The Project Gutenberg EBook of A History of The Inquisition of The Middle Ages; volume II, by Henry Charles Lea This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license Title: A History of The Inquisition of The Middle Ages; volume II Author: Henry Charles Lea Release Date: April 16, 2012 [EBook #39458] Language: English Character set encoding: UTF-8 *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A HISTORY OF THE INQUISITION 2/3 *** Produced by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, Chuck Greif and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at DP Europe (http://dp.rastko.net); produced from images of the Bibliothèque nationale de France (BNF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr Typographical errors were corrected (See note at the end of the etext). The spelling of names of people or places has not been corrected or normalized. (note of etext transcriber.) image of the book's cover A HISTORY OF THE INQUISITION VOL. II. A HISTORY OF THE INQUISITION OF THE MIDDLE AGES. BY HENRY CHARLES LEA, AUTHOR OF “AN HISTORICAL SKETCH OF SACERDOTAL CELIBACY,” “SUPERSTITION AND FORCE,” “STUDIES IN CHURCH HISTORY.” IN THREE VOLUMES. VOL. II. NEW YORK: HARPER & BROTHERS, FRANKLIN SQUARE. 1901 Copyright, 1887, by HARPER & BROTHERS. —— All rights reserved. CONTENTS. BOOK II.—THE INQUISITION IN THE SEVERAL LANDS OF CHRISTENDOM. CHAPTER I.—Languedoc. Page Obstacles to Establishing the Inquisition 1 Progress and Zeal of the Dominicans 6 First Appointment of Inquisitors.—Tentative Proceedings 8 Popular Resistance 12 Position of Count Raymond 14 Troubles at Toulouse.—Expulsion of the Inquisition 16 Its Return and Increasing Vigor 21 Suspended from 1238 to 1241 24 Condition of the Country.—Rising of Trencavel 25 Connection between Religion and State-craft 26 Pierre Cella’s Activity in 1241-1242 30 Heretic Stronghold of Montségur 34 Massacre of Avignonet.—Its Unfortunate Influence 35 Count Raymond’s Last Effort.—Triumph of the Inquisition 38 Raymond Reconciled to the Church 40 Fall of Montségur.—Heresy Defenceless 42 Increased Activity of the Inquisition 44 Raymond’s Persecuting Energy.—His Death 46 Desperation of the Heretics.—Intercourse with Lombardy 49 Supremacy of Inquisition.—It Attacks the Count of Foix 52 Death of Alphonse and Jeanne in 1273 56 Rise of the Royal Power.—Appeals to the King 57 Popular Discontent.—Troubles at Carcassonne 58 Philippe le Bel Intervenes.—His Fluctuating Policy 62 Renewed Troubles at Carcassonne.—Submission in 1299 67 Prosecutions at Albi, 1299-1300 71 Inquisitorial Frauds.—Case of Castel Fabri 72 Frère Bernard Délicieux 75 Renewed Troubles.—Philippe Sends Jean de Pequigny 77 Philippe Tries to Reform the Inquisition 79 Troubles at Albi.—Conflict between Church and State 82 Philippe Visits Languedoc.—His Plan of Reform 86 Despair at Carcassonne.—Treasonable Projects 88 Appeal to Clement V.—Investigation 92 Abuses Recognized.—Reforms of Council of Vienne 94 Election of John XXII. 98 The Inquisition Triumphs.—Fate of Bernard Délicieux 99 Recrudescence of Heresy.—Pierre Autier 104 Bernard Gui Extirpates Catharism 107 Case of Limoux Noir 108 Results of the Triumph of the Inquisition 109 Political Effects of Confiscation 110 CHAPTER II.—France. Inquisition Introduced in 1233 by Frère Robert le Bugre 113 Opposed by the Prelates.—Encouraged by St. Louis 115 Robert’s Insane Massacres and Punishment 116 Inquisition Organized.—Its Activity in 1248 117 Slender Records of its Proceedings 120 Paris Auto de fé in 1310.—Marguerite la Porete 123 Gradual Decadence.—Case of Hugues Aubriot 125 The Parlement Assumes Superior Jurisdiction 130 The University of Paris Supplants the Inquisition 135 Moribund Activity during the Fifteenth Century 138 Attempt to Resuscitate it in 1451 140 It Falls into utter Discredit 144 The French Waldenses.—Their Number and Organization 145 Intermittent Persecution.—Their Doctrines 147 François Borel and Gregory XI. 152 Renewed Persecutions in 1432 and 1441 157 Protected by Louis XI.—Humiliation of the Inquisition 158 Alternations of Toleration and Persecution 159 CHAPTER III.—The Spanish Peninsula. ARAGON.—Unimportance of Heresy there 162 Episcopal and Lay Inquisition Tried in 1233 163 Papal Inquisition Introduced.—Navarre Included 165 Delay in Organization 167 Greater Vigor in the Fourteenth Century 169 Dispute over the Blood of Christ 171 Nicolas Eymerich 174 Separation of Majorca and Valencia 177 Decline of Inquisition 178 Resuscitation under Ferdinand the Catholic 179 CASTILE.—Inquisition not Introduced there 180 Cathari in Leon 181 Independent Legislation of Alonso the Wise 183 Persecution for Heresy Unknown 184 Case of Pedro of Osma in 1479 187 PORTUGAL.—No Effective Inquisition there 188 Chapter IV.—ITALY. Political Conditions Favoring Heresy 191 Prevalence of Unconcealed Catharism 192 Development of the Waldenses 194 Popular Indifference to the Church 196 Gregory XI. Undertakes to Suppress Heresy 199 Gradual Development of Inquisition 201 Rolando da Cremona 202 Giovanni Schio da Vicenza 203 St. Peter Martyr 207 He Provokes Civil War in Florence 210 Death of Frederic II. in 1250.—Chief Obstacle Removed 213 Assassination of St. Peter Martyr.—Use Made of it 214 Rainerio Saccone 218 Triumph of the Papacy.—Organization of the Inquisition 220 Heresy Protected by Ezzelin and Uberto 223 Ezzelin Prosecuted as a Heretic.—His Death 224 Uberto Pallavicino 228 The Angevine Conquest of Naples Revolutionizes Italy 231 Triumph of Persecution 233 Sporadic Popular Opposition 237 Secret Strength of Heresy.—Case of Armanno Pongilupo 239 Power of the Inquisition.—Papal Interference 242 Naples.—Toleration Under Normans and Hohenstaufens 244 The Inquisition Under the Angevines 245 Sicily 248 Venice.—Its Independence 249 Inquisition Introduced in 1288, under State Supervision 251 Decadence of Inquisition in Fourteenth Century 253 Disappearance of the Cathari.—Persistence of the Waldenses 254 Remnants of Catharism in Corsica and Piedmont 255 Persecution of the Waldenses of Piedmont 259 Decline of the Lombard Inquisition 269 Venice.—Subjection of Inquisition to the State 273 Tuscany.—Increasing Insubordination.—Case of Piero di Aquila 275 Continued Troubles in Florence 280 Tommasino da Foligno 281 Decline of Inquisition in Central Italy 282 The Two Sicilies.—Inquisition Subordinate to the State 284 CHAPTER V.—The Slavic Cathari. Efforts of Innocent III. and Honorius III. East of the Adriatic 290 The Mendicant Orders Undertake the Task 293 Bloody Crusades from Hungary 294 Revival of Catharism 298 Endeavors of Boniface VIII. and John XXII. 299 Fruitlessness of the Work 301 Reign of Stephen Tvrtko 303 Catharism the State Religion 305 Advance of the Turks 306 Confusion Aggravated by Persecution 307 The Cathari Aid the Turkish Conquest 313 Disappearance of Catharism 314 CHAPTER VI.—Germany. Persecution of Strassburg Waldenses in 1212 316 Spread of Waldensianism in Germany 318 Mystic Pantheism.—The Amaurians and Ortlibenses 319 Brethren of the Free Spirit or Beghards.—Luciferans 323 Conrad of Marburg.—His Character and Career 325 Gregory XI. Vainly Stimulates him to Persecution 329 Gregory Commissions the Dominicans as Inquisitors 333 The Luciferan Heresy 334 Conrad’s Methods and Massacres 336 Antagonism of the Prelates 338 Assembly of Mainz.—Conrad’s Defeat and Murder 340 Persecution Ceases.—The German Church Antagonistic to Rome 342 The Reaction Keeps the Inquisition out of Germany 346 Waldenses and Inquisition in Passau 347 Growth of Heresy.—Virtual Toleration 348 The Beguines, Beghards, and Lollards 350 The Brethren of the Free Spirit 354 Tendency to Mysticism.—Master Eckart 358 John of Rysbroek, Gerard Groot, and the Brethren of the Common Life 360 John Tauler and the Friends of God 362 Persecution of the Brethren of the Free Spirit 367 Antagonism between Louis of Bavaria and the Papacy 377 Subservience of Charles IV.—The Black Death 378 Gregarious Enthusiasm.—The Flagellants 380 Clement VI. Condemns Them.—They Become Heretics 383 Attempts to Introduce the Inquisition.—Successful in 1369 385 Persecution of Flagellants and Beghards.—The Dancing Mania 390 Beghards and Beguines Protected by the Prelates 394 Speedy Decline of the Inquisition 395 The Waldenses.—Their Extension and Persecution 396 Renewed Persecution of the Beghards 401 William of Hilderniss, and the Men of Intelligence 405 The Flagellants.—The Brethren of the Cross 406 Triumph of the Beghards at Constance 409 Renewed Persecution 411 Hussitism in Germany.—Coalescence with Waldenses 414 Gregory of Heimburg 417 Hans of Niklaushausen 418 John von Ruchrath of Wesel 420 Decay of the Inquisition.—John Reuchlin 423 Its Impotence in the Case of Luther 425 CHAPTER VII.—Bohemia. Independence of Bohemian Church.—Waldensianism 427 Inquisition Introduced in 1257.—Revived by John XXII. 428 Growth of Waldensianism.—John of Pirna 430 Conditions Favoring the Growth of Heresy.—Episcopal Inquisition 433 The Precursors of Huss 436 Wickliff and Wickliffitism 438 John Huss Becomes the Leader of Reform 444 Progress of the Revolution.—Rupture with Rome 445 Convocation of the Council of Constance 453 Motives Impelling Huss’s Presence 455 His Reception and Treatment 457 His Arrest.—Question of the Safe-conduct 460 Communion in both Elements 471 The Trial of Huss.—Illustration of the Inquisitorial Process 473 Exceptional Audiences Allowed to Huss 484 Extraordinary Efforts to Procure Recantation 486 The Inevitable Condemnation and Burning 490 Indignation in Bohemia 494 Jerome of Prague.—His Trial and Execution 495 CHAPTER VIII.—The Hussites. Inquisitorial Methods Attempted in Bohemia 506 Increasing Antagonism.—Fruitless Threats of Force 508 Parties Form Themselves.—Calixtins and Taborites 511 Sigismund Succeeds to the Throne.—Failure of Negotiations 514 Crusade Preached in 1420.—Its Repulse 516 Religious Extravagance.—Pikardi, Chiliasts 517 The Four Articles of the Calixtins 519 Creed of the Taborites 522 Failure of Repeated Crusades.—The Hussites Retaliate 525 Efforts to Reform the Church.—Council of Siena 527 Council of Basle.—Negotiation with the Hussites a Necessity 530 The Four Articles the Basis.—Accepted as the “Compactata” 533 The Taborites Crushed at Lipan 535 Difficulties Caused by Rokyzana’s Ambition 536 Insincere Peace.—Sigismund’s Reactionary Reign and Death 538 The Calixtins Secure Control under George Podiebrad 541 Rome Disavows the Compactata.—Giacomo della Marca in Hungary 542 The Use of the Cup the Only Distinction.—Capistrano Sent as Inquisitor 545 His Projected Hussite Crusade Impeded by the Capture of Constantinople551 Efforts to Resist the Turks.—Death of Capistrano at Belgrade 552 Steady Estrangement of Bohemia.—Negotiations and Attacks 555 The Compactata Maintained in Spite of Rome 559 The Bohemian Brethren Arise from the Remains of the Taborites 561 Their Union with the Waldenses 564 Their Growth and Constancy under Persecution 566 APPENDIX OF DOCUMENTS 569 THE INQUISITION. BOOK II. THE INQUISITION IN THE SEVERAL LANDS OF CHRISTENDOM. CHAPTER I. LANGUEDOC. THE men who laid the foundations of the Inquisition in Languedoc had before them an apparently hopeless task. The whole organization and procedure of the institution were to be developed as experience might dictate and without precedents for guidance. Their uncertain and undefined powers were to be exercised under peculiar difficulties. Heresy was everywhere and all-pervading. An unknown but certainly large portion of the population was addicted to Catharism or Waldensianism, while even the orthodox could not, for the most part, be relied upon for sympathy or aid. Practical toleration had existed for so many generations, and so many families had heretic members, that the population at large was yet to be educated in the holy horror of doctrinal aberrations. National feeling, moreover, and the memory of common wrongs suffered during twenty years of bitter contest with invading soldiers of the Cross, during which Catholic and Catharan had stood side by side in defence of the fatherland, had created the strongest bonds of sympathy between the different sects. In the cities the magistrates were, if not heretics, inclined to toleration and jealous of their municipal rights and liberties. Throughout the country many powerful nobles were avowedly or secretly heretics, and {page 1} {2} Raymond of Toulouse himself was regarded as little better than a heretic. The Inquisition was the symbol of a hated foreign domination which could look for no cordial support from any of these classes. It was welcomed, indeed, by such Frenchmen as had succeeded in planting themselves in the land, but they were scattered, and were themselves the objects of detestation to their neighbors. The popular feeling is voiced by the Troubadours, who delight in expressing contempt for the French and hostility to the friars and their methods. As Guillem de Montanagout says: “Now have the clerks become inquisitors and condemn men at their pleasure. I have naught against the inquests if they would but condemn errors with soft words, lead the wanderers back to the faith without wrath, and allow the penitent to find mercy.” The bolder Pierre Cardinal describes the Dominicans as disputing after dinner over the quality of their wines: “They have created a court of judgment, and whoever attacks them they declare to be a Waldensian; they seek to penetrate into the secrets of all men, so as to render themselves dreaded.”[1] The lands which Raymond had succeeded in retaining were, moreover, drained by the enormous sums exacted of him in the pacification. To enable him to meet these demands he was authorized to levy taxes on the subjects of the Church, in spite of their immunities, and this and the other expedients requisite for the discharge of his engagements could not fail to excite widespread discontent with the settlement and hostility to all that represented it. That it was hard to extort these payments from a population exhausted by twenty years of war is manifest when, in 1231, two years after the treaty, the Abbey of Citeaux had not as yet received any part of the two thousand marks which were its share of the plunder, and it was forced to agree to a settlement under which Raymond promised to pay in annual instalments of two hundred marks, giving as security his revenues from the manor of Marmande.[2] The Inquisition, it is true, was at first warmly greeted by the Church, but the Church had grown so discredited during the events of the past half-century that its influence was less than in any other spot in Christendom. Even in Aragon the Council of Tarragona, in 1238, felt itself compelled to decree excommunication against those who composed or applauded lampoons against the clergy. The abuse of the interdict had grown to such proportions that Innocent IV., in 1243, and again in 1245, was obliged to forbid its employment throughout southern France, in all places suspected of heresy, because it afforded to heretics so manifold an occasion of asserting that it was used for private interests, and not for the salvation of souls. During the troubles which followed after the crusade of Louis VIII. the bishops had taken advantage of the confusion to seize many lands to which they had no claim, and this involved them in endless quarrels with the royal fisc in the territories which fell to the king, while in those which remained to Raymond, the pious St. Louis was forced to interfere to obtain for him a restoration of what they obstinately refused to surrender. The Church itself was so deeply tainted with heresy that the faithful were scandalized at seeing the practical immunity enjoyed by heretical clerks, owing to the difficulty of assembling a sufficient number of bishops to officiate at their degradation, and Gregory IX. felt it necessary, in 1233, to decree that in such cases a single bishop, with some of his abbots, should have power to deprive them of holy orders and deliver them to the secular arm to be burned—a provision which he subsequently embodied in the canon law. Innocent IV., moreover, in 1245, felt called upon to order his legate in Languedoc to see that no one suspected of heresy was elected or consecrated as bishop. On the other hand, priests who were zealous in aiding the Inquisition sometimes found that the enmities thus excited rendered it impossible for them to reside in their parishes, as occurred in the case of Guillem Pierre, a priest of Narbonne, in 1246, who on this account was allowed to employ a vicar and to hold a plurality of benefices. About the same time Innocent IV. felt obliged to express his surprise that the prelates disobeyed his repeated commands to assist the Inquisition; he has trustworthy information that they neglect to do so, and he threatens them roundly with his displeasure unless they manifest greater zeal. Bernard Gui, indeed, speaks of the bishops who favored Count Raymond as among the craftiest and most dangerous enemies of the inquisitors. The natural antagonism between the Mendicants and the secular clergy was, moreover, increased by the pretension of the inquisitors to supervise the priesthood and see that they performed their neglected duty in all that pertained to the extension of the faith. That under such circumstances the Dominicans employed in the pious work should suffer constant molestation scarce needs the explanation given by the pope that it was through the influence of the Arch Enemy.[3] Another serious impediment to the operations of the Inquisition lay in the absence of places of detention for those accused and of prisons for those condemned. We have already seen how the bishops shirked their duty in providing jails for the multitudes of prisoners until St. Louis was obliged to step in and construct them, and during this prolonged interval the sentences of the inquisitors show, in the number of contumacious absentees after a preliminary hearing, how impossible it often was to retain hold of heretics who had been arrested.[4] To undertake, in such an environment, the apparently hopeless task of suppressing heresy required men of exceptional character, and they were not wanting. Repulsive as their acts must seem to us, we cannot refuse to them the tribute due to their fearless fanaticism. No labor was too arduous for their unflagging zeal, no danger too great for their unshrinking courage. Regarding themselves as elected to perform God’s work, they set about it with a sublime self- confidence which lifted them above the weakness of humanity. As the mouthpiece of God, the mendicant friar, who lived on charity, spoke to prince and people with all the awful authority of the Church, and exacted obedience or punished contumacy unhesitatingly and absolutely. Such men as Pierre Cella, Guillem Arnaud, Arnaud Catala, Ferrer the Catalan, Pons de Saint-Gilles, Pons de l’Esparre, and Bernard de Caux, bearded prince and prelate, were as ready to endure as merciless to inflict, were veritable Maccabees in the internecine strife with heresy, and yet were kind and pitiful to the miserable and overflowing with tears in their prayers and discourses. They were the culminating development of the influences which produced the Church Militant of the Middle Ages, and in their hands the Inquisition was the most effective instrument whereby it maintained its supremacy. A secondary result was the complete subjugation of the South to the King of Paris, and its unification with the rest of France. If the faithful had imagined that the Treaty of 1229 had ended the contest with heresy they were quickly {2} {3} {4} {5} undeceived. The blood-money for the capture of heretics, promised by Count Raymond, was indeed paid when earned, for the Inquisition undertook to see that this was done, but the earning of it was dangerous. Nobles and burghers alike protected and defended the proscribed class, and those who hunted them were slain without mercy when occasion offered. The heretics continued as numerous as ever, and we have already seen the fruitless efforts put forth by the Cardinal Legate Romano and the Council of Toulouse. Even the university which Raymond bound himself to establish in Toulouse for the propagation of the faith, though it subsequently performed its work, was at first a failure. Learned theologians were brought from Paris to fill its chairs, but their scholastic subtleties were laughed at by the mocking Southrons as absurd novelties, and the heretics were bold enough to contend with them in debate. After a few years Raymond neglected to continue the stipends, and for a time the university was suspended.[5] The most encouraging feature of the situation, one, indeed, full of promise, was the steady progress of the Dominican Order. It had outgrown the modest Church of St. Romano, bestowed upon it by Bishop Foulques; and in 1230 the piety of a prominent burgher of Toulouse, Pons de Capdenier, provided for it more commodious quarters in an extensive garden, situated partly in the city and partly in the suburbs. The inmates of the convent, some forty in number, were always ready to furnish champions of the Cross, whose ardent zeal shrank from neither toil nor peril; and when, in 1232, the fanatic Bishop Foulques died and was succeeded by the yet more fiery fanatic, the Dominican Provincial Raymond du Fauga, the Order was fully prepared to enter upon the exterminating war with heresy which was to last for a hundred years.[6] The eager zeal of the friars did not wait to be armed with the organized authorization of inquisitorial powers. Their leading duty was to combat heresy, and their assaults on it were unintermitting. In 1231 a friar, in a sermon, declared that Toulouse was full of heretics, who held their assemblies there and disseminated their errors without hindrance. Already the magistrates seem to have looked askance on these pious efforts, for this assertion was made the occasion of a decided attempt at repression. The consuls of the city met and summoned before them, in the capitole, or town- hall, the prior, Pierre d’Alais. There they roundly scolded and threatened him, declaring that it was false to assert the existence of heresy in the town, and forbidding such utterances for the future. Trivial as was the occurrence, it has interest as the commencement of the ill-will between the authorities of Toulouse and the Inquisition, and as illustrating the sense of municipal pride and independence still cherished in the cities of the South. It required but a few years’’ struggle to trammel the civic liberties which had held their own against feudalism, but which could not stand against the subtler despotism of the Church.[7] Even thus early Dominican ardor refused to be thus restrained. Master Roland of Cremona, noted as the first Dominican licentiate of the University of Paris, who had been brought to Toulouse to teach theology in the infant University, was scandalized when he heard of the insolent language of the consuls, and exclaimed that it was only a fresh incentive to preach against heresy more bitterly than ever. He set the example in this, and was eagerly followed by many of the brethren. He soon, too, had an opportunity of proving the falsity of the consuls’’ disclaimer. It transpired that Jean Pierre Donat, a canon of the ancient Church of Saint Sernin, who had recently died and been buried in the cloister, had been secretly hereticated on his death-bed. Without authority, and apparently without legal investigation, Master Roland assembled some friars and clerks, exhumed the body from the cloister, dragged it through the streets, and publicly burned it. Soon afterwards he heard of the death of a prominent Waldensian minister named Galvan. After stirring up popular passion in a sermon, he marched at the head of a motley mob to the house where the heretic had died and levelled it to the ground; then proceeding to the Cemetery of Villeneuve, where the body was interred, he dug it up and dragged it through the city, accompanied by an immense procession, to the public place of execution beyond the walls, where it was solemnly burned.[8] All this was volunteer persecution. The episcopal court was as yet the only tribunal having power to act in such matters, and it, as we have seen, could only authorize the secular arm to do its duty in the final execution. Yet the episcopal court seems to have been in no way invoked in these proceedings, and no protest is recorded as having been uttered against such irregular enforcements of the law by the mob. There was, in fact, no organization for the steady repression of heresy. Bishop Raymond appears to have satisfied himself with an occasional raid against heretics outside of the city, and to have allowed those within it virtual immunity under the protection of the consuls, though he had, in virtue of his office, all the powers requisite for the purpose, and the machinery for their effective use could have readily been developed. No permanent results were to be expected from fitful bursts of zeal, and the suppression of heresy might well seem to be as far off as ever. Urgent as was evidently the need of some organized body devoted exclusively to persecution, the appointment of the first inquisitors, in 1233, seems not to have been regarded as possessing any special significance. It was merely an experiment, from which no great results were anticipated. Frère Guillem Pelisson, who shared in the labors and perils of the nascent Inquisition, and who enthusiastically chronicled them, evidently does not consider it as an innovation worthy of particular attention. It was so natural an evolution from the interaction of the forces and materials of the period, and its future importance was so little suspected, that he passes over its founding as an incident of less moment than the succession to the Priory of Toulouse. “Frère Pons de Saint Gilles,” he says, “was made Prior of Toulouse, who bore himself manfully and effectively for the faith against the heretics, together with Frère Pierre Cella of Toulouse and Frère Guillem Arnaud of Montpellier, whom the lord pope made inquisitors against the heretics in the dioceses of Toulouse and Cahors. Also, the Legate Archbishop of Vienne made Frère Arnaud Catala, who was then of the Convent of Toulouse, inquisitor against the heretics.” Thus colorless is the only contemporary account of the establishment of the Holy Office.[9] How little the functions of these new officials were at first understood is manifested by an occurrence, which is also highly suggestive of the tension of public feeling. In a quarrel between two citizens, one of them, Bernard Peitevin, called {6} {7} {8} the other, Bernard de Solier, a heretic. This was a dangerous reputation to have, and the offended man summoned his antagonist before the consuls. The heretical party, we are told, had obtained the upper hand in Toulouse, and the magistrates were all either sympathizers with or believers in heresy. Bernard Peitevin was condemned to exile for a term of years, to pay a fine both to the complainant and to the city, and to swear publicly in the town-hall that he had lied, and that de Solier was a good Catholic. The sentence was a trifle vindictive, and Peitevin sought counsel of the Dominicans, who recommended him to appeal to the bishop. Episcopal jurisdiction in such a matter was perhaps doubtful, but Raymond du Fauga entertained the appeal. A few years later, if any cognizance had been taken of the case it would have been by the Inquisition, but now the inquisitors, Pierre Cella and Guillem Arnaud, appeared as advocates of the appellant in the bishop’s court, and so clearly proved de Solier’s heresy that the miserable wretch fled to Lombardy.[10] Similar indefiniteness of procedure is visible in the next attempt. The inquisitors, Pierre and Guillem, began to make an inquest through the city, and cited numerous suspects, all of whom found defenders among the chief citizens. The hearings took place before them, but seem as yet to have been in public. One of the accused, named Jean Teisseire, asserted himself to be a good Catholic because he had no scruples in maintaining marital relations with his wife, in eating flesh, and in lying and swearing, and he warned the crowd that they were liable to the same charge, and that it would be wiser for them to make common cause than to abandon him. When he was condemned, and the viguier, the official representative of the count, was about to conduct him to the stake, so threatening a clamor arose that the prisoner was hurried to the bishop’s prison, still proclaiming his orthodoxy. Intense excitement pervaded the city, and menaces were freely uttered to destroy the Dominican convent and to stone all the friars, who were accused of persecuting the innocent. While in prison Teisseire pretended to fall mortally sick, and asked for the sacraments; but when the bailli of Lavaur brought to Toulouse some perfected heretics and delivered them to the bishop, Teisseire allowed himself to be hereticated by them in prison, and grew so ardent in the faith under their exhortations that when they were taken out for examination he accompanied them, declaring that he would share their fate. The bishop assembled the magistrates and many citizens, in whose presence he examined the prisoners. They were all condemned, including Teisseire, who obstinately refused to recant, and no further opposition was offered when they were all duly burned.[11] Here we see the inquisitorial jurisdiction completely subordinate to that of the bishop, but when the inquisitors soon afterwards left Toulouse to hold inquests elsewhere they acted with full independence. At Cahors we hear nothing of the Bishop of Querci taking part in the proceedings under which they condemned a number of the dead, exhuming and burning their bodies, and inspiring such fear that a prominent believer, Raymond de Broleas, fled to Rome. At Moissac they condemned Jean du Gard, who fled to Montségur, and they cited a certain Folquet, who, in terror, entered the convent of Belleperche as a Cistercian monk, and, finding that this was of no avail, finally fled to Lombardy. Meanwhile Frère Arnaud Catala and our chronicler, Guillem Pelisson, descended upon Albi, where they penanced a dozen citizens by ordering them to Palestine, and in conjunction with another inquisitor, Guillem de Lombers, burned two heretics, Pierre de Puechperdut and Pierre Bomassipio.[12] The absence of the inquisitors from Toulouse made no difference in the good work, for their duties were assumed by their prior, Pons de Saint-Gilles. Under what authority he acted is not stated, but we find him, in conjunction with another friar, trying and condemning a certain Arnaud Sancier, who was burned, in spite of his protests to the last that he was a good Catholic, causing great agitation in the city, but no tumultuous uprising.[13] The terror which Pelisson boasts that these proceedings spread through the land was probably owing not only to the evidence they afforded of an organized system of persecution, but also to their introduction of a much more effective method of prosecution than had heretofore been known. The “heretic,” so called, was the perfected teacher who disdained to deny his faith, and his burning was accepted by all as a matter of course, as also was that of the “credens,” or believer, who was defiantly contumacious and persisted in admitting and adhering to his creed. Hitherto, however, the believer who professed orthodoxy seems generally to have escaped, in the imperfection of the judicial means of proving his guilt. The friars, trained in the subtleties of disputation and learned in both civil and canon law, were specially fitted for the detection of this particularly dangerous secret misbelief, and their persistence in worrying their victims to the death was well calculated to spread alarm, not only among the guilty, but among the innocent. How reasonable were the fears inspired by the speedy informality of the justice accorded to the heretic is well illustrated by a case occurring in 1234. When the canonization of St. Dominic was announced in Toulouse it was celebrated in a solemn mass performed by Bishop Raymond in the Dominican convent. St. Dominic, however, desired to mark the occasion with some more edifying manifestation of his peculiar functions, and caused word to be brought to the bishop, as the latter was leaving the church for the refectory to partake of a meal, that a woman had just been hereticated in a house hard by, in the Rue de l’Olmet sec. The bishop, with the prior and some others, hurried thither. It was the house of Peitavin Borsier, the general messenger of the heretics of Toulouse, whose mother-in-law lay dying of fever. So sudden was the entrance of the intruders that the woman’s friends could only tell her “the bishop is coming,” and she, who expected a visit from the heretic bishop, was easily led on by Raymond to make a full declaration of her heresy and to pledge herself to be steadfast in it. Then, revealing himself, he ordered her to recant, and, on her refusal, he summoned the viguier, condemned her as a heretic, and had the satisfaction of seeing the dying creature carried off on her bed and burned at the place of execution. Borsier and his colleague, Bernard Aldric of Drémil, were captured, and betrayed many of their friends; and then Raymond and the friars returned to their neglected dinner, giving thanks to God and to St. Dominic for so signal a manifestation in favor of the faith.[14] The ferocious exultation with which these extra-judicial horrors were perpetrated is well reflected in a poem of the period by Isarn, the Dominican Prior of Villemier. He represents himself as disputing with Sicard de Figueras, a Catharan bishop, and each of his theological arguments is clinched with a threat— {9} {10} {11} “E’’ s’aquest no vols creyre vec te ’l foc aizinat Que art tos companhos, Aras vuelh que m’’respondas en un mot o en dos, Si cauziras et foc o remanras ab nos.” “If you will not believe this, look at that raging fire which is consuming your comrades. Now I wish you to reply to me in one word or two, for you will burn in the fire or join us.” Or again, “If you do not confess at once, the flames are already lighted; your name is proclaimed throughout the city with the blast of trumpets, and the people are gathering to see you burn.” In this terrible poem, Isarn only turned into verse what he felt in his own heart, and what he saw passing under his eyes almost daily.[15] As the holy work assumed shape and its prospects of results grew more encouraging, the zeal of the hunters of men increased, while the fear and hatred of the hunted became more threatening. On both sides passion was fanned into flame. Already, in 1233, two Dominicans, sent to Cordes to seek out heretics, had been slain by the terrified citizens. At Albi the people, excited by the burning of the two heretics already referred to, rose, June 14, 1234, when Arnaud Catala ordered the episcopal bailli to dig up the bones of a heretic woman named Beissera whom he had condemned. The bailli sent back word that he dared not do it. Arnaud left the episcopal synod in which he was sitting, coolly went to the cemetery, himself gave the first strokes of the mattock, and then, ordering the officials to proceed with the work, returned to the synod. The officials quickly rushed after him, saying that they had been ejected from the burial-ground by the mob. Arnaud returned and found it occupied by a crowd of howling sons of Belial, who quickly closed in on him, striking him in the face and pummelling him on all sides, with shouts of “Kill him! he has no right to live!” Some endeavored to drag him into the shops hard by to slay him; others wished to throw him into the river Tarn, but he was rescued and taken back to the synod, followed by a mass of men fiercely shouting for his death. The whole city, indeed, seemed to be of one mind, and many of the principal burghers were leaders of the tumult. It is satisfactory to learn that, although Arnaud mercifully withdrew the excommunication which he launched at the rebellious city, his successor, Frère Ferrer, wrought the judgment of God upon the guilty, imprisoning many of them and burning others.[16] In Narbonne disturbances arose even more serious, although special inquisitors had not yet been sent there. In March, 1234, the Dominican prior, François Ferrer, undertook a volunteer inquisition and threw in prison a citizen named Raymond d’Argens. Fifteen years previous the artisans of the suburb had organized a confederation for mutual support called the Amistance, and this body arose as one man and forcibly rescued the prisoner. The archbishop, Pierre Amiel, and the viscount, Aimery of Narbonne, undertook to rearrest him, but found his house guarded by the Amistance, which rushed upon their followers with shouts of “Kill! kill!” and drove them away after a brief skirmish, in which the prior was badly handled. The archbishop had recourse to excommunication and interdict, but to little purpose, for the Amistance seized his domains and drove him from the city. Both sides sought allies. Gregory IX. appealed to King Jayme of Aragon, while a complaint from the consuls of Narbonne to those of Nimes looks as though they were endeavoring to effect a confederation of the cities against the Inquisition, of whose arbitrary and illegal methods of procedure they give abundant details. A kind of truce was patched up in October, but the troubles recommenced when the prior, in obedience to an order from his provincial, undertook a fresh inquisition, and made a number of arrests. In December a suspension was obtained by the citizens appealing to the pope, the king, and the legate, but in 1235 the people rose against the Dominicans, drove them from the city, sacked their convent, and destroyed all the records of the proceedings against heresy. Archbishop Pierre had cunningly separated the city from the suburb, about equal in population, by confining the inquisition to the latter, and this bore fruit in his securing the armed support of the former. The suburb placed itself under the protection of Count Raymond, who, nothing loath to aggravate the trouble, came there and gave to the people as leaders Olivier de Termes and Guiraud de Niort, two notorious defenders of heretics. A bloody civil war broke out between the two sections, which lasted until April, 1237, when a truce for a year was agreed upon. In the following August the Count of Toulouse and the Seneschal of Carcassonne were called in as arbitrators, and in March, 1238, a peace was concluded. That the Church triumphed is shown by the conditions which imposed upon some of the participators in the troubles a year’s service in Palestine or against the Moors of Spain.[17] In Toulouse, the centre both of heresy and persecution, in spite of mutterings and menaces, open opposition to the Inquisition was postponed longer than elsewhere. Although Count Raymond is constantly represented by the Church party as the chief opponent of the Holy Office, it was probably his influence that succeeded in staving off so long the inevitable rupture. Hard experience from childhood could scarce have rendered him a fervent Catholic, yet that experience had shown him that the favor and protection of the Church were indispensable if he would retain the remnant of territory and power that had been left to him. He could not as yet be at heart a persecutor of heresy, yet he could not afford to antagonize the Church. It was important for him to retain the love and good-will of his subjects and to prevent the desolation of his cities and lordships, but it was yet more important for him to escape the stigma of favoring heresy, and to avoid calling down upon his head a renewal of the storm in which he had been so nearly wrecked. Few princes have had a more difficult part to play, with dangers besetting him on every side, and if he earned the reputation of a trimmer without religious convictions, that reputation and his retention of his position till his death are perhaps the best proof of the fundamental wisdom which guided his necessarily tortuous course. Pierre Cardinal, the Troubadour, describes him as defending himself from the assaults of the worst of men, as fearing neither the Frenchman nor the ecclesiastic, and as humble only with the good.[18] He was always at odds with his prelates. Intricate questions with regard to the temporalities were a constant source of quarrel, and he lived under a perpetual reduplication of excommunications, for he had been so long under the ban of {12} {13} {14} {15} the Church that no bishop hesitated for a moment in anathematizing him. Then, one of the conditions of the treaty of 1229 had been that within two years he should proceed to Palestine and wage war there with the infidel for five years. The two years had passed away without his performing the vow; the state of the country at no time seemed to render so prolonged an absence safe, and for years a leading object of his policy was to obtain a postponement of his crusade or immunity for the non-observance of his vow. Moreover, from the date of the peace of Paris until the end of his life he earnestly and vainly endeavored to obtain from Rome permission for the sepulture of his father’s body. These complications crippled him in multitudinous ways and exposed him to immense disadvantage in his fencing with the hierarchy. As early as 1230 he was taxed by the legate with inobservance of the conditions of the peace, and was forced to promise amendment of his ways. In 1232 we see Gregory IX. imperiously ordering him to be energetic in the duty of persecution, and, possibly in obedience to this, during the same year, we find him personally accompanying Bishop Raymond of Toulouse in a nocturnal expedition among the mountains, which was rewarded with the capture of nineteen perfected heretics, male and female, including one of their most important leaders, Pagan, Seigneur de Bécède, whose castle we saw captured in 1227. All these expiated their errors at the stake. Yet not long afterwards the Bishop of Tournay, as papal legate, assembled the prelates of Languedoc and formally cited Raymond before King Louis to answer for his slackness in carrying out the provisions of the treaty. The result of this was the drawing up of severe enactments against heretics, which he was obliged to promulgate in February, 1234. In spite of this, and of a letter from Gregory to the bishops ordering them no longer to excommunicate him so freely as before, he was visited within a twelvemonth with two fresh excommunications, for purely temporal causes. Then came fresh urgency from the pope for the extirpation of heresy, with which Raymond doubtless made a show of compliance, as his heart was bent on obtaining from Rome a restoration of the Marquisate of Provence. In this he was strongly backed by King Louis, whose brother Alfonse was to be Raymond’s heir, and towards the close of the year he sought an interview with Gregory and succeeded in effecting it. His reconciliation with the papacy appeared to be complete. His military reputation stood high, and Gregory made use of his visit to confide to him the leadership of the papal troops in a campaign against the rebellious citizens of Rome, who had expelled the head of the Church from their city. Though he did not succeed in restoring the pope, they parted on the best of terms, and he returned to Toulouse as a favored son of the Church, ready on all points to obey her behests.[19] There he found matters rapidly approaching a crisis which tested to the utmost his skill in temporizing. Passions on both sides were rising to an uncontrollable point. At Easter, 1235, the promise of grace for voluntary confession brought forward such crowds of penitent heretics that the Dominicans were insufficient to take their testimony, and were obliged to call in the aid of the Franciscans and of all the parish priests of the city. Encouraged by this, the prior, Pons de Saint-Gilles, commenced to seize those who had not come forward spontaneously. Among these was a certain Arnaud Dominique, who, to save his life, promised to betray eleven heretics residing in a house at Cassers. This he fulfilled, though four of them escaped through the aid of the neighboring peasants, and he was set at liberty. The long- suffering of the heretics, however, was at last exhausted, and shortly afterwards he was murdered in his bed at Aigrefeuille by the friends of those whom he had thus sacrificed. Still more significant of the dangerous tension of popular feeling was a mob which, under the guidance of two leading citizens, forcibly rescued Pierre-Guillem Delort from the hands of the viguier and of the Abbot of Saint-Sernin, who had arrested him and were conveying him to prison. The situation was becoming unbearable, and soon the ceremony of dragging through the streets and burning the bodies of some dead heretics aroused an agitation so general and so menacing that Count Raymond was sent for in hopes that his interposition might avert the most deplorable consequences. Thus far, although perhaps somewhat lacking in alacrity of persecution, no serious charges could be laid against him. His officials, his baillis and viguiers, had responded to all appeals of the inquisitors and had lent the aid of the secular arm in seizing heretics, in burning them, and in confiscating their property. Yet when he came to Toulouse and begged the inquisitors to suspend for a time the vigor of their operations he was not listened to. Then he turned to the papal legate, Jean, Archbishop of Vienne, complaining specially of Pierre Cella, whom he considered to be inspired with personal enmity to himself, and whom he regarded as the chief author of the troubles. His request that Cella’s operations should be confined to Querci was granted. That inquisitor was sent to Cahors, where, with the assistance of Pons Delmont and Guillem Pelisson he vigorously traversed the land and forced multitudes to confess their guilt.[20] This expedient was of no avail. Persecution continued as aggressive as ever, and popular indignation steadily rose. The inevitable crisis soon came which should determine whether the Inquisition should sink into insignificance, as had been the case with so many previous efforts, or whether it should triumph over all opposition and become the dominating power in the land. Guillem Arnaud was in no way abashed by the banishment of his colleague. Returning from a brief absence at Carcassonne, of which more anon, he summoned for trial as believers twelve of the leading citizens of Toulouse, one of them a consul. They refused to appear, and threatened him with violence unless he should desist. On his persisting, word was sent him, with the assent of Count Raymond, that he must either leave the city or abandon his functions as inquisitor. He took council with his Dominican brethren, when it was unanimously agreed that he should proceed manfully in his duty. The consuls then ejected him by force from the city; he was accompanied to the bridge over the Garonne by all the friars, and as he departed the consuls recorded a protest to the effect that if he would desist from the inquisition he could remain; otherwise, in the name of the count and in their own, they ordered him to leave the city. He went to Carcassonne, whence he ordered the Prior of Saint-Étienne and the parish priests to repeat the citations to the parties already summoned. This order was bravely obeyed in spite of threats, when the consuls sent for the prior and priests, and after keeping them in the town-hall part of a night, expelled them from the town, and publicly proclaimed {16} {17} {18} that any one daring to repeat the citations should be put to death, and that any one obeying the summons of an inquisitor should answer for it in body and goods. Another proclamation followed, in which the name of Count Raymond was used, prohibiting that any one should give or sell anything to the bishop, the Dominicans, or the canons of Saint-Étienne. This forced the bishop to leave the city, as we are told that no one dared even to bake a loaf of bread for him, and the populace, moreover, invaded his house, beat his clerks, and stole his horses. The Dominicans fared better, for they had friends hardy enough to supply them with necessaries, and when the consuls posted guards around their house, still bread and cheese and other food was thrown over their walls in spite of the arrest of some of those engaged in it. Their principal suffering was from lack of water, which had to be brought from the Garonne, and as this source of supply was cut off, they were unable to boil their vegetables. For three weeks they thus exultingly endured their martyrdom in a holy cause. Matters became more serious when the indomitable Guillem Arnaud sent from Carcassonne a letter to the prior saying, that as no one dared to cite the contumacious citizens, he was forced to order two of the friars to summon them to appear before him personally in Carcassonne to answer for their faith, and that two others must accompany them as witnesses. Tolling the convent bel...