/ej.9789004182899.i-249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Välimäki, R. 2019. Heresy in Late Medieval Germany: The Inquisitor Petrus Zwicker and the Waldensians, Heresy and Inquisition in the Middle Ages 6, York.Google Scholar
Välimäki, R. 2022 ‘The portrayal of the Waldensian Brethren in the De vita et conversacione (c. 1391–3)’ and ‘Appendix: De vita et conversacione: edition and translation of the Weimar Ms’ in Biller, P. and Sackville, L. J. (eds.) Inquisition and Knowledge, 1200–1700, Heresy and Inquisition in the Middle Ages 10, York, 157–77.Google Scholar
Wakefield, W. P. and Evans, A. P. (eds.) 1969. Heresies of the High Middle Ages, New York.Google Scholar
Select Bibliography
Cole, A. 2008. Literature and Heresy in the Age of Chaucer, Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511481420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forrest, I. 2005. The Detection of Heresy in Late Medieval England, Oxford.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199286928.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornbeck, J. Patrick II 2010. What Is a Lollard? Dissent and Belief in Late Medieval England, Oxford.Google Scholar
Hornbeck, J. Patrick (with M. Bose and F. Somerset) 2017. A Companion to Lollardy, Leiden.Google Scholar
Hudson, A. 1988. The Premature Reformation: Wycliffite Texts and Lollard History, Oxford.Google Scholar
Justice, S. 1994. Writing and Rebellion: England in 1381, Berkeley, CA.10.1525/9780520918405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, I. C. (ed.) 2006. A Companion to John Wyclif: Late Medieval Theologian, Leiden.10.1163/9789047409052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutton, R. 2006. Lollardy and Orthodox Religion in Pre-Reformation England: Reconstructing Piety, London.Google Scholar
McSheffrey, S. 1995. Gender and Heresy: Women and Men in Lollard Communities 1420–1530, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Tanner, N. P. (ed.) 1977. Heresy Trials in the Diocese of Norwich, 1428–1431, Camden Fourth Series, vol. 20, London.Google Scholar
Watson, N. 1995. ‘Censorship and cultural change in late-medieval England: Vernacular theology, the Oxford translation debate, and Arundel’s Constitutions of 1409’, Speculum 70: 822–64.10.2307/2865345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Select Bibliography
Cole, A. 2008. Literature and Heresy in the Age of Chaucer, Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511481420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fudge, T. A. 1998. The Magnificent Ride: The First Reformation in Hussite Bohemia, Aldershot.Google Scholar
Ghosh, K. 2001. The Wycliffite Heresy: Authority and the Interpretation of Texts, Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511483288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghosh, K. and Soukup, P. (eds.) 2021. Wycliffism and Hussitism: Methods of Thinking, Writing, and Persuasion c. 1360 – c. 1460, Brepols.10.1484/M.MCS-EB.5.116728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, I. C. (ed.) 2006. A Companion to John Wyclif: Late Medieval Theologian, Leiden.10.1163/9789047409052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nodl, M. 2017. Das Kuttenberger Dekret von 1409: Von der Eintracht zum Konflikt der Prager Universitätsnationen, Cologne.10.7788/9783412506643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patschovsky, A. 2001. ‘Das Revolutionäre an der hussitischen Revolution’, in Petersohn, J. (ed.) Mediaevalia Augiensia: Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters, Stuttgart, 407–28.Google Scholar
Rychterová, P. (ed.) 2019. Pursuing a New Order II: Late Medieval Vernacularization and the Bohemian Reformation, Turnhout.10.1484/M.TMT-EB.5.116115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Šmahel, F. 2002. Die Hussitische Revolution, Monumenta Germaniae Historica – Schriften 43, 4 vols., Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Šmahel, F. 2007. Die Prager Universität im Mittelalter – The Charles University in the Middle Ages. Gesammelte Aufsätze – Selected Studies, Leiden.10.1163/ej.9789004154889.i-635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Šmahel, F. (ed.) 2015. A Companion to Jan Hus, Leiden.10.1163/9789004282728_002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Dussen, M. and Soukup, P. (eds.) 2013. Religious Controversy in Europe, 1378–1536: Textual Transmission and Networks of Readership, Turnhout.10.1484/M.MCS-EB.6.09070802050003050404020801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Dussen, M. (eds.) 2020. A Companion to the Hussites, Leiden.10.1163/9789004414044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.0 A
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The HTML of this chapter
conforms to version 2.0 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), ensuring core accessibility principles are addressed and meets the basic
(A)
level of WCAG compliance, addressing essential accessibility barriers.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
Structural and Technical Features
ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.