Kitobni o'qish: «Records of the Spanish Inquisition, Translated from the Original Manuscripts»

PREFACE

THE manner in which the originals of the following work came into the hands of the translator may be described in a few words. These papers are a part of the Records of the Inquisition of Barcelona, and were obtained during the revolution which broke out at Cadiz in 1819.

The province of Catalonia, of which Barcelona is the capital, was one of the most forward and zealous to embrace the cause of freedom. Its inhabitants have, in all times, been distinguished for their daring and determined spirit, and their ardent love of liberty. The revolution moved with rapid strides from the Isle of Leon to the Ebro. On the twentyeighth of February, 1820, the governor of Tarragona received a summons to repair immediately to Madrid, and in a few days the insurrection burst out in the former place. On the fourteenth of March, two days after this, it exploded at Barcelona.

The first movement of the revolutionary party was to depose the Captain General of the province. This office was then held by Castañas, a royalist. His predecessor was General Villacampa, an officer of some distinction, who had been deprived of the captain-generalship, and banished to Mataró, a small town on the coast, for his attachment to liberal principles. Castañas was forced to resign, and Villacampa was conducted in triumph from his place of banishment to Barcelona, and reinstated in his dignity by the populace.

The government of the city being revolutionized, their next thoughts were directed to the Inquisition, the great engine of priestly oppression, and the object of dread and detestation to the friends of liberty, both political and religious. The vast and gloomy piles of this tribunal, which covered a spot of more than ten times the extent of the Massachusetts State Prison, had been too long the terror of the oppressed and restless Catalonians to escape distinguished notice on this occasion. The populace demanded, with loud cries, of the Captain General, that the Inquisitorial Palace should be thrown open. What answer was given by Villacampa to this demand, does not appear. A body of twenty thousand persons rushed to the Inquisition, stormed at the gates, and demanded admittance. Those within told them to wait a few minutes and the gates should be opened. This interval they improved to make their escape, and in a short time the populace, growing impatient, burst the gates and rushed in.

Every part of the premises was immediately filled. The dungeons were broken open; the prisoners released, and the papers cast out at the windows. For several days these were thrown in great numbers about the streets of the city, and a small portion of them, after passing through various hands, came into the possession of a gentleman of this city, who at that period was travelling in Spain. These papers were forwarded to Boston in 1820.

It was thought that a publication of these documents would be received with much interest and satisfaction by the community, as nothing of the kind has ever before seen the light. There are indeed some authentic and well written compilations relating to this subject, as well as a few narratives given by persons who have been imprisoned in the dungeons of the Holy Office; but a copious and minute detail of the forms and proceedings observed in the trials and investigations of the Inquisitorial Tribunal, such as is afforded in the following pages, has never, till this moment, existed in print. Should the Holy Office again rear its head in Spain, perhaps the Fiscal and Calificadores might do the publisher and Translator of this work the honor to take some notice of their labors. It is to be hoped, however, that these most illustrious and apostolical Señores may not very soon have occasion to obtain for either of us any such notoriety.

Boston, June, 1828.

HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE INQUISITION

THIS establishment had its origin in the endeavours of the Roman pontiffs for the suppression of heresy. In the year 1184, Pope Lucius II., alarmed at the appearance of the new religious sects in Dauphiny and Provence, called a great council at Verona, where a severe decree was issued against them, and the power of the secular princes called to aid in their discovery and punishment. In this decree we perceive the embryo of the Inquisition, although its proper foundation is commonly fixed some years later.¹

It was in France, in the year 1208, that it was first established, and took a distinct character under the direction of Pope Innocent III., who despatched legates into that country, with a power independent of the bishops, to persecute the heretics with the assistance of the secular arm. The unfortunate Albigenses, the objects of this persecution, were extirpated with fire and sword, and the death of thousands by massacres, tortures, and the funeral pile, signalized the commencement of the Inquisition.²

This was in the reign of Philip Augustus, during which the Inquisition appears not to have been in exercise beyond the limits of Provence and Languedoc; but in 1255, at the request of Louis IX., it was established by the papal authority throughout the whole kingdom, with the exception of the territories of the Count of Poitiers and Toulouse.³ It did not however, obtain any permanent footing here, although the exact period of its discontinuance is not easy to ascertain. In 1560, the Cardinal of Lorraine made an effectual attempt to introduce it into France against the Protestants, which is the last time we find it mentioned in connexion with the history of that country.⁴

In 1224, it was established by Pope Honorius II. in all the States of Italy, except Venice and Naples. In 1289, it was established at Venice.⁵ It appears to have been in existence in the kingdom of Naples as early as 1269.⁶ There is no very frequent mention of it in the histories of that period, and we may conclude that it did not assume that sanguinary character in these countries, which marked its first existence on the other side of the Alps. It disappeared from all these parts, except the Papal States, before completing a long career.

It was in Spain that this terrible tribunal was destined to obtain the firmest footing, and exercise the bloodiest sway. Its establishment in this country may be dated at the year 1232, and it gradually made its way into all the principalities of which this kingdom is composed, though not without a bloody resistance on the part of the inhabitants, who entertained the utmost horror of the Inquisition, and killed many of the Dominican Friars, who were its chief ministers, and the instruments of its establishment.⁷ In 1481, upon the union, under Ferdinand and Isabella, of the Kingdom of Castile and Arragon, the inquisitorial constitution was reformed and modified, with respect to its various limits of territorial jurisdiction, and also by the introduction of new and severe statutes and rules. This was called the modern Inquisition,⁸ and the pretext for its establishment was the persecution of the converted Jews, who were suspected of relapsing to their former faith. It afterwards took under its cognizance other heresies, and some civil offences. It is very clear that the people felt a decided aversion to it, which they manifested in violent tumults. Nevertheless force and terror overcame their resistance, and the domineering spirit of the Pope, the avarice of Ferdinand, and the fanaticism of the monks, succeeded in fastening the iron yoke of the Inquisition upon the necks of the Spaniards. It ran an uninterrupted career until abolished by Napoleon on the fourth of December, 1808.

The circumstances of its introduction into Portugal are too curious to be omitted. About the year 1540, there was in Spain, a monk of the name of Saavedra, who forged apostolic bulls, royal decrees, and bills of exchange, with so much accuracy, that they passed with every one for genuine. He succeeded so well as to pass himself off for a knight and commander of the military order of St Jago, the income of which, amounting to three thousand ducats, he received for the space of a year and a half. In a short time he acquired, by means of the royal deeds which he counterfeited, three hundred and sixty thousand ducats.

With a little prudence he might have remained undetected through life, but his successes tempted him to undertakings which led to his discovery. He fell in company with a Jesuit travelling to Portugal, with an apostolic brief for the foundation there of a college of that order. These two concerted measures for introducing the Inquisition as well as the Jesuits into Portugal. Saavedra forged letters from Charles V. to the King of Portugal, and a papal bull establishing the Inquisition in that country. This bull appointed Saavedra legate a latere for the purpose.

This daring and brazenfaced impostor then took upon him the character and costume of a Roman cardinal. He travelled with litters, silver dishes, and a train of attendants, levying money on his course by forging bonds. He sent his secretary to Lisbon with his bull and papers to prepare for his reception. The king despatched to the frontiers a distinguished nobleman to receive him, and he made his entry into Lisbon, where he spent three months, and was treated with the highest respect. He afterwards travelled through the kingdom, and completed the business for which he had made his visit. He was at last detected by the Inquisitor General of Spain and arrested. After a trial by the Inquisition, he was sentenced to the gallies for ten years. The king added nine years more to the period. Almost all the establishments made by him in Portugal, were retained under the pretence that the Holy Office was necessary to persecute the Jews.

It has been the endeavour of the Spanish monarchs to extend it to every country under their dominion. The Emperor Charles V., whose zeal for the Inquisition has procured him the title of the Don Quixote of the Faith, established it in the Netherlands in 1522, and vast multitudes, who had embraced the Reformed religion, perished on its funeral piles. This bloody persecution was one of the means of exciting the revolt by which Holland was freed from the Spanish yoke.⁹ An attempt was also made by him to introduce it into Naples, but it encountered the most determined opposition. The Neapolitans rose in insurrection, massacred the Spaniards, and obliged the emperor to give over the project. About the time of its appearance in the Netherlands it was also established in the Spanish dominions in America. The first autos de fe were celebrated at Lima in 1639.¹⁰ The Portuguese carried it into their East Indian Colonies, fixing it at Goa in 1559.¹¹ In Brazil, however, it has never existed.

The modern history of the Inquisition must be familiar to every reader. Its abolition by Napoleon in 1808, its reestablishment under Ferdinand VII. and its second overthrow by the Spanish people in 1820, are events too well known to need a recapitulation here.

RECORDS OF THE SPANISH INQUISITION

TRIAL OF PEDRO GINESTA, NATIVE OF THE VILLAGE OF ST QUINTI, IN THE DIOCESE OF ST FLOR, FOR EATING BACON ON A PROHIBITED DAY

IN the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the fourth day of September, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, present, the Inquisitor Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta, officiating alone in his morning audience; having examined the information received against Pedro Ginesta, native of the village of St Quinti, diocese of St Flor, and Joan Mella, of the village of St Maurion, parish of Xauvinar, diocese of Clermont, in the kingdom of France, by occupation both braziers, the same being in custody of the Commissioner of Salas in the prison of Agna Villa,—ordered, that the abovementioned persons be transferred to the secret prison of this palace of the Inquisition,¹² and that their trial be instituted in form; also ordered, that the Commissioner aforesaid be instructed to attest ad perpetuam the evidence of the witnesses, ascertain the identity of the persons whom they depose against, and whether the said prisoners be the persons whom they charge with having eaten bacon on St Bartholomew’s eve, notwithstanding the prohibition; also that the said prisoners, after the business of the deposition is despatched, be conveyed with care by the hands of the several Familiars, to the prison of this Inquisition.

For which purpose let the necessary measures be taken.

Before me—

Mattheo Magre, Sec’y.

In the town of Tremp, bishopric of Urgel, on the twentyfifth day of August, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, in the morning, before the Licenciate Joan Torroella, Presbyter Commissary of the Holy Office of the Inquisition in the town of Salas,—appeared according to summons and swore formally to declare the truth, a man who asserted his name to be Joan Compte, a native and resident of the town of Talarn, in the abovementioned bishopric, of age as he stated, fiftyfive years or thereabout.

Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his being summoned to appear.

Answered, that he neither knew nor conjectured.

Questioned, if he knew or had heard that any person had spoken or done anything which was, or appeared to be, contrary to our holy Catholic Faith, and evangelical doctrine preached and taught by the holy Catholic Roman Church, or against the just and free exercise of the Holy Office.

Answered, that he knew nothing of the matters respecting which he was questioned, except that on the eve of St Bartholomew last, being in the town of Timian in the abovementioned bishopric of Urgel, he went to the tavern of Pitieu, and saw there a man, by occupation a brazier, with a grey beard, which person was well known to the deponent, he having seen and entertained him in the town of Calan, where he exercised his trade and had labored for the deponent. The name of this person deponent did not know, never having heard it mentioned. At the same place was a young man whom the said brazier stated to be his journeyman. These two were sitting at table and eating soup, which, being despatched, deponent saw the said person empty an earthen dish of bacon and onions into a frying-pan, and the said brazier asked deponent if he would eat with him, to which he replied that it was the eve and fast of St Bartholomew, at which time it was forbidden by the church to eat such food. Notwithstanding this, the said brazier and his servant did, in the presence of the deponent, eat the said bacon and onions, a small portion of which was observed to remain in the dish. This remnant the said persons placed on a piece of bread and presented it in a plate to the hostess. This done, the brazier and his servant went away to the plaza of the town, and deponent remained in the tavern with the hostess abovementioned. This is the truth according to the oath of the witness, and being read in his presence, is declared by him to be correctly written. Witness declares that he does not make this statement out of malice to any one. Secrecy being enjoined upon him, he promised to observe it; and he being unable to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in his name.

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

In the town of Semiana, bishopric of Urgel, on the twentyeighth day of August, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, in the morning, before the Rev. Sr. Licentiate Joan Torroella, Presbyter Commissary of the Holy Office in the town of Salas, appeared according to summons and swore formally to declare the truth, a woman calling herself Geronima Aymara, wife of Pedro Aymar y Piteu, husbandman, native and resident of the town of Semiana, of age, as she stated, forty years or thereabout.

Questioned, if she knew or conjectured the cause of her being summoned to appear.

Answered, that she supposed it to be in order to learn whether some persons had eaten flesh in her house on the eve of St Bartholomew the Apostle, respecting which she could state, that on the time specified, two persons had been at her house, of whose names she was ignorant, but remembered that one was an old man and the other a youth, both by occupation braziers; the said youth asked witness to cook for them a dish of salted bacon which sat upon a table. Witness demanded in reply why they wanted to eat bacon on that day. The young man repeated his demand to have the bacon cooked for they meant to eat it. Witness answered that she was unwilling, as it was at such a time. The young man again demanded to have the bacon cooked, and told her to put onions along with it in the pot. Whereupon witness proceeded to cook the bacon, adding one dinero’s worth of onions, which she bought for that purpose. Having done this, she placed the victuals on the table before the said persons, and at this moment entered Juan Compte of the town of Talarn; as witness was baking on that day and was obliged to attend to her oven, she did no more than set the victuals on the table before the said persons, and being asked by Juan Compte for something to eat, answered that he must wait till she returned from the oven, which he did, and upon her return she found the above two persons at table, one of whom ordered her to take away what remained of the meat, and witness saw that there was left a bit of the bacon and a few mouthfuls of the onions she had cooked, the bacon being thrust into a piece of bread. After this the two persons aforesaid left the house, having been seen to eat their meal by the abovementioned Joan Compte, who was present all the time. Furthermore witness stated, that she believes she heard her husband say, on the evening of the Wednesday before, that he heard the above persons declare they meant to eat that piece of bacon, which they had procured, the next day, which was St Bartholomew’s, as aforesaid, and that her husband replied, they could not, as it was a fast. This is the truth according to the oath of the witness, and being read in her presence is declared by her to be correctly written. Witness further states that she does not make this declaration out of malice to any one. Secrecy being enjoined upon her, she promised to observe it; and she, not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name.

The Licentiate

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

In the village of Sanserin, parish of Semiana, in the morning, before the abovementioned Licentiate Commissary Joan Torroella, appeared according to summons and swore formally to declare the truth, a woman calling herself Isabel Ramoneda, wife of Pedro Ramoneda, husbandman, a resident of the said village of Sanserin, of age, as she stated, thirty years or thereabout.

Questioned, if she knew or conjectured the cause of her being summoned to appear.

Answered, that she supposed it to be for the purpose of ascertaining whether certain Gascons had eaten flesh in Semiana, on last St Bartholomew’s eve, concerning which, she could state, that on Thursday last, which was St Bartholomew’s day, there came to her house in the evening a Gascon, whom she believes to be named Pedro, an old man, and by trade a brazier. He had come, as he stated, from the town of Semiana; and standing at the door of the house of this witness, there passed by the servants of Francisco Rocabruna, apothecary of Semiana, when the said Gascon demanded of the lads whether they knew if the young man who had been apprehended at Semiana, was released, to which they replied, ‘No,’ and cried out ‘Ha! Lutheran, eat meat on a fast day!’ The lads having passed, he said to witness that he had been eating, and that he was sorry or not sorry, witness does not remember which of the two. No other person was present. This is the truth according to the oath of the witness, and being read in her presence is declared by her to be correctly recorded. Witness declares that she does not make this statement out of malice towards any one. Secrecy being enjoined upon her, she promised to observe it. She being unable to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name.

The Licentiate

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

In the village of Sanserin, on the same morning, appeared according to summons and swore formally to declare the truth, a man calling himself Juan Monco, husbandman, native and resident of the village abovementioned, of age, as he stated, twenty years or thereabout.

Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his being summoned to appear.

Answered, that he supposed it to be for the purpose of learning whether certain Gascons had eaten flesh in the town of Semiana on the eve of St Bartholomew last, concerning which he could state, that on the evening of the said day of St Bartholomew, being near the house of Pedro Ramonera, where there was a Gascon, whose name was unknown to the witness, which Gascon was an old man, corpulent, and by trade a brazier, there passed by the servant of the apothecary Rocabruna, of Tremp, whose name is unknown to witness. This servant of Rocabruna was heard by the deponent to say to the said Gascon, ‘Ha, Lutheran! eat flesh on a fast day!’ And deponent heard the said Gascon reply, ‘Yes, I have eaten,’—but does not know whether this was heard by the said servant of Rocabruna. This is the truth according to the oath of the deponent; and, being read in his presence, is declared by him to be correctly recorded. Deponent further states that he does not make this declaration out of malice to any one. Secrecy being enjoined upon him, he promised to observe it; and being unable to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in his name.

The Licentiate,

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

In the town of Semiana, at the same time, before me the said Licentiate and Commissary, Joan Torroella, appeared according to summons and swore formally to declare the truth, a man calling himself Pedro Aymar y Piteu, native and resident of the above town of Semiana, of age, as he stated, fiftysix years or thereabout.

Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his being summoned to appear.

Answered, that he supposed it to be for the purpose of learning whether certain Gascons had eaten flesh in his house on the day of St Bartholomew last, concerning which he had been informed by his wife that the two Gascons referred to, had stopped at his house, and eaten meat on that day. He furthermore stated that the said Gascons, whose names he knew not, as he had never seen them before, being at supper at his house the evening previous, which was Wednesday, one of the said Gascons being an old, and the other a young man, both braziers,—the old man said to the wife of the deponent that he meant to have some meat the next day, which was St Bartholomew’s, and wished her to cook some salted bacon. Whereupon deponent replied, they could not, as it was a fast. The old man answered that they meant to eat notwithstanding, which induced the deponent to believe that he had a license to eat meat, or had some infirmity; on which account he made no more remonstrances, and on the evening of the same day, returning home from his work, his wife informed him that the Gascons had eaten meat, and that the old man had gone away, and the young man was taken and carried to prison. This is the truth according to the oath of the witness, and being read in his presence is declared by him to be correctly recorded. Witness further states, that he does not make this declaration out of malice to any one; and secrecy being enjoined upon him, he promised to observe it. From his inability to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in his name.

The Licentiate,

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

On the seventeenth day of September, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, at three o’clock in the afternoon, Pedro Ginesta, of Auvergne, bishopric of St Flor, was by order of the Inquisitors put in the secret prison of the Inquisition and intrusted to the care of P. Fontanella, Alcayde of the said prison, who examined the prisoner and allowed him nothing prohibited by his instructions. The articles found upon him, were, two shirts, a pair of breeches, a purse, one dinero and three sueldos, which have been given in charge to the Camara de Pablo.

Pedro Fontanella.

FIRST AUDIENCE

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the eighteenth day of September, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, the Inquisitor, Doctor Domingo Abbad y Huerta being at his morning audience, ordered the prisoner to be brought from his cell; who, being produced, was sworn to declare the truth on the present as well as on all other occasions till the decision of his trial. He was also sworn to observe secrecy with respect to everything which he might see, hear, or learn, and everything which should befall him.

Questioned, what was his name, age, occupation, birthplace, residence, and the period of his arrestation by this Holy Office.

Answered, that his name was Pedro Ginesta, by occupation a brazier, native of the village of Orliach, bishopric of St Flor, in the kingdom of France, residing at Orcan, in Catalonia, having exercised the trade of a brazier in that country more than fourteen years, of age eighty years or thereabout, and that he was arrested by a Commissary of the Holy Office, yesterday, in the town of Salas.

Questioned, who was his father, grandfather, paternal and maternal, and wife; who were his uncles, brothers, and children; what were their occupations, birthplaces, and residences. [Here follows a long account of the prisoner’s relatives, in answer to the particulars specified.]

Questioned, what was the origin and descent of his ancestors and collateral relatives, and whether any one of them had been punished or put under penance by the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Answered, that all his relatives were old Roman Catholic Christians,¹³ and that no one of them had ever been punished or sentenced by the Holy Office up to the present day.

Questioned, if he was a baptized and confirmed Catholic, and made it a practice to attend mass, go to confession, and receive the sacrament at such times as are prescribed by the Holy Catholic Mother Church; at what time he last attended mass, and from whom he received the holy sacrament.

Answered, that he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, having by the grace of God been baptized in the church of Santanti, metropolitan of the suffragans of Caberna and other places, and that he knew himself to have been confirmed by a bishop named Panlaza in the city of Huerca in Arragon, or Poroteo, bishop of that kingdom, more than forty years since, in the cathedral; that he remembered the fact of the confirmation very well, being then of full age; that he hears mass every Sunday and holiday, except when he is travelling; that he confesses and communicates at every time fixed by the Holy Mother Church; that he has certificates to this effect; that he believes the last time he confessed was on Passion Week last, in the town of La Puente de Montania, to a priest of that church; that he does not remember the name of the person from whose hands he received the sacrament. The prisoner then made the sign of the cross, invoking the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and repeated the four prayers and general confession correctly in Latin, and stated that he knew nothing more of the christian doctrine.

Questioned, if he could write, or read, or had studied any science or faculty.

Answered, that he could neither write, nor read, nor had he studied any science or art.

Questioned, if he had ever left the kingdoms of Spain since his first arrival, or had any dealings with people of equivocal faith.

Answered, that he had exercised his trade of a brazier for more than sixty years, in the kingdoms of Catalonia and Arragon, visiting at times his home in France, where there are no Lutherans, nor any persons of equivocal faith.

Questioned, what were the events of his life.

Answered, that he was born, as above stated, in the village of Orliach, and remained with his father till twenty years of age assisting him in his profession of a brazier; that he had passed his life in France, Arragon, and Catalonia, his father having brought him while a boy into this country, where he died, and left him, sixty years since, in the town of Erla, near Gea, in Arragon, working all this time in various places, where he became well known; that his wife had never been in Spain at any time.

Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his imprisonment.

Answered, falling on his knees, weeping, and beating his breast, that he had committed an offence against our Lord by eating bacon on the eve of St Bartholomew in the village of Semiana, and that it was true he had been told on the day previous, by the hostess of the house where it was done, that the next day was a fast, but not remembering this intimation, he had, while the hostess was gone out of the house to her oven, eaten of the same in company with a certain youth of fourteen or fifteen years of age, a native of the bishopric of Clermont in France, who had come to work with him two days before; and that while they were eating, the hostess returned and again reminded him that it was the fast of St Bartholomew, and they ought not to eat it, upon which they immediately abstained from eating; that they were both arrested and brought on the road to Barcelona under guard of one man, the youth with his hands tied; that on arriving near a wood he escaped notwithstanding the exertions made by the guard, who raised the neighbourhood to search for him; and if in this he had offended our Lord, he begged for pardon and mercy.

The prisoner was then informed, that, in this Holy Office, it was not customary to apprehend any person without sufficient information that he had said, done, or witnessed the commission of something really or apparently offensive against God our Lord, or against his Holy Catholic faith and evangelical law, taught and preached by the Holy Mother Roman Church, or against the just and free exercise of the Holy Office; consequently he was to understand that he was imprisoned on account of some such information, and he was admonished on the part of God our Lord, and the glorious and blessed Virgin Mary, to recollect himself and confess his offences without concealing anything relating either to himself or any other person, and without uttering false testimony against any one; by doing all which, his trial should be dispatched with all brevity, and decided with that mercy which is shown by the Holy Office to all those who confess freely; otherwise, justice should be executed.