This volume offers a definitive and ground-breaking reassessment of the 1409 Prague Arts quodlibet—the
most extensive academic disputation recorded in the history of late medieval Central Europe. By examining a forum involving 148 participating scholars, this work shifts the analytical focus from isolated thinkers to the collective
scientific practices of the medieval academy. The contributors argue that the quodlibet functioned not merely as a ceremonial display, but as a sophisticated institutional mechanism for the collaborative production, validation, and
dissemination of knowledge across Central Europe. A cornerstone of this volume is the establishment of a rigorous new terminology for the study of medieval academic materials, introducing conceptual tools such as the “quodlibetal
book” and distinct “sets of arguments.” This refined framework allows for a deeper understanding of the administrative and cognitive organization of medieval debates and their interdisciplinary reach, bridging the gap between the
Arts and the higher faculties of Medicine, Law and Theology. Crucially, the work represents a radical expansion of the primary source base for late medieval studies. Through the meticulous critical edition of dozens of previously
unstudied and unedited texts, the volume transforms neglected manuscript witnesses into accessible scholarly resources. These editions provide the empirical foundation for a detailed analysis of doctrines across an extraordinary
epistemic range—from Wycliffite realism and the theory of divine ideas to the cutting edge of medieval optics, astronomy, and moral ethics. By elucidating how these diverse doctrines were negotiated within a shared dialectical space,
The Greatest Debate redefines the late medieval university as a dynamic hub of collaborative inquiry and a vital precursor to modern scientific culture.
F. Galli, L. Lička, M. Mantovani (eds.), Sight and Light in the Late Middle Ages: Textual Insights and Research Perspectives (a thematic section), Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie Médiévales 92.1 (2025): 137–221 (DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.92.1.3293625).
This thematic section offers a reassessment of late medieval perspectiva, elucidating
the profound significance and epistemic scope of discourses on sight and light from the mid-thirteenth to the late fifteenth centuries. The authors investigate the nuanced interplay between philosophy and theology, tracing the transmission
of ideas from the invisible light of celestial spheres to the physical mechanisms of human perception. By exploring a diverse range of sources—including commentaries on Aristotle and Peter Lombard, as well as sermons and university
disputations—these studies serve as rigorous analytical probes into the intellectual practices of three interrelated scholarly environments. They reveal how theologians reconciled Aristotelian natural philosophy with Biblical cosmology,
how masters at the arts faculties navigated the intersections of philosophy and perspectiva, and how preachers utilized optical theory for exegetical clarity and engagement. With a sustained focus on previously unstudied
manuscripts and unpublished texts, this section provides a significant contribution to the history of medieval science and thought.
Studies
Pavlíček, O., Lička, L., “New Witnesses to the Arts Quodlibetal Tradition at the University of Prague. Revealing the Possible Quodlibetal Books of Nicholas Magni of Javor (1395) and Henry of Homberg (1396)”, Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge 92 (2025), 167–208.
This article offers a significant reassessment of the quodlibetal tradition at the Faculty of Arts of
the University of Prague in the late fourteenth century. Drawing on a close analysis of three previously understudied manuscripts preserved in Kraków, it identifies and interprets new quodlibetal books that can plausibly be attributed
to the disputations of Nicholas Magni of Jawor (1395) and Henry of Homberg (1396). By reconstructing the structure, thematic scope, and textual transmission of these materials, the study provides fresh insight into the intellectual
practices of Prague masters and the functioning of quodlibetal debates. It also highlights the strong interplay between arts and theology, demonstrating how theological authorities and questions permeated the curriculum of the Faculty
of Arts. More broadly, the article refines the chronology of Prague quodlibeta and advances our understanding of their role as central scholarly events that shaped late medieval academic culture. In doing so, it contributes new evidence
and a revised interpretative framework to the study of medieval university disputations.
Campi, L., Pavlíček, O., “The Greatest Debate: An Introduction with a Glimpse into Arts Quodlibeta Terminology,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 15–27 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151759).
This introductory study offers a wide-ranging reassessment of quodlibetal disputations as a central
yet insufficiently explored form of intellectual practice at late medieval universities. By tracing the historical development of quodlibeta from their theological origins to their transformation within Central European Arts faculties,
the chapter highlights their evolution into complex, large-scale forums of scholarly exchange. Particular emphasis is placed on the Prague quodlibet of 1409, presented as an unparalleled academic event both in scale and in its rich
textual legacy. The authors further address the methodological and terminological challenges posed by the surviving sources, proposing a more precise conceptual framework for analysing quodlibetal materials, including the adoption
of terms such as “quodlibetal book”, “sets of arguments”, and “positiones”. In doing so, the study not only provides essential orientation for the volume but also establishes a refined vocabulary and interpretative lens for future
research into medieval academic culture.
Pavlíček, O., “The 1409 Prague Arts Quodlibet in the Context of Prague and Central European Quodlibetal Tradition,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 31–69 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151760).
This chapter situates the Prague Arts quodlibet of 1409 within the broader framework of Central European
university culture, offering a comprehensive reassessment of its intellectual and institutional significance. It demonstrates that Arts quodlibeta constituted a distinct and understudied form of scholarly practice, differing fundamentally
from their theological counterparts in organisation, participation, and epistemic scope. By reconstructing the procedural structure of these disputations and analysing their role in the circulation of knowledge, the study reveals
their central importance for the development of late medieval intellectual life. Particular attention is devoted to the exceptional scale and context of the 1409 Prague event, which emerges as a uniquely large and representative
forum of academic exchange. The chapter thus redefines the place of Arts quodlibeta within the history of European universities and highlights their value as sources for the study of medieval thought.
Pavlíček, O., “Catalogue of Texts in MS Praha, Knihovna Metropolitní Kapituly, L 45 Including Matthias of Knín’s Quodlibet of 1409,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 109–150 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151763).
This study offers a substantially revised and methodologically refined catalogue of texts associated
with the Prague Arts quodlibet of 1409, preserved in MS Praha, KMK, L 45. Building upon and critically reassessing Jiří Kejř’s foundational work, it introduces new identifications, structural clarifications, and previously unrecognised
textual relationships within the manuscript tradition. By distinguishing between argument sets, problemata, and authorial positions, the chapter elucidates the complex intellectual architecture of quodlibetal disputations and their
transmission. It further demonstrates that the manuscript may represent a composite collection rather than a single-event record, thereby reshaping our understanding of textual circulation and scholarly practice at the late medieval
University of Prague. The catalogue thus constitutes an indispensable research tool and a significant contribution to the reconstruction of late medieval academic discourse.
Pavlíček, O., “Divine Ideas as a Metaphysical and Theological Topic at the Prague 1409 Quodlibet,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 179–199 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151765).
This study examines the role of divine ideas within the metaphysical and theological discourse of the
Prague quodlibet of 1409, demonstrating their centrality to the intellectual programme of Wyclif-influenced masters. Through a detailed analysis of surviving quodlibetal questions and positions, particularly those of Jerome of Prague
and Paul of Prague, the chapter reconstructs the conceptual framework in which divine ideas function as both universals and foundational principles of creation. By situating these discussions within the broader debate on universals
and realism, the author shows how divine ideas underpin a sophisticated metaphysical system that integrates ontology, epistemology, and theology. The study thus not only illuminates a key doctrinal theme of the Prague quodlibet but
also contributes to a deeper understanding of late medieval philosophical theology in Central Europe.
Lička, L., “Between Peckham and Buridan: Visual Representation in 15th-Century Vienna Disputations”, Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie Médiévales 92.1 (2025), 191–221. (DOI: https://doi.org/10.2143/RTPM.92.1.3294379)
This article analyses theories of visual representation extracted from various, mostly unpublished,
texts from the 15th-century University of Vienna: disputation materials, commentaries on Aristotle’s De anima and John Peckham’s Perspectiva communis, and compendia of natural philosophy. It examines
two idiosyncratic claims developed and defended by Vienna masters: the first claim proposes that visual representations are extended and, in some way, ‘shaped’ according to the objects seen, with parts distinctly representing the
respective parts of the latter. The second claim is that acts of the external senses are concepts of a sort, signifying the substance of the object seen and connoting its colour, shape, place, and other accidents. Thus, the Vienna
masters advocated and expanded the Buridanian idea of the rich content of visual representation: we see not only colours, but objects as modified by diverse visible properties. The article investigates whether any Vienna scholar
endorsed both claims, and whether they are compatible in principle.
Campi, L., Pavlíček, O., Lukšová, Z., “Editing Prague Quodlibeta Associated with Matthias of Knín and the 1409 Quodlibet,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 329–340 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151770).
This methodological introduction outlines the editorial principles governing the modern edition of Prague
quodlibetal texts associated with the 1409 disputation. Addressing the challenges posed by the diversity and complexity of the manuscript tradition, the authors establish a coherent set of transcription and normalisation rules grounded
in established practices of editing medieval Latin. Particular emphasis is placed on preserving manuscript orthography, handling abbreviations, and ensuring clarity in the presentation of argumentative structures. By carefully balancing
philological rigour with usability, the text provides a transparent framework for the critical edition of quodlibetal materials. It thereby lays the foundation for future scholarly engagement with these texts and enhances their accessibility
for research into medieval intellectual history.
Pavlíček, O., “Matthias Knín’s and Paul of Prague’s Disputation at the 1409 Prague Quodlibet: Edition of Texts on Divine Ideas,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 395–406 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151772).
This contribution presents a critical edition of key texts concerning divine ideas from the Prague quodlibet
of 1409, focusing on the disputation between Matthias of Knín and Paul of Prague. By editing both Paul’s position and the corresponding set of quodlibetal arguments, the text offers unique insight into the dynamics of academic debate
and the articulation of metaphysical doctrines in situ. The texts reveal a sophisticated engagement with the concept of exemplarism, highlighting the role of divine ideas as eternal archetypes governing the structure and intelligibility
of the created world. Beyond its philological value, the edition provides an essential source for understanding the interplay between philosophical reasoning and theological speculation in late medieval university culture.
Lukšová, Z., “The Astronomical and Cosmological Sets of Arguments in the 1409 Quodlibet-Related Materials,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 245–282 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151767).
This contribution examines the astronomical and cosmological arguments preserved in the materials of
the 1409 quodlibet. It explores their manuscript context within codex MS Praha KMK L 45 and reveals significant textual links to the earlier works of John Arsen. By clarifying the methods of compilation and the specific scientific
interests regarding the motion of the Earth and celestial spheres, the study enhances our understanding of the sophisticated natural philosophy taught at Prague University.
Lička, L., “Sight and the Rainbow in the 1409 Quodlibet-Related Materials: Drawing Inspiration from Robert Grosseteste and Albert the Great to Nicole Oresme and Themo Judaei,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 201–244 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151766).
This chapter delves into several texts from the quodlibetal materials preserved in codex MS Praha, KMK,
L 45, generally taken as connected with Matthias of Knín’s 1409 quodlibet, namely those dealing with sensory perception, especially vision, and light phenomena, such as the rainbow. It is argued that some of these materials are textually
dependent on what was popular at the Prague Faculty of Arts, such as works by Albert the Great, Robert Grosseteste, Nicole Oresme, and Themo Judaei. These textual dependencies, especially many complex arguments copied from the source
texts, corroborate the standard understanding of the materials preserved in MS Praha, KMK, L 45, as products of textual copying in a scriptorium (as opposed to written reports of spoken argumentation in an auditorium).
Campi, L., “Matthias of Knín’s Quaestio Principalis and Anti-Eternalism at the Prague Faculty of Arts in the Wake of Wyclif,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 115–144 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151764).
Focusing on the rejection of Aristotelian eternalism, this study explores Matthias of Knín’s quaestio principalis regarding
the immutable Creator. It traces the profound doctrinal influence of John Wyclif upon Bohemian masters, demonstrating how theological concerns about the temporal beginning of the world shaped philosophical discourse at the Prague
Faculty of Arts. The chapter reveals these debates as a crossroads of textual influences during a period of intense intellectual and ecclesiastical reform.
Campi, L., “Matthias of Knín’s Road to the 1409 Prague Quodlibet: An Intellectual Biography and Some Notes on the Long Introductory Section to the 1409 Quodlibet,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 71–114 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151761).
This chapter provides a meticulous intellectual biography of Matthias of Knín, situating his academic
career within the volatile Wycliffite circles of early fifteenth-century Prague. It further elucidates the complex structural and ceremonial nature of the introductory sections to his 1409 quodlibet, offering vital insights into
late medieval university practices. By examining Knín’s production, the study illuminates the methods of disputation and the specific intellectual climate that defined this transformative era.
Dragoun, M., “The Quodlibetal Book of Matthias of Knín in MS Praha, Knihovna Metropolitní Kapituly, L 45 Viewed by a Codicologist,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 11–30 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151762).
This study offers a comprehensive codicological analysis of MS Praha, KMK, L 45, the primary witness
to Matthias of Knín’s 1409 quodlibet. By examining the physical structure, foliation, and collation of the paper leaves, the author confirms its origin within the Prague University milieu shortly after the disputation. The investigation
provides crucial descriptive data on the manuscript’s history and its non-extant sources, establishing a material foundation for the intellectual history of academic life in fifteenth-century Bohemia.
Dobiáš, K., “Matthias of Knín’s and Zdeněk of Labouň’s Disputation at the 1409 Prague Quodlibet. Edition of Texts on Medical Astrology,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 401–431 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151775).
This critical edition presents Master Zdeněk of Labouň’s position on iatromathematics, specifically
the determination of “critical days” in acute diseases through celestial observation. Based on the primary witnesses in manuscripts Ea and H, the edition also includes related arguments from Matthias of Knín’s quodlibetal book. By
providing a rigorous reconstruction of these medical-astrological texts, the work offers scholars essential primary material for investigating the integration of scientific and medical doctrines at the medieval Prague Faculty of
Arts.
Hudíková, S., “Edition of the 1409 Quodlibet-Related Sets of Arguments on Moral Philosophy with a Note on the Sets,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 493–531 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151776).
This contribution presents a critical edition of seven sets of arguments on moral philosophy from the
1409 quodlibet. Covering essential topics such as happiness, the nature of malice, and the execution of human work, these texts highlight the prominence of ethical inquiry at Prague University. The edition provides a rich resource
for analyzing late medieval developments in virtue ethics, reflecting the core curriculum and the complex moral questions debated by Matthias of Knín and his peers.
Lukšová, Z., “Editions of the 1409 Quodlibet-Related Astronomical Texts, with a Note on the Edition,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 463–478 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151774).
The author provides a meticulous edition of eight astronomical sets of arguments associated with the
1409 Prague quodlibet. By identifying the various scribal hands in MS Praha KMK L 45 and incorporating materials from other vital manuscripts, these texts elucidate late medieval theories on celestial motion and influence. This edition
offers scholars indispensable primary material for the history of science, capturing the breadth of cosmological inquiry at the Faculty of Arts.
Lička, L., “Editions of the 1409 Quodlibet-Related Sets of Arguments on Sight, Sensible Qualities, and the Rainbow, with a Note on the Edition,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 433–462 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151773).
This chapter contains editions of the three sets of arguments preserved in MS Praha, KMK, L 45, connected
with Matthias of Knín’s 1409 Prague quodlibet: namely, no. 37 on the nature of species of sensible qualities in the medium, no. 73 on the rainbow, and no. 116 on the intromission/extramission controversy.
It also provides a text-critical note on the Prague reception of the compiled redaction of Book III of Oresme’s/Themo’s Questions on Meteorology.
Campi, L., “The Introductory Section of Matthias of Knín’s Quodlibet with a Note on the Edition,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 335–400 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151771).
This critical edition presents the previously neglected introductory materials of Matthias of Knín’s
1409 quodlibet, including the inceptio and the ordinatio of objections. Based on the unique testimony of codex L, the text provides an essential primary source for understanding the formal ceremonial
and dialectical framework of university-wide disputations. The edition sheds light on the administrative and intellectual apparatus that underpinned major academic events in fifteenth-century Prague.
Hanke, M., “British Logic in the 1409 Quodlibet-Related Materials: Consequencie, obligaciones, insolubilia,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 305–331 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151769).
This article surveys the reception of British logic within the 1409 Prague quodlibet, focusing on theories
of consequence, insolubilia, and semantic paradoxes. It identifies key textual sources and highlights the enduring influence of the via moderna on the logical curricula. The study examines how Oxford-style logical
rigor was disseminated through Central European universities, illustrating the sophisticated dialectical environment where masters engaged with complex rules of obligation.
Dobiáš, K., “Zdeněk of Labouň and the Doctrine of Critical Days: Medical Astrology at the 1409 Prague Quodlibet,” in O. Pavlíček, L. Campi (eds.), The Greatest Debate: The 1409 Quodlibetal Debate at the Prague Faculty of Arts, Turnhout: Brepols 2025, 283–303 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPA-EB.5.151768).
This study addresses the intersection of medicine and astrology in Zdeněk of Labouň’s contribution to
the 1409 quodlibet. Analyzing the doctrine of ‘critical days’ in acute illnesses, the author demonstrates how masters at the Faculty of Arts integrated astrological judgments into medical theory. Although medicine was not part of
the core Arts curriculum, its presence in these debates reflects the inherently interdisciplinary and holistic nature of academic inquiry in the late Middle Ages.