8 ms·

Popular culture is full of historical myths, another popular one is about cruelties of Holy Inquisition. Inquisition is painted ("The Name of the Rose" by Umber

Popular culture is full of historical myths, another popular one is about cruelties of Holy Inquisition. Inquisition is painted ("The Name of the Rose" by Umberto Eco and others) as some sadistic group of catholic priests who were chasing innocent woman, torture them and then burn. The truth is that Inquisition aim was exactly opposite: to stop chasing and burning innocent woman (and man) by all kind of petty lords and civil "courts" who used witchcraft accusation to get rid of opponents. This was done in the name of Catholic Church so Rome decided to do something about this and stop that practice by introduction of pretty modern standards of court proceedings - this way Inquisition was born. Inquisition was punishing heavily those who gave false testimony and that cut number of witchcraft cases significantly. In addition the punishment for heresy was rarely death penalty (about 1,5% of cases), which is less than 5 thousand executions during several centuries of Inquisition activity. Typical punishment was fasting, scourging or pilgrimage. Coming back to Umberto Eco writing, he described in "The Name of the Rose" Dominican friar Bernard Gui as some bloody, mindless, cruel madman, medieval version of Doctor Mengele. While the truth was exactly the opposite - he was a decent and educated man. Obviously historical research and facts are much less interesting than Eco pop writing, but we live in the pop age and believe in the pop "truths" so this is not a big surprise.

watwut 6y ago
> Coming back to Umberto Eco writing, he described in "The Name of the Rose" Dominican friar Bernard Gui as some bloody, mindless, cruel madman, medieval version of Doctor Mengele. While the truth was exactly the opposite - he was a decent and educated man. Education and cruelty are not in opposition. And decency toward some people or in some situation is not in opposition to cruelty toward other people. The same guy who was great diplomat and writer, could also convict 636 individuals of 940 counts of heresy. And that involved torturing quite a few people. So even if he was more lenient then some other guys, if you are around the situation where he is torturing, he will come across as cruel, cause that is what he does.
- starfallg 6y ago
  >So even if he was more lenient then some other guys, if you are around the situation where he is torturing, he will come across as cruel, cause that is what he does. That is applying our modern standards to historical figures more or less. We should view history through a contemporary lens for a better picture of the different driving factors and their effects.
  - watwut 6y ago
    > That is applying our modern standards to historical figures more or less. We should view history through a contemporary lens for a better picture of the different driving factors and their effects. That is actually not. Through contemporary lens, the contemporary person being tortured or someone who is close to that person, is in fact perceiving you as cruel. Factoring in writing and diplomacy done in other situations is literally applying different standard.
    - starfallg 6y ago
      The contemporary view as in how the populace at the time viewed it, not the condemned person. There are a lot of practices in our prison system today (both inside the US and in other industrialised nations) that some people find questionable, but much of the populace accept. This window is constantly moving over time.
      - watwut 6y ago
        But the books the whole thread is about are written from the point of view of "someone who is close to that tortured person". It if point of view of third party witness of inquisition, not from the point of view of diplomat. And they did perceived that as cruel and had emotional reaction to what is happening. Moreover, if you want to know what "populace thought" you cant just decide to ignore some people.
pjc50 6y ago
[historical citation needed] It's not for nothing that Torquemada was a synonym for cruelty long before Eco was even born. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom%C3%A1s_de_Torquemada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom%C3%A1s_de_Torquemada It's also inextricable from the "holy wars" between the Catholic Spanish monarchy, the Muslim states of Spain, and the Jewish population of Spain. The expulsion and forced conversion of Jews was a foreshadow of the Holocaust. (oh hey, we can find Bernard Gui source material on the Internet! https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/bernardgui-inq.asp https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/bernardgui-inq.asp )
- yurielt 6y ago
  From wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revision_of_the_Inquisition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revision_of_the_Inq... Inquisitions were ecclesiastical investigations conducted either directly by the Catholic Church or by secular authorities with the support of the Church. These investigations were undertaken at varying times in varying regions under the authority of the local bishop and his designates or under the sponsorship of papal-appointed legates. The purpose of each inquisition was specific to the outstanding circumstances of the region in which it was held. Investigations usually involved a legal process... "Until recently, Protestant-inspired literature on the Inquisition tended to be hostile to the Catholic Church per se, while Catholic literature tended to be narrowly apologetic and justificatory."[2] For Protestant scholars of the nineteenth century such as William H. Prescott and John Lothrop Motley the Spanish Inquisition represented "the archsymbol of religious intolerance and ecclesiastical power".[3] Henry Charles Lea wrote both A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages (1888) and A History of the Inquisition of Spain (1906). A History of the Inquisition of Spain was considered both groundbreaking and polemical. His studies were criticized for having both an anti-Catholic[4] and an anti-Spanish bias. Lea saw the Inquisition as theocratic absolutism that weakened Spain to an extent that undermined its overseas empire and ultimately contributed to its defeat during the Spanish–American War of 1898.[3] However both Juan Antonio Llorente's in his Histoire critique de l'Inquisition espagnole (1817) and Lea had access to original documents. For a long time, the Spanish Inquisition had been associated principally with persecution of Protestants. Nineteenth-century historian José Amador de los Ríos brought a focus to bear on the situation of Spain's large converso population.[3] Iarocci, Michael P. (1 March 2006). Properties of Modernity. Vanderbilt University Press. p. 218. ISBN 0-8265-1522-3. Hove, Brian S.J., "The Inquisitions of History: The Mythology and the Reality", Ignatian Insight, January 2012 Kagan, Richard L., "A Kinder, Gentler Inquisition", The New York Times (book review), 19 April 1998 While I do not know about the exact aspect of the inquisition you want to demystify yourself about. The truth is that a lot of it was anglo revisionism as tensions rose between the British crown and the Catholic Church, here above and after is one of many links that have sources in them, both links and books that will dispel many of the myths you might believe about the holy inquisition. https://www.ru.nl/theology/society/imagining-the-inquisition/inquisition-history/busting-inquisitorial-myths/ https://www.ru.nl/theology/society/imagining-the-inquisition... https://www.ru.nl/theology/society/imagining-the-inquisition/inquisition-history/busting-inquisitorial-myths/ https://www.ru.nl/theology/society/imagining-the-inquisition...
TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
I don't entirely understand how burning some people to death and torturing others was supposed to encourage the rest to behave in a more civilised way.
- collaborative 6y ago
  The Inquisition was the first attempt at having a fair trial in an age of summary, brutal executions Only the church had the moral authority to step into the void used by kings and lords to have justice their way Burning and torture did occur, but what is missing from pop culture is that it also happened in a greater scale in territories not controlled by the Inquisition
  - anthk 6y ago
    Also "popular" trials were worse than the Inquisition, far, far worse. Do you know these countries today where they kill you in a horrible way for just stealing a hen? Heh, that was nothing about what would happen to you in the Middle Ages and later. People is delusional, as if the common Medieval folk was any better than the ruling powers. Hint: it wasn't.
  - phillc73 6y ago
    > The Inquisition was the first attempt at having a fair trial Except where it wasn't. Philip IV of France specifically sanctioned torture to obtain specific confessions of defined types of heresy, in order to support his wish to deband the Templars, allowing him to sieze their land, gold and other assets. This was done in the name of the Inquisition. Later Pope Clement V tried to step in and moderate things somewhat. Many Templars recanted their earlier confessions.
- bserge 6y ago
  It's a strong, clear message. And it worked even better in a time when the vast majority of people had nothing but their health and lives to lose.
- goto11 6y ago
  The purpose the the inquisition was to combat heresy.
collaborative 6y ago
This part of pop culture is interesting in that it all started with vivid depictions of torture and murder mass printed by the protestant Dutch (the depictions were made up but taken as truth) This cultural trait of the west has remained intact until today. Popular TV still reinforces these claims from time to time Powerful propaganda, that was
- mbroncano 6y ago
  Also known as the black legend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_legend_(Spain) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_legend_(Spain)
- goto11 6y ago
  Just to be absolutely clear: The inquisition absolutely did torture people and condemn heretics to be burned at the stake. This is certainly not a myth. But protestants did use this a propaganda against the Catholic Church.
  - dtbx 6y ago
    Less than 100 people were killed by the Inquisition in Spain, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Number_of_alleged_witches_and_wizards_killed_in_Europe_during_the_Early_Modern_Era.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Number_of_alleged_witches...
    - goto11 6y ago
      "Number of alleged witches and wizards" - I assume this does not include heretics and Jews/conversos? What is the source for the numbers? The label "Early modern area" does not inspire confidence.
hutzlibu 6y ago
Inquisition meant still burning or torturing people to death - or threatening of doing so, if they continue to speak heresy, like "the earth moves around the sun". (Galileo and the Inquisition) Inquisition (which still exists today! only with no physical authority anymore) might be a bit missrepresented in their thirst for blood - but the harm they done over the centuries to free thinking and therefore advancement of science and technology and therefore progress of humanity as its whole - is something on its own validating their bad reputation.
- Mikhail_Edoshin 6y ago
  Do you know Galileo received a pension from the church? Galileo had many admirers among the clergy, including the pope himself, yet by publishing a book he broke an earlier agreement on not teaching his theory and this wasn't taken lightly. A modern analogy would be to break an NDA.
  - hutzlibu 6y ago
    Yes I know, that Galileo prefered the money and luxery(and de facto imprisonment) over death. How noble of the inquisition to offer him that. And comparing that with breaking an NDA, well I don't know. I didn't know NDA's contain that.
    - User23 6y ago
      If violating your NDA reveals a trade secret you can face prison, yes[1]. [1] https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/california-trade-secret-law.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/california-trade-sec...
      - hutzlibu 6y ago
        with the alternative of death at the stake?
        mwigdahl 6y ago
brazzy 6y ago
> The truth is that Inquisition aim was exactly opposite: to stop chasing and burning innocent woman (and man) by all kind of petty lords and civil "courts" who used witchcraft accusation to get rid of opponents. This was done in the name of Catholic Church so Rome decided to do something about this and stop that practice by introduction of pretty modern standards of court proceedings - this way Inquisition was born. This is really not true. Handling Witchcraft trials better had absolutely nothing to do with why the Inquisition was established. Its original and foremost job was to stomp out heretics (and later, in Spain, Muslims and Jews) in an organized and efficient way. If anything, it used torture more than had previously been common. But yes, it established standard procedures that were much less arbitrary and gave some rights to the defendant. > In addition the punishment for heresy was rarely death penalty (about 1,5% of cases), which is less than 5 thousand executions during several centuries of Inquisition activity. The main reason was that the death penalty was only given to unrepentant or repeat offenders.
- bobthechef 6y ago
  It wasn't that simple. The problem of the conversos was a major political problem. This didn't happen over night. Jews had occupied many high positions in Spain and following the ultimatum that Jews either convert or leave, the widespread belief among the populace that many of those converting were merely simulating conversion simply to remain in those high positions was a threat to social order and probably even an existential threat to a Spain just recovered from Islamic Moorish rule. The Inquisition set out to determine whether these claims were true in a process that was actually much more just than was the norm during that time period.
  - coffeefirst 6y ago
    All of which was of no consolation to the people being imprisoned, tortured or burned to death.
- User23 6y ago
  > The main reason was that the death penalty was only given to unrepentant or repeat offenders. And even then in their spiritual world view the auto-da-fé was a last ditch effort to persuade the condemned to repent. It gave the sinner a taste of the eternal fires awaiting them and time enough to make an act of perfect contrition and be saved from hell.
goto11 6y ago
I suspect you are getting into some myth-making yourself here. The inquisition was not originally focused on witch-hunting, it was focused on heretics - people challenging or denying the the doctrines of the Church. Bernardo Gui and The Name of the Rose is 14th century, while the large scale witch-hunts only started in the 15th century with the publishing of "Malleus Maleficarum". > The truth is that Inquisition aim was exactly opposite: to stop chasing and burning innocent woman (and man) by all kind of petty lords and civil "courts" who used witchcraft accusation to get rid of opponents. I suspect you made that up, given the anachronisms in your account. Do you have any legitimate source which confirm this narrative? Bernard Gui was certainly an educated man, and he is described as as such in Name of The Rose. He also was responsible for a lot of torture and death, persecution of Judaism and so on. You can consider this "decent" or not pending on your personal values. The Name of the Rose Eco actually has a reasonable good treatment of the philosophy behind the heretic movement and the inquisition, despite the book being fiction.
- samuel 6y ago
  You are right about the heretics part. But he has a point in the sense that the Catholic Church mostly fought against witch hunts, look https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alonso_de_Salazar_Fr%C3%ADas https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alonso_de_Salazar_Fr%C3%ADas Alonso de Salazar Frías has been given the epithet "The Witches’ Advocate"[1] by historians, for his role in establishing the conviction, within the Spanish Inquisition, that accusations against supposed witches were more often rooted in dreams and fantasy than in reality, and the inquisitorial policy that witch accusations and confessions should only be given credence where there was firm, independent, corroborating evidence. He was probably the most influential figure in ensuring that those accused of witchcraft were generally not put to death in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Spain. The Spanish Inquisition was one of the first institutions in Europe to rule against the death penalty for supposed witches. Its Instructions of 1614, which embodied Salazar's ideas, were influential throughout Catholic Europe.
  - goto11 6y ago
    > the Catholic Church mostly fought against witch hunts You should probably read about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleus_Maleficarum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleus_Maleficarum. The Catholic church was the cause of the which hunts, despite the moderating voices existing inside the church.
bobthechef 6y ago
Indeed. The Inquisition was actually innovative in the sense that it made courts more fair. You have to view these things in historical context. The events that motivated the Spanish Inquisition were, of course, a complicated political matter, too, but people don't like complicated things when all they want is an indictment and heads to roll. Such is bigotry. In general, these sorts of myths were often the product of anti-Catholic propaganda produced long after the events in question happened. Both Protestants and Enlightenment figures had a vested interest in spreading vicious lies about the Church and they did so gladly.
Nimitz14 6y ago
Sorry but describing Umberto Eco as a pop writer is simply hilarious.
ilamont 6y ago
Those accused of heresy were sentenced at an auto de fe, Act of Faith. Clergyman would sit at the proceedings and would deliver the punishments. Punishments included confinement to dungeons, physical abuse and torture. Those who reconciled with the church were still punished and many had their property confiscated, as well as were banished from public life. Those who never confessed were burned at the stake without strangulation; those who did confess were strangled first. ... In the beginning, the Inquisition dealt only with Christian heretics and did not interfere with the affairs of Jews. However, disputes about Maimonides’ books (which addressed the synthesis of Judaism and other cultures) provided a pretext for harassing Jews and, in 1242, the Inquisition condemned the Talmud and burned thousands of volumes. In 1288, the first mass burning of Jews on the stake took place in France. In 1481 the Inquisition started in Spain and ultimately surpassed the medieval Inquisition, in both scope and intensity. Conversos (Secret Jews) and New Christians were targeted because of their close relations to the Jewish community, many of whom were Jews in all but their name. ... First, they arrested Conversos and notable figures in Seville; in Seville more than 700 Conversos were burned at the stake and 5,000 repented. Tribunals were also opened in Aragon, Catalonia and Valencia. An Inquisition Tribunal was set up in Ciudad Real, where 100 Conversos were condemned, and it was moved to Toledo in 1485. Between 1486-1492, 25 auto de fes were held in Toledo, 467 people were burned at the stake and others were imprisoned. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-inquisition https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-inquisition

watwut 6y ago

> Coming back to Umberto Eco writing, he described in "The Name of the Rose" Dominican friar Bernard Gui as some bloody, mindless, cruel madman, medieval version of Doctor Mengele. While the truth was exactly the opposite - he was a decent and educated man. Education and cruelty are not in opposition. And decency toward some people or in some situation is not in opposition to cruelty toward other people. The same guy who was great diplomat and writer, could also convict 636 individuals of 940 counts of heresy. And that involved torturing quite a few people. So even if he was more lenient then some other guys, if you are around the situation where he is torturing, he will come across as cruel, cause that is what he does.

starfallg 6y ago
>So even if he was more lenient then some other guys, if you are around the situation where he is torturing, he will come across as cruel, cause that is what he does. That is applying our modern standards to historical figures more or less. We should view history through a contemporary lens for a better picture of the different driving factors and their effects.
- watwut 6y ago
  > That is applying our modern standards to historical figures more or less. We should view history through a contemporary lens for a better picture of the different driving factors and their effects. That is actually not. Through contemporary lens, the contemporary person being tortured or someone who is close to that person, is in fact perceiving you as cruel. Factoring in writing and diplomacy done in other situations is literally applying different standard.
  - starfallg 6y ago
    The contemporary view as in how the populace at the time viewed it, not the condemned person. There are a lot of practices in our prison system today (both inside the US and in other industrialised nations) that some people find questionable, but much of the populace accept. This window is constantly moving over time.
    - watwut 6y ago
      But the books the whole thread is about are written from the point of view of "someone who is close to that tortured person". It if point of view of third party witness of inquisition, not from the point of view of diplomat. And they did perceived that as cruel and had emotional reaction to what is happening. Moreover, if you want to know what "populace thought" you cant just decide to ignore some people.

pjc50 6y ago

[historical citation needed] It's not for nothing that Torquemada was a synonym for cruelty long before Eco was even born. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom%C3%A1s_de_Torquemada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom%C3%A1s_de_Torquemada It's also inextricable from the "holy wars" between the Catholic Spanish monarchy, the Muslim states of Spain, and the Jewish population of Spain. The expulsion and forced conversion of Jews was a foreshadow of the Holocaust. (oh hey, we can find Bernard Gui source material on the Internet! https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/bernardgui-inq.asp https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/bernardgui-inq.asp )

yurielt 6y ago
From wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revision_of_the_Inquisition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revision_of_the_Inq... Inquisitions were ecclesiastical investigations conducted either directly by the Catholic Church or by secular authorities with the support of the Church. These investigations were undertaken at varying times in varying regions under the authority of the local bishop and his designates or under the sponsorship of papal-appointed legates. The purpose of each inquisition was specific to the outstanding circumstances of the region in which it was held. Investigations usually involved a legal process... "Until recently, Protestant-inspired literature on the Inquisition tended to be hostile to the Catholic Church per se, while Catholic literature tended to be narrowly apologetic and justificatory."[2] For Protestant scholars of the nineteenth century such as William H. Prescott and John Lothrop Motley the Spanish Inquisition represented "the archsymbol of religious intolerance and ecclesiastical power".[3] Henry Charles Lea wrote both A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages (1888) and A History of the Inquisition of Spain (1906). A History of the Inquisition of Spain was considered both groundbreaking and polemical. His studies were criticized for having both an anti-Catholic[4] and an anti-Spanish bias. Lea saw the Inquisition as theocratic absolutism that weakened Spain to an extent that undermined its overseas empire and ultimately contributed to its defeat during the Spanish–American War of 1898.[3] However both Juan Antonio Llorente's in his Histoire critique de l'Inquisition espagnole (1817) and Lea had access to original documents. For a long time, the Spanish Inquisition had been associated principally with persecution of Protestants. Nineteenth-century historian José Amador de los Ríos brought a focus to bear on the situation of Spain's large converso population.[3] Iarocci, Michael P. (1 March 2006). Properties of Modernity. Vanderbilt University Press. p. 218. ISBN 0-8265-1522-3. Hove, Brian S.J., "The Inquisitions of History: The Mythology and the Reality", Ignatian Insight, January 2012 Kagan, Richard L., "A Kinder, Gentler Inquisition", The New York Times (book review), 19 April 1998 While I do not know about the exact aspect of the inquisition you want to demystify yourself about. The truth is that a lot of it was anglo revisionism as tensions rose between the British crown and the Catholic Church, here above and after is one of many links that have sources in them, both links and books that will dispel many of the myths you might believe about the holy inquisition. https://www.ru.nl/theology/society/imagining-the-inquisition/inquisition-history/busting-inquisitorial-myths/ https://www.ru.nl/theology/society/imagining-the-inquisition... https://www.ru.nl/theology/society/imagining-the-inquisition/inquisition-history/busting-inquisitorial-myths/ https://www.ru.nl/theology/society/imagining-the-inquisition...

TheOtherHobbes 6y ago

I don't entirely understand how burning some people to death and torturing others was supposed to encourage the rest to behave in a more civilised way.

collaborative 6y ago
The Inquisition was the first attempt at having a fair trial in an age of summary, brutal executions Only the church had the moral authority to step into the void used by kings and lords to have justice their way Burning and torture did occur, but what is missing from pop culture is that it also happened in a greater scale in territories not controlled by the Inquisition
- anthk 6y ago
  Also "popular" trials were worse than the Inquisition, far, far worse. Do you know these countries today where they kill you in a horrible way for just stealing a hen? Heh, that was nothing about what would happen to you in the Middle Ages and later. People is delusional, as if the common Medieval folk was any better than the ruling powers. Hint: it wasn't.
- phillc73 6y ago
  > The Inquisition was the first attempt at having a fair trial Except where it wasn't. Philip IV of France specifically sanctioned torture to obtain specific confessions of defined types of heresy, in order to support his wish to deband the Templars, allowing him to sieze their land, gold and other assets. This was done in the name of the Inquisition. Later Pope Clement V tried to step in and moderate things somewhat. Many Templars recanted their earlier confessions.
bserge 6y ago
It's a strong, clear message. And it worked even better in a time when the vast majority of people had nothing but their health and lives to lose.
goto11 6y ago
The purpose the the inquisition was to combat heresy.

collaborative 6y ago

This part of pop culture is interesting in that it all started with vivid depictions of torture and murder mass printed by the protestant Dutch (the depictions were made up but taken as truth) This cultural trait of the west has remained intact until today. Popular TV still reinforces these claims from time to time Powerful propaganda, that was

mbroncano 6y ago
Also known as the black legend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_legend_(Spain) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_legend_(Spain)
goto11 6y ago
Just to be absolutely clear: The inquisition absolutely did torture people and condemn heretics to be burned at the stake. This is certainly not a myth. But protestants did use this a propaganda against the Catholic Church.
- dtbx 6y ago
  Less than 100 people were killed by the Inquisition in Spain, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Number_of_alleged_witches_and_wizards_killed_in_Europe_during_the_Early_Modern_Era.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Number_of_alleged_witches...
  - goto11 6y ago
    "Number of alleged witches and wizards" - I assume this does not include heretics and Jews/conversos? What is the source for the numbers? The label "Early modern area" does not inspire confidence.

hutzlibu 6y ago

Inquisition meant still burning or torturing people to death - or threatening of doing so, if they continue to speak heresy, like "the earth moves around the sun". (Galileo and the Inquisition) Inquisition (which still exists today! only with no physical authority anymore) might be a bit missrepresented in their thirst for blood - but the harm they done over the centuries to free thinking and therefore advancement of science and technology and therefore progress of humanity as its whole - is something on its own validating their bad reputation.

Mikhail_Edoshin 6y ago
Do you know Galileo received a pension from the church? Galileo had many admirers among the clergy, including the pope himself, yet by publishing a book he broke an earlier agreement on not teaching his theory and this wasn't taken lightly. A modern analogy would be to break an NDA.
- hutzlibu 6y ago
  Yes I know, that Galileo prefered the money and luxery(and de facto imprisonment) over death. How noble of the inquisition to offer him that. And comparing that with breaking an NDA, well I don't know. I didn't know NDA's contain that.
  - User23 6y ago
    If violating your NDA reveals a trade secret you can face prison, yes[1]. [1] https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/california-trade-secret-law.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/california-trade-sec...
    - hutzlibu 6y ago
      with the alternative of death at the stake?
      - mwigdahl 6y ago

brazzy 6y ago

> The truth is that Inquisition aim was exactly opposite: to stop chasing and burning innocent woman (and man) by all kind of petty lords and civil "courts" who used witchcraft accusation to get rid of opponents. This was done in the name of Catholic Church so Rome decided to do something about this and stop that practice by introduction of pretty modern standards of court proceedings - this way Inquisition was born. This is really not true. Handling Witchcraft trials better had absolutely nothing to do with why the Inquisition was established. Its original and foremost job was to stomp out heretics (and later, in Spain, Muslims and Jews) in an organized and efficient way. If anything, it used torture more than had previously been common. But yes, it established standard procedures that were much less arbitrary and gave some rights to the defendant. > In addition the punishment for heresy was rarely death penalty (about 1,5% of cases), which is less than 5 thousand executions during several centuries of Inquisition activity. The main reason was that the death penalty was only given to unrepentant or repeat offenders.

bobthechef 6y ago
It wasn't that simple. The problem of the conversos was a major political problem. This didn't happen over night. Jews had occupied many high positions in Spain and following the ultimatum that Jews either convert or leave, the widespread belief among the populace that many of those converting were merely simulating conversion simply to remain in those high positions was a threat to social order and probably even an existential threat to a Spain just recovered from Islamic Moorish rule. The Inquisition set out to determine whether these claims were true in a process that was actually much more just than was the norm during that time period.
- coffeefirst 6y ago
  All of which was of no consolation to the people being imprisoned, tortured or burned to death.
User23 6y ago
> The main reason was that the death penalty was only given to unrepentant or repeat offenders. And even then in their spiritual world view the auto-da-fé was a last ditch effort to persuade the condemned to repent. It gave the sinner a taste of the eternal fires awaiting them and time enough to make an act of perfect contrition and be saved from hell.

goto11 6y ago

I suspect you are getting into some myth-making yourself here. The inquisition was not originally focused on witch-hunting, it was focused on heretics - people challenging or denying the the doctrines of the Church. Bernardo Gui and The Name of the Rose is 14th century, while the large scale witch-hunts only started in the 15th century with the publishing of "Malleus Maleficarum". > The truth is that Inquisition aim was exactly opposite: to stop chasing and burning innocent woman (and man) by all kind of petty lords and civil "courts" who used witchcraft accusation to get rid of opponents. I suspect you made that up, given the anachronisms in your account. Do you have any legitimate source which confirm this narrative? Bernard Gui was certainly an educated man, and he is described as as such in Name of The Rose. He also was responsible for a lot of torture and death, persecution of Judaism and so on. You can consider this "decent" or not pending on your personal values. The Name of the Rose Eco actually has a reasonable good treatment of the philosophy behind the heretic movement and the inquisition, despite the book being fiction.

samuel 6y ago
You are right about the heretics part. But he has a point in the sense that the Catholic Church mostly fought against witch hunts, look https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alonso_de_Salazar_Fr%C3%ADas https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alonso_de_Salazar_Fr%C3%ADas Alonso de Salazar Frías has been given the epithet "The Witches’ Advocate"[1] by historians, for his role in establishing the conviction, within the Spanish Inquisition, that accusations against supposed witches were more often rooted in dreams and fantasy than in reality, and the inquisitorial policy that witch accusations and confessions should only be given credence where there was firm, independent, corroborating evidence. He was probably the most influential figure in ensuring that those accused of witchcraft were generally not put to death in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Spain. The Spanish Inquisition was one of the first institutions in Europe to rule against the death penalty for supposed witches. Its Instructions of 1614, which embodied Salazar's ideas, were influential throughout Catholic Europe.
- goto11 6y ago
  > the Catholic Church mostly fought against witch hunts You should probably read about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleus_Maleficarum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleus_Maleficarum. The Catholic church was the cause of the which hunts, despite the moderating voices existing inside the church.

bobthechef 6y ago

Indeed. The Inquisition was actually innovative in the sense that it made courts more fair. You have to view these things in historical context. The events that motivated the Spanish Inquisition were, of course, a complicated political matter, too, but people don't like complicated things when all they want is an indictment and heads to roll. Such is bigotry. In general, these sorts of myths were often the product of anti-Catholic propaganda produced long after the events in question happened. Both Protestants and Enlightenment figures had a vested interest in spreading vicious lies about the Church and they did so gladly.

Nimitz14 6y ago

Sorry but describing Umberto Eco as a pop writer is simply hilarious.

ilamont 6y ago

Those accused of heresy were sentenced at an auto de fe, Act of Faith. Clergyman would sit at the proceedings and would deliver the punishments. Punishments included confinement to dungeons, physical abuse and torture. Those who reconciled with the church were still punished and many had their property confiscated, as well as were banished from public life. Those who never confessed were burned at the stake without strangulation; those who did confess were strangled first. ... In the beginning, the Inquisition dealt only with Christian heretics and did not interfere with the affairs of Jews. However, disputes about Maimonides’ books (which addressed the synthesis of Judaism and other cultures) provided a pretext for harassing Jews and, in 1242, the Inquisition condemned the Talmud and burned thousands of volumes. In 1288, the first mass burning of Jews on the stake took place in France. In 1481 the Inquisition started in Spain and ultimately surpassed the medieval Inquisition, in both scope and intensity. Conversos (Secret Jews) and New Christians were targeted because of their close relations to the Jewish community, many of whom were Jews in all but their name. ... First, they arrested Conversos and notable figures in Seville; in Seville more than 700 Conversos were burned at the stake and 5,000 repented. Tribunals were also opened in Aragon, Catalonia and Valencia. An Inquisition Tribunal was set up in Ciudad Real, where 100 Conversos were condemned, and it was moved to Toledo in 1485. Between 1486-1492, 25 auto de fes were held in Toledo, 467 people were burned at the stake and others were imprisoned. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-inquisition https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-inquisition