Note 88 — Chapter III · THE CATHARI.

The nomenclature of the heresy is quite extensive. The sectaries called themselves Cathari, or the pure. The origin of the term Patarin has been the subject of considerable dispute, but there would seem to be no doubt that it arose in Milan about the middle of the eleventh century, during the civil wars resulting from the papal efforts to enforce celibacy on the Milanese married clergy. In the Romance dialects pates signifies old linen; rag-pickers in Lombardy were called Patari, and the quarter inhabited by them in Milan was known, even up to the last century, as Pattaria, or Contrada de’ Pattari. Even to-day there are in Italian cities quarters or streets of that name (Schmidt, II. 279). In the eleventh-century quarrels the papalists held secret meetings in the Pattaria, and were contemptuously designated by their antagonists as Patarins—a name which was finally recognized and accepted by them (Arnulf. Mediolanens. Lib. III. cap. 11; Lib. IV. c. 6, 11.—Landulf. Jun. c. 1.—Willelmi Clusiens. vita Benedicti Abbat. Clusiens. c. 33.—Benzon. Comm. de Reb. Henrici IV. Lib. VII. c. 2). As the papal condemnation of clerical marriage was stigmatized as Manichæan, and as the papalists were supported by the secret heretics, followers of Gherardo di Monforte, the name was not unnaturally transferred to the Cathari in Lombardy, when they became publicly known, and it spread from there throughout Europe. In Italy the word Cathari, vulgarized into Gazzari, was also commonly used, and came gradually to designate all heretics; the officials of the Inquisition were nicknamed Cazzagazzari (Cathari hunters), and even accepted the designation (Muratori Antiq. Diss, lx. Tom. XII. pp. 510, 516), and the word is still seen in the German Ketzer. The Cathari, from their Bulgarian origin, were also known as Bulgari, Bugari, Bulgri, Bugres (Matt. Paris, ann. 1238)—a word which has been retained with an infamous signification in the English, French, and Italian vernaculars. We have seen above that from the number of weavers among them they were also known in France as Texerant, or Textores (cf. Doat, XXIII. 209-10). The term Speronistæ was derived from Robert de Sperone, bishop of the French Cathari in Italy (Schmidt, II. 282). The Crusaders who met the Paulicians (Παυλικανοι) in the East brought home the word and called them Publicani, or Popelicans. More local designations were Piphili or Pifres (Ecbert. Schonaug. Serm. I. c. 1), Telonarii or Deonarii (D’Achery, II. 560), and Boni Homines, or Bonshommes. The term Albigenses, from the district of Albi, where they were numerous, was first employed by Geoffroy of Vigeois, in 1181 (Gaufridi Vosens. Chron. ann. 1181), and became generally used during the crusades against Raymond of Toulouse.

The various sects into which the Cathari were divided were further known by special names, as Albanenses, Concorrezenses, Bajolenses, etc. (Rainerii Saccon. Summa. Cf. Muratori Dissert. LX.).

In the official language of the Inquisition of the thirteenth century, “heretic” always means Catharan, while the Vaudois are specifically designated as such. The accused was interrogated “Super facto hæresis vel Valdesiæ.”

[89] Schmidt, I. 63-5.—Muratori Antiq. Dissert. lx. (p. 462-3).—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1199 No. 23-5; ann. 1205 No. 67; 1207 No. 3.—Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 491.—Innocent. PP. III. Regest. I. 298; II. 1, 50; v. 33; VII. 37; VIII. 85, 105; IX. 7, 8, 18, 19, 166-9, 204, 213, 258; X. 54, 105, 130; XV. 189; Gesta cxxiii.

[90] Schmidt I. 38.—Chron. Episc. Albigens. (D’Achery III. 572).—Udalr. Babenb. Cod. II. 303.—Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1119 c. 3.—Concil. Lateran. II. ann. 1139 c. 23.—Concil. Remens. ann. 1148 c. 18.

[91] Concil. Turon. ann. 1163 c. 4.—Concil. Lombariense ann. 1165 (Harduin. VI. II. 1643-52).—Roger de Hoveden. ann. 1176.—D. Vaissette, Hist. Gén. de Languedoc, III. 4—Löwenfeld, Epistt. Pont. Roman. inedd. No. 247 (Lipsiæ, 1885).

[92] D. Bouquet, XIV. 448-50.—D. Vaissette, III. 4. 537.

[93] Roger. Hoveden. Annal. ann. 1178.—D. Vaissette, III. 46-7.

[94] Benedict. Petroburg. Vit. Henrici. II. ann. 1178.—Alexander. PP. III. Epist. 395 (D. Bouquet, XV. 950-960).

[95] Roger. Hovedens. Annal. ann. 1178.—Schmidt, I. 78.—Martene Thesaur. I. 992.—Rob. de Monte Chron. ann. 1178.—Benedict. Petroburg. Vit. Henrici II. ann. 1178.

Roger Trencavel of Béziers was no heretic (see Vaissette, III. 49) and his treatment of the Bishop of Albi and disregard of the missionary bishops shows the complete contempt into which the Church had fallen, even among the faithful.

[96] Concil. Lateran. III. ann. 1179 c. 27.

[97] Gaufridi Vosiens. Chron. ann. 1181.—Roberti Autissiodor. Chron. ann. 1181.—Alberic. Trium Font. Chron. ann. 1181.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1181.—Chron. Turonens. ann. 1181.—D. Vaissette, III. 57.—Guillel. de Pod.-Laurent. c. 2.

[98] Stephani Tornacens. Epist. 92.—Gaufridi Vosiens. Chron. ann. 1183.—Gualt. Mapes de Nugis Curialium Dist. I. c. xxix.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1183.—Rigord. de Gest. Phil. Aug. ann. 1183.—Guillel. Brito de Gest. Phil. Aug. ann. 1183.—Ejusd. Philippidos Lib. I. 726-45.—Grandes Chroniques, ann. 1183.—Du Cange s. vv. Cotarellus, Palearii.

[99] Lucii PP. III. Epist. 171.—Concil. Monspeliens. ann. 1195.

[100] Innocent. PP. III. Serm. de Tempore XII.—Guillem. de Tudela, c. ii.—Gualt. Mapes de Nugis Curialium Dist. I. c. xxx.—Guillel. de Pod.-Laurent. Proœm.; cf. cap. 3, 4.—Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dist. v. c. 21.—Stephani Tornacens. Epist. 92.—Anon. Passaviens. (Bib. Mag. Pat. XIII. 299).—Schmidt, I. 200.

[101] Innocent. PP. III. Serm. de Diversis III.

[102] Innocent. PP. III. Serm. de Diversis VI.; Regest. VII. 165, X. 54.—Honor. PP. III. Epist. ad Archiep. Bituricens. (Martene Ampl. Collect. I. 1149-51).

In 1250 Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln, told Innocent IV. at Lyons that the corruption of the priesthood was the cause of the heresies which afflicted the Church (Fascic. Rer. Expetend. et Fugiend. II. 251. Ed. 1690).

[103] Roberti Autissiodor. Chron. ann. 1198-1201.—Hist. Episcopp. Autissiodor. (D. Bouquet, XVIII. 725-6, 729).—Petri Sarnens. Hist. Albigens. c. 3.—Innoc. PP. III. Regest. II. 63, 99; v. 36; VI. 63, 239; IX. 110; X. 206.—Potthast, No. 9152.—Alberic. Trium Font. Chron. ann. 1200.—Chron. Canon. Laudunens. ann. 1204 (D. Bouquet, XVIII. 713).

[104] Regest. II. 141, 142, 235.—Gesta Treviror. c. 104.

[105] Villani Cronica, Lib. v. c. 90.—Diez, Leben und Werke der Troubadours, 424.—Guill. Pod. Laur. cap. 47.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 558.—Petri Sarnensis Hist. Albigens, c. 1.—Vaissette, Éd. 1730, III. 101.

[106] Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1207.—Vaissette, III. 128, 132.—Guillel. Pod. Laurent. c. 6, 7.—Regest. VIII. 115-6.—For the condition of other sees—Carcassonne, Vence, Agde, Ausch, Narbonne, Bordeaux—see Regest. I. 194; III. 24; VI. 216; VII. 84; VIII. 76; XVI. 5.

For the biography of Foulques, or Folquet, of Marseilles, who, after being favored by Raymond V., became the most bitter enemy of Raymond VI., see Paul Meyer ap. Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VII. 444. Dante places him in the heaven of Venus, together with Cunizza, the lascivious sister of Ezzelin da Romano (Paradiso, IX.). It is related of him that once when preaching against the heretics he compared them to wolves and the faithful to sheep. A heretic whose eyes had been torn out and his nose and lips cut off by Simon de Montfort, arose and said, “Did you ever see sheep bite a wolf thus?” to which Foulques rejoined that de Montfort was a good dog who had thus bitten the wolf. A more pleasing trait is seen in the story that he gave alms to a poor heretic beggar-woman, saying that he gave it to poverty and not to heresy.—Chabaneau (Vaissette, Éd. Privat, X. 292).

[107] Regest. I. 92, 93, 94, 165, 395; II. 122, 123, 298; III. 24; v. 96; VII. 17, 75; VIII. 75, 106; IX. 66; X. 68; XIII. 88; XIV. 32; XVI. 5.—Vaissette, III. 117.

[108] Petri Sarnens. c. 1, 17.—Vaissette, III. 129, 134-5; Preuves, 197.—Regest. VI. 242-3.

[109] Pet. Sarnens. c. 3.—Vaissette, III. 133, 135—Guillem de Tudela iv. My references to the poem which passes under the name of Guillem de Tudela are to Fauriel’s edition (1837). A metrical version by Mary-Lafon appeared in 1868, since when M. Paul Meyer has issued a critical edition with abundant apparatus.

[110] Regest. VII. 76, 77, 79, 165.

[111] Regest. VII. 210, 212; VIII. 94, 97; IX. 103.—Havet, L’Hérésie et le bras seculier (Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes, 1880, 582).

[112] Guillel. de Pod. Laurent, c. 8.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 1.

[113] Pet. Sarnens. c. 3.

[114] Pet. Sarnens. c. 3, 5.—Rob. Autissiodor. ann. 1207.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1207.—Guillel. de Pod. Laurent, c. 8.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1208.—Regest. IX. 185.

[115] Pet. Sarnens. c. 3, 4.

[116] Regest. X. 69.

[117] Pet. Sarnens. c. 3, 6, 7.—Regest. X. 149, 176; XI. 11.

[118] Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 557.—Hist. du Comte de Toulouse (Vaissette, III. Pr. 3, 4).—Guill. de Pod. Laurent. c. 9.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 9.—Rob. Autissiodor. ann. 1209.—Guill. Nangiac. ann. 1208.—Regest. XI. 26; XII. 106.—Guillem de Tudela, v.

[119] Regest. XI. 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33.—Archives Nationales de France J, 430, No. 2.—Hist. du C. de Toul. (Vaissette, III. Pr. 4).

[120] Alberti Stadens. Chron. ann. 1212.—Chronik des Jacob v. Königshofen (Chron. der deutschen Städte IX. 649).—Regest. xi. 234; xv. 199.

[121] Guillel. Briton. Philippidos VIII. 490-529.—Regest. XI. 156, 157, 158, 159, 180, 181, 182, 231, 234.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 4, 96.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 559, 563.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 10, 14.—Guill. de Tudela viii., lvi., cliv.—Alberti Stadens. Chron. ann. 1210.—Cæsar. Heisterb. Dial. Mirac. Dist. v. c. 21.—Reineri Monach. Leodiens. Chron. ann. 1210, 1213.—Chron. Engelhusii (Leibnitz Script. Rer. Brunsv. II. 1113).

[122] Guill. de Pod. Laurent. c. 13.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 4, 5.—Regest. XI. 232.

[123] Pet. Sarnens. c. 11, 12.—Regest. xii. post Epistt. 85, 107.

[124] Regest. ubi sup; xii. 89, 90, 106, 107.

[125] Regest. xi. 230; xii. 97, 98, 99.—Guillem de Tudela, xiii.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 10.

[126] Pet. Sarnens. c. 15.—Guillem de Tudela, xi., xiv.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 7.

[127] Regest. XII. 108.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 16.—Vaissette, III. 168; Pr. 10, 11.—Guill. de Pod. Laurent, c. 13.—Guillem de Tudela xvi.-xxiii., xxv.—Roberti Autissiodor. Chron. ann. 1209.—Cæsar. Heisterb. Dial. Mirac. v. 21.

[128] Guillem de Tudela, xiii., xiv.—Vaissette, III. 169, 170; Pr. 9, 10.

[129] Regest. XII. 108; XV. 212.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 17.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 11-18.—Guillem de Tudela, xxiv.-xxxiii., xl.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1209.—Guill. de Pod. Laurent, c. 14.—A. Molinier, ap. Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VI. 296.

Dom Vaissette (III. 172) cites Cæsarius of Heisterbach as authority for the statement that four hundred and fifty of the inhabitants of Carcassonne refused to abjure heresy, of whom four hundred were burned and the rest hanged. The silence of better-informed contemporaries may well render this doubtful, especially as Cæsarius assigns the incident to a city which he terms Pulchravallis (Dial. Mirac. Dist. v. c. 21).

[130] Regest. VII. 229; XV. 212; XVI. 87.—Fran. Tarafæ de Reg. Hisp.—Löwenfeld, Epistt. Pontif. ined. p. 63.—Lafuente, Hist. de Esp. V. 492-5.—Mariana, Hist. de Esp. XII. 2.—L. Marinæi Siculi de Reb. Hisp. Lib. X.—Diez, Leben und Werke der Troubadours, 424.—Vaissette, III. 124.—Gest. Com. Barcenon. c. 24.

[131] Pet. Sarnens. c. 16-18.—Joann. Iperii. Chron. ann. 1201.—Geoff. de Villehardouin, c. 55.—Alberic. Trium Font. ann. 1202.—Guillem de Tudela, xxxv.

[132] Pet. Sarnens. c. 17bis.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 19.—Regest, XII. 108.—Pierre de Vaux-Cernay asserts that de Montfort was able to retain but thirty knights, but this is manifestly an exaggeration.

[133] Concil. Avenion. ann. 1209.—D’Achery Spicileg I. 706.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 20-26, 34.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 20.—Guillem de Tudela, xxxvi.—Regest. XII. 108, 109, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 129, 132, 136, 137; XIII. 86.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 340, No. 899.

By a very curious exegetical effort, the Dominicans succeed in convincing themselves that Innocent’s letter confirming Albi to de Montfort (XIII. 86) is an approbation of the Dominican Order and a proof that de Montfort was a member of it (Ripoll Bullar. Ord. FF. Prædicat. T. VII. p. 1).

[134] Guill. de Pod. Laurent, c. 17, 18.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1210.—Rob. Autissiodor. Chron. ann. 1211.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 29, 35.—Guillem de Tudela, xlix., lxviii.—lxxi., lxxxiv.—Regest. XVI. 41.—Chron. Turon. ann. 1210.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 37, 52, 53.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 371, No. 968.

[135] Vaissette, III. Pr. 20, 23, 232-3.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 33, 34.—Guillem de Tudela, xl., xlii., xliii.—Regest. XII. 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 168, 169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 175, 176.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 368, No. 968.

[136] Vaissette, III. Pr. 24-5, 234.—Guillem de Tudela, xliv.—Teulet, loc. cit.

[137] Pet. Sarnens. c. 39.—Regest. XIII. 188, 189; XVI. 39.—Guillem de Tudela, lviii.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 360, No. 948.

[138] The sole authority for this extraordinary document is Guillem de Tudela (lix., lx., lxi.), followed by the Historien du Comte de Toulouse (Vaissette, III. Pr. 30. Cf. Text p. 204 and notes p. 561, also Hardouin VI. II. 1998). Though generally accepted by historians, I cannot regard it as genuine, and its only explanation seems to me that it was manufactured by Raymond to arouse the indignation of his people.

[139] Guill. de Pod. Laurent, c. 16, 17.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 43, 47, 49, 53, 54, 55.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 234.

[140] Vaissette, III. Pr. 38-40, 234-5.—Guill. de Pod. Laurent, c. 18.—Guillem de Tudela, lxxx.-lxxxiii.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 370, No. 968; 372, No. 975.

[141] Pet. Sarnens. c. 75.—Guill. de Pod. Laurent, c. 23.

[142] Pet. Sarnens. c. 60.—Vaissette, III. 271-2.—Rod. Tolet. de Reb. Hispan. VIII. 2, 6, 11—Rod. Santii Hist. Hispan. III. 35.

[143] Pet. Sarnens. c. 59-64.—Regest. XV. 102, 103, 167-76.

[144] Pet. Sarnens. c. 66.—Regest. XVI. 39.

[145] Pet. Sarnens. c. 65.—Regest. XV. 212.—A. Molinier (Vaissette, Éd Privat, VI. 407).

[146] Regest. XV. 212; XVI. 42, 47.

[147] Regest. XVI. 39, 42, 43.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 66.

[148] Regest. XVI. 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47.

[149] Pet. Sarnens. c. 66, 70.—Regest. XVI. 48.

[150] Pet. Sarnens. c. 66-8.—Regest. XVI. 87.—Raynouard, Lexique Roman, I. 512-3.

[151] Pet. Sarnens. c. 69, 70.—Vaissette, III. Note XVII.—A. Molinier (Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VII. 256).

[152] Pet. Sarnens. c. 70-3.—Guillel. de Pod. Laurent. c. 21-22.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1213.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 52-4.—Guillem de Tudela, cxxv.-cxl.—Zurita, Añales de Aragon, Lib. II. c. 63.—De Gestis Com. Barcenon. ann. 1213.—Bernard d’Esclot, Cronica del Rey en Pere, c. 6.—Campana, Storia di San Piero Martire p. 44.—Tamburini, Ist. dell’ Inquisizione, I. 351-2.—Comentarios del Rey en Jacme c. 8 (Mariana, IV. 267-8).

Don Jayme himself, then a child in his sixth year, was still in the hands of de Montfort as a hostage, and if the Catalan chroniclers speak truth, it was with difficulty that the young king was recovered, even after Innocent III. had ordered his release.—L. Marinæi Siculi de Reb. Hispan. Lib. X.—Regest. XVI. 171.

[153] Pet. Sarnens. c. 74-8.—Regest. XVI. 167, 170, 171, 172.—Guill. de Pod. Laurent. c. 24, 25.—Vaissette, III. 260-2; Pr. 239-42.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 399-402, No. 1068-9, 1073.

[154] Pet. Sarnens. c. 80, 81, 82.—Harduin. Concil. VII. II. 2052.—Innocent. PP. III. Rubricella.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 410-16, Nos. 1099, 1113-16.—Guill. de Pod Laurent, c. 24, 25.

[155] Pet. Sarnens. c. 82.—Vaissette, III. 269; Pr. 56.

[156] Radulph. Coggeshall ann. 1213.

[157] Chron. Fossæ Novæ: ann. 1215.

[158] Guillem de Tudela, cxlii.-clii.—Vaissette, III. 280-1; Pr. 57-63.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 420, No. 1132.—Pet Sarnens. c. 83.—D’Achery I. 707.—Molinier, L’Ensevelissement du Comte de Toulouse, Angers, 1885, p. 6.

[159] Pet. Sarnens. c. 83.

[160] Guillem de Tudela, cliii.-viii.—Guill. de Pod. Laurent. c. 27-8.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 64-66.—Pet. Sarnens. c. 83.

[161] Pet. Sarnens. c. 83-6.—Guill. de Pod. Laurent, c. 28-30.—Vaissette, III. 271-2; Pr. 66-93.—Guillem de Tudela, clviii.-ccv.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1217 No. 52, 55-62; ann. 1218 No. 55.—Martene Ampliss. Collect. I. 1129.—Annal. Waverliens. ann. 1218.—Bernardi Iterii Chron. ann. 1218.—Chron. Lemovicens. ann. 1218.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1218.—Chron. Turonens. ann. 1218.—Roberti Autissiodor. Chron. ann. 1218.—Chron. S. Taurin. Ebroicens. ann. 1218.—Chron. Joan Iperii ann. 1218.—Chron. Laudunens. ann. 1218.—Chron. S. Petri Vivi Senonens. Append. ann. 1218.—Alberici Trium Font. Chron. ann. 1218.

[162] Teulet, Layettes, I. 454, No. 1271; pp. 461-2, No. 1279-80; p. 466, No. 1301; p. 475, No. 1331; p. 511, No. 1435; p. 518, No. 1656.—Vaissette, III. 307, 316-17, 568; Pr. 98-102.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1218, No. 54-57; ann. 1221, No. 44, 45.—Archives Nationals de France J. 430, No. 15, 16.—Guillel. de Pod. Laurent, c. 31-33.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1219-1220.—Bernardi Iterii Chron. ann. 1219.—Robert. Autissiodor. Chron. ann. 1219.—Chron. Laudunens. ann. 1219.—Chron. Andrens. ann. 1219.—Alberici Trium Font. Chron. ann. 1219.—Martene Thesaur. I 884.—Rymer, Fœdera, I. 229.

[163] Vaissette, III. 319; Pr. 275, 276.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1222, No. 44-47.—Guill. de Pod. Laurent, c. 47.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 546, No. 1537.

[164] Guill. de Pod. Laurent. c. 34.—Vaissette, III. 306, 321-4.—Molinier, L’Ensevelissement de Raimond VI.

[165] Vaissette, III. Pr. 276, 282.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 561, No. 1577.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1222, No. 48.—Matt. Paris ann. 1223, p. 219.

[166] Alberici Trium Font. Chron. arm. 1223.—Guill. de Pod. Laurent, c. 34.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 290.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1223, No. 41-45.—Teulet, Layettes, II. 24, No. 1631.

[167] Vaissette, III. Pr. 285, 291-3.—Gesta Ludovici VIII. ann. 1224.

[168] Rymer, Fœdera I. 271.—Vaissette, III. 339-40: Pr. 283.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1224, No. 40.—Gesta Ludovici VIII. ann. 1224.—Chron. Turonens. ann. 1224.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1224.—Epistolæ Seculi XIII. Tom. I. No. 240 (Monument. Hist. German.).

[169] Vaissette, III. Pr. 284, 296.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 804.—Baluz. Concil. Narbonn. pp. 60-64.—Gesta Ludovici VIII. ann. 1224.—Concil. Montispessulan. ann. 1224 (Harduin. VII. 131-33).—Grandes Chroniques, ann. 1224.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1224.

[170] Vaissette, III. Pr. 284-5.—Schmidt I. 291.—Coll. Doat, XXIII. 269-70.—Rymer, Fœd. I. 273, 274, 281.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1225, No. 28-34.—Teulet, Layettes, II. 47, No. 1694.

[171] Chron. Turonens. ann. 1225.—Matt. Paris ann. 1225, pp. 227-9. A poetaster of the period, in describing the council, depicts Raymond’s discomfiture with emphasis:

[172] Chron. Turonens. ann. 1225.—Matt. Paris ann. 1225, pp. 227-8.—Possibly the chroniclers may be guilty of exaggeration, for the letters of Honorius only ask for a single prebend in each cathedral and collegiate church (Martene Thesaur. I. 929). In either case the encroachments of Rome were only postponed, for in 1385 Charles le Sage complained that nearly all the benefices of France were practically held by the cardinals, who carried the revenue to Italy, so that the churches were falling to ruin, the abbeys deserted, the orphanages and hospitals diverted from their purpose, divine service had ceased in many places, and the lands of the Church were uncultivated. To remedy this, he seized all such revenues and ordered them to be expended on the objects for which they had been given to the Church (Ibid. I. 1612).

[173] Matt. Paris ann. 1226, p. 229.—Vaissette, III. 349.—Rymer, Fœd. I. 281.—Martene Collect. Nova, p. 104; Thesaur. I. 931.

[174] Waddingi Annal. Minorum ann. 1225, No. 14.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 305, 318.—Teulet, Layettes, II. 75, No. 1758; p. 79, No. 1768; p. 90, No. 1794.

[175] Vaissette, III. Pr. 300, 308-14.—Teulet, Layettes, II. 68-9, No. 1742-3.—Matt. Paris ann. 1226, p. 229.—Chron. Turonens. ann. 1225, 1226.

[176] Chron. Turonens. ann. 1226.—Teulet, Layettes, II. 72, No. 1751.

[177] Matt. Paris ann. 1226.—Teulet, Layettes, II. 71, 78, 81, 84, 85, 87, 89, 90, 91, 648-9.—Guillel. de Pod. Laurent. c. 35.—Vaissette, III. 354, 364.—Chron. Turonens. ann. 1226.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1226.—Gesta Ludovici VIII. ann. 1226.

The city of Agen seems to have remained faithful to Raymond (Teulet, II. 82).

[178] Gesta Ludovici VIII. ann. 1226.—Matt. Paris ann. 1226.—Chron. Turonens. ann. 1226.—Guillel. de Pod. Laurent. c. 36, 38.—Alberti Stadens. Chron. ann. 1226.—Vaissette, III. 363.

[179] Chron. Turonens. ann. 1226, 1227.—Martene Ampliss. Collect. I. 1210-13.—Potthast Regesta, 7897, 7920.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 323-5.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1227.—Guillel. de Pod. Laurent. c. 38.—Matt. Paris ann. 1228.—Martene Thesaur. I. 940.—Concil. Narbonnens. ann. 1227 can. 13-17.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 265.

Letters of the Archbishop of Sens and Bishop of Chartres, in 1227, promising to pay to the king a subsidy for the crusade against the Albigenses are preserved in the Archives Nationales de France, J. 428, No. 8.

[180] Bernard. Guidon. Vit. Gregor. PP. IX. (Muratori, S.R.I. III. 570-1).—Guillel. de Pod. Laurent, c. 38, 39.—Teulet, Layettes, II. 144, No. 1980.—Potthast Regesta, 8150, 8216, 8267.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1228, No. 20-4.—Martene Thesaur. I. 943.—Vaissette, III. 377-8; Pr. 326-9, 335.

[181] Harduin. Concil. VII. 165-72.—Vaissette, III. 375; Pr. 329-35, 340-3.—Teulet, Layettes, II. 147-52, No. 1991-4; pp. 154-57, No. 1998-99, 2003-4.—Guill. de Pod. Laurent. c. 47.

[182] Martene Ampliss. Collect. I. 1225.—Vaissette, III. 375, 412.—Teulet, Layettes, II. 155, No. 2000.—Raynald. ann. 1237, No. 31.—Rob. de Monte Chron. ann. 1238.—Potthast Regest. 10469, 10516-17, 10563, 10579, 10666, 10670, 10996.—Cf. Berger, Les Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 2763-69.

For the sums raised in England in 1234 by selling releases of Crusaders’ vows see Matt. Paris ann. 1234, p. 276.

[183] Bern. Guidon. Vit. Gregor. PP. IX. (Muratori S.R.I. III. 572).

[184] Tertull. de Baptism, c. 15.—Concil. Chalced. Act. I.

[185] Augustin. Epist. 185 ad Bonifac. c. iii. § 12.—Cf. Cypriani de Unit. Eccles.—C. 3 Extra, v. 7.

[186] Tertull. Apologet. c. xxiv.; Lib. ad Scapulam ii.; adv. Gnosticos Scorpiaces ii, iii.—Cypriani Epist. 54 ad Maximum; de Unitate Ecclesia; Epist. 4 ad Pomponium c. 4, 5.—Firm. Lactant. Div. Instit. v. 20.

[187] Lib. XVI. Cod. Theod. Tit. v. II. 1, 2.—Sozomen H.E. I. 21; II. 20, 22, 30; III. 5.—Socrat. II. E. I. 9; IV. 16.—Ammian. Marcell. XXII. 5.

[188] Sulp. Sever. Hist. Sacræ II. 47-51; Ejusd. Dial. III. 11-13.—Prosp. Aquitan. Chron. ann. 385-6.—St. Martin could hardly have anticipated that a time would come when a pope would cite the murder of Priscillian as an example to be followed in the case of Luther; and, in spite of Maximus’s excommunication by St. Ambrose, characterize him as one of the “veteres ac pii imperatores.” (Epist. Adriani PP. VI. Nov. 15, 1522 ap. Lutheri Opp. T. II. fol. 538 a.)

[189] Chrysostomi in Matthæum Homil. xlvi. c. 2. Cf. Homil. de Anathemate c. 4.—Augustini Epist. 100 ad Donatum c. 2; Epist. 139 ad Marcellinum; Epist. 105 c. 13; Enchirid. c. 72; Contra Litt. Petiliani Lib. II. c. 83.

[190] Hieron. Epist. 109 ad Ripar.; Comment. in Naum I. 9.—Leonis PP. I. Epist. 15 ad Turribium.—Lib. XVI. Cod. Theodos. Tit. v. ll. 9, 15, 34, 36, 51, 56, 64.—Constt. 11, 12 Cod. Lib. I. Tit. v.—Novell. Theod. II. Tit. vi.—Pauli Diac. Histor. Lib. XVI.—Basilicon Lib. I. Tit. 1-33.

[191] Cod. Eccles. African. c. 67, 93.—Augustin. Epist. 185 ad Bonifac. c. 7.—Ejusd. contra Cresconium Lib. III. c. 47.—Possidii Vit. Augustini c. 12.—Leonis PP. I. Epist. 60.—Pelagii PP. I. Epistt. 1, 2.—Isidori Hispalens. Sententt. Lib. III. c. li. 3-6.—Balsamon. in Photii Nomocanon Tit. ix. c. 25.—Victor. Vitens. de Persecutione Vandalica Lib. lii.—Victor. Tunenens. Chron. ann. 479.—Sidon. Apollin. Epistt. VII. 6.—Isidor. Hist. de Regg. Gothor. c. 50.—Pelayo, Heterodoxos Españoles, I. 195 sqq.—Legg. Wisigoth. Lib. XII. Tit. ii. l. 2; Tit. iii. ll. 1, 2 (cf. Fuero Juzgo cod. loc.).

[192] Mag. Biblioth. Pat. IX. II. 875.—Chron. Turonens. ann. 878.—Concil. Ratispon. ann. 792.—C. Francfortiens. ann. 794.—C. Romanum ann. 799.—C. Aquisgran. ann. 799.—Alcuini Epistt. 108, 117.—Agobardi Lib. adv. Felicem c. 5. 6.—Nic. Anton. Bib. Vet. Hispan. Lib. VI. c. ii. No. 42-3 (cf. Pelayo, Heterod. Españ. I. 297, 673 sqq.).—Hincmari Remens. de Prædestinat. II. c. 2.—Annal. Bertin. ann. 849.—Concil. Carisiacens. ann. 849 (cf. C. Agathens. ann. 506 c. 38).—Cap. Car. Mag. ann. 789 c. 44.—Capitul. Add. III. c. 90.

For the slenderness of the disabilities inflicted on Jews under the Carlovingians see Reginald Lane Poole’s “Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought,” London, 1884, p. 47.

[193] Burchardi Decret. Lib. XIX. c. 133-4.—Gesta Episcopp. Leodiens. Lib. II. c. 60, 61.—Hist. Andaginens. Monast. c. 18.—Martene Ampliss. Collect. I. 776-8.

[194] Dom Bouquet, XI. 497-8.—Bernardi Serm. in Cantica lxiv. c. 8; lxvi. c. 12.—Alex. PP. III. Epistt. 118, 122.—Pet. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. c. 78, 80.

[195] Concil. Turonens. ann. 1163 c. 4.—Trithem. Chron. Hirsaug. ann. 1163.—Concil. Remens. ann. 1157 c. 1.—Guillel. de Newburg Hist. Angl. ii. 15.—Innoc. III. Regest. I. 94, 165.—Contre le Franc-Alleu sans Tiltre, Paris, 1629, pp. 215 sqq.—H. Mutii Chron. Lib. XIX. ann. 1212.—Böhmer, Regesta Imperii V. 110.—Muratori Antiq. Ital. Diss. lx. (T. XII. p. 447).—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. II. pp. 6-8, 422-3; IV. 301; V. 201.—Constitt. Sicular. Lib. I. Tit. 1.—Treuga Henrici (Böhlau, Nove Constit. Dom. Alberti, Weimar, 1858, p. 78, cf. Böhmer Regest. V. 700).—Sachsenspiegel, II. xiii.—Schwabenspiegel, cap. 116 No. 29; cap. 351 No. 3 (Ed. Senckenb.).—Archivio di Venezia, Codice ex Brera No. 277.—El Fuero real de España, Lib. IV. Tit. I. ley 1.—Isambert, Anc. Loix Françaises I. 230-33, 257.—Harduin. Concil. VII. 203-8.—Établissements, Lib. I. ch. 85.—Livres de Jostice et de Plet, Liv. I. Tit. iii. § 7.—Beaumanoir, Cout. du Beauvoisis, XI. 2, XXX. 11.—2 Henry IV. c. 15 (cf. Pike, History of Crime in England I. 343-4, 489).

It is true that both Bracton (De Legibus Angliæ Lib. III. Tract ii. cap. 9 § 2) and Horne (Myrror of Justice, cap. I. § 4, cap. II. § 22, cap. IV. § 14) describe the punishment of burning for apostasy, heresy, and sorcery, and the former alludes to a case in which a clerk who embraced Judaism was burned by a council of Oxford, but the penalty substantially had no place in the common law, save under the systematizing efforts of legal writers, enamoured of the Roman jurisprudence, and seeking to complete their work by the comparison of treason against God with that against the king. The silence of Britton (chap. VIII.) and of the Fleta (Lib. I. cap. 21) shows that the question had no practical importance.

[196] Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Miracular. Dist. v. c. 33.—Mosaic. et Roman. Legg. Collat. Tit. XV. § 3 (Hugo, 1465).—Const. 3 Cod. IX. 18.—Cassiodor. Variar. IV., XXII., XXIII.—Gregor. PP. I. Dial. I. 4.—Gloss. Hostiensis in Cap. ad abolendam, No. 11, 13 (Eymerici Direct. Inquisit. pp. 149-150); cf. Gloss. Joan. Andreæ (Ibid. p. 170-1).—Repertorium Inquisitorum s. v. Comburi (Ed. Valent. 1494; Ed. Venet. 1588, pp. 127-8).

[197] Concil. Autissiodor. ann. 578 c. 33.—C. Matiscon. II. ann. 585 c. 19.—C. 30 Decreti P. II. Caus. xxiii. Quæst. 8.—C. Lateran. IV. ann. 1215 c. 18.—C. Burdegalens. ann. 1255 c. 10.—C. Budens. ann. 1268 c. 11.—C. Nugaroliens. ann. 1303 c. 13.—C. Baiocens. ann. 1300 c. 34.—Lib. Sentt. Inq. Tolosan. p. 208.—Bernard. Guidonis Practica (MSS. Bib. Nat., Coll. Doat, T. XXX. fol. 1. sqq.).

[198] Honor. Augustod. Summ. Glor. de Apost. c. 5.—Ivon. Decret. IX. 70-79.—Gratiani Decret. P. II. Caus. xxiii. q. 5.—Radevic. de Gest. Frid. I. Lib. II. c. 56.—Concil. Lateran. II. ann. 1139 c. 23.—Concil. Lateran. III. ann. 1179 c. 27 (cf. C. Tolosan. ann. 1119 c. 3; C. Remens. ann. 1148 c. 18; C. Turonens. ann. 1163 c. 4).—Lucii. PP. III. Epist. 171.

[199] Böhmer, Regest. Imp. V. 86.—Innocent. PP. III. Regest. de Negot. Rom. Imp. 189.—Muratori Antiq. Ital. Dissert. III.—Hartzheim Concil. German. III. 540.—Cod. Epist. Rodolphi I. Auct. II. pp. 375-7 (Lipsiæ 1806).—Theod. Vrie, Hist. Concil. Constant. Lib. III. Dist. 8; Lib. VII. Dist. 7.—Thom. Aquin. de Principum Regimine Lib. I. c. xiv.; Lib. III. c. x., xiii.-xviii.—Lib. v. Extra. Tit. vii. c. 13 § 3.—Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1229 c. 5.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 15, 16.—Zanchini de Hæret. c. v.—Beaumanoir, Coutumes du Beauvoisis, XI. 27.—See also the sermon of the Bishop of Lodi at the condemnation of Huss, Von der Hardt, III. 5.

The treatise “De principum regimine,” though not wholly by St. Thomas Aquinas, was the authoritative exponent of the ecclesiastical theory as to the structure and duties of government. See Poole’s “Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought,” p. 240.

[200] Post. Const. 4, Cod. Lib. I. Tit. v.—Post. Libb. Feudorum.—Lib. Juris Civilis Veronæ c. 156.—Schwabenspiegel, Ed. Senckenb. cap. 351; Ed. Schilteri c. 308.—Potthast Regesta No. 6593.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Cum adversus, 5 Jun. 1252; Bull. Ad aures, 2 Apr. 1253; 31 Oct. 1243; 7 Julii 1254.—Bull. Cum fratres, Maii 9 1252.—Urbani. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 1262 § 12.—Wadding Annal. Minor ann. 1258, No. 7; ann. 1260, No. 1; ann. 1261, No. 3.—c. 6 Sexto v. 2 c. 1, 2 in Septimo v. 3.—Von der Hardt, T. IV. p. 1519.—Campana, Vita di San Piero Martire, p. 124.—De Maistre, Lettres à un Gentilhomme Russe sur l’Inquisition Espagnole, Ed. 1864, pp. 17-18, 28, 34.

A thirteenth-century writer argued the matter more directly than De Maistre—“Papa noster non occidit, nec præcipit aliquem occidi, sed lex occidit quos papa permittit occidi, et ipsi se occidunt qui ea faciunt unde debeant occidi.”—Gregor. Fanens. Disput. Cathol. et Patar. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1741).

More historically true is the assertion of an enthusiastic Dominican in 1782, who, after quoting Deut. XIII. 6-10, declares that its command to slay without mercy all who entice the faithful from the true religion is almost literally the law of the holy Inquisition; and who proceeds to prove from Scripture that fire is the peculiar delight of God, and the proper means of purifying the wheat from the tares.—Lob u. Ehrenrede auf die heilige Inquisition, Wien, 1782, pp. 19-21.

The hypocritical plea for mercy was commenced in good faith by Innocent III. in the case of clerks guilty of forgery who were degraded and delivered to the secular courts.—c. 27 Extra v. 40.

[201] Urbani PP. II. Epist. 256.—Zanchini de Hæret. c. xviii.—Innoc. PP. III. Regest. XI. 26.—Lucæ Tudens. de altera Vita II 9.

[202] S. Raymundi Summæ Lib. I. Tit. v. §§ 2, 4, 8; Tit. VI. § 1.—This continued to be the doctrine of the Church. Zanghino Ugolini includes in his enumeration of heresies neglect to observe the papal decretals, being an apparent contempt for the power of the keys (Tract. de Hæret. c. ii.). This authoritative work was printed in Rome, 1568, at the expense of Pius V., with a commentary by Cardinal Campeggi, and was reprinted with additions by Simancas in 1579. My references are made to a transcript from a fifteenth-century MS. of the original in the Bibliothèque Nationale, fonds latin, 12532.

[203] S. Thom. Aquinat. Summæ Sec. Sec. Q. XI. art. 3, 4.

[204] Cypriani Epist. I.—Chrysost. Hom. de Anathemate.—Leon PP. I. Epist. 108 c. 2.—Gelasii PP. I. Epistt. 4, 11.—Concil. Roman. II. ann. 494.—Evagrii H.E. Lib. IV. c. 38.—Vigilii Constit. de Tribus Capitulis.—Facundi Epist. in Defens. Trium Capitt.—Concil. Constantinop. II. ann. 553 Collat. VII.—Concil. Hispalens. II. ann. 618 c. 5.—Concil. Constantinop. III. ann. 680 Tom. XII.-Jaffé Regesta, 303.—Synod. Roman. ann. 898 c. 1.—Chron. Turonens. (Martene Ampliss. Collect. V. 978-80).—Ivon. Carnotens. Epist. 96; Ejusd. Panorm. Lib. v. c. 115-123.—Lucii PP. III. Epist. 171.—Lib. v. Extra Tit. vii. c. 13.—Gratian. Decret. II. Caus. XI. Q. iii. c. 36, 37, 38.—F. Pegnæ Comment. in Eymerici Direct. Inquis. p. 95.—Innocent. PP. III. Regest. IX. 213.—Lib. III. Extra Tit. xxviii. c. 12.—Lib. v. in Sexto Tit. i. c. 2.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. p. 104.

[205] Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. Introd. pp. cdlxxxviii., cdxcvi.; II. 6-8, 422-3; IV. 409-11, 435-6; V. 459-60.—Fazelli de Reb. Siculis Decad. II. Lib. viii.—Alberic. T. Font. Chron. ann. 1228.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1220, No. 23.—Richard de S. Germano Chron. ann. 1233.

[206] Mr. John Fiske has developed the contrast between the military and industrial spirit and the theory of corporate responsibility with his accustomed admirable clearness in his “Excursions of an Evolutionist,” Essays VIII. and IX.

The theory of solidarity is clearly expressed in Zanghino’s remark “Quia in omnes fert injuriam quod in divinam religionem committatur” (Tract. de Hæres. c. xi.).

[207] Ademari S. Cibardi Hist. Lib. III. c. 36.—Dooms of Æthelstan, III. vi. (Thorpe, I. 219).—Bracton. Lib. III. Tract, i. c. 6.—Legg. Villæ de Arkes § 26. (D’Achery III. 608).—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. Introd. p. cxcvi.; IV. 444.—Godefrid. S. Pantal. Annal. ann. 1233.—Fazelli de Reb. Siculis Decad. II. Lib. viii. p. 442.—Isambert. Anc. Loix Franç. I. 295.—Legg. Opstalbom. §§ 3, 4.—Treuga Henrici c. 1224 (Böhlau, Nove Constitut. Dom. Alberti, Weimar, 1858, pp. 76-77).—Registre Criminel du Châtelet de Paris, passim (Paris, 1861).—Beaumanoir, Coutumes du Beauvoisis, c. 30, No. 12.—Antiqua Ducum Mediolan. Decreta, pp. 187-88 (Mediolani, 1654).—Legg. Capital. Caroli V. c. 103-197 (Goldast. Constitt. Imp. III. 537-55).—London Athenæum, Mar. 15, 1873, p. 338.—R. Christian. V. Jur. Danic. art. 7.—Willenburgii de Except. et Pœnis Cleric, p. 41 (Jenæ, 1740).—5 Henry IV. c. 5.—Description of Britaine, Bk. III. c. 6 (Holinshed’s Chronicles Ed. 1577 I. 106).—London Athenæum, 1885 No. 3024, p. 466.

It has seemed to me, however, that a sensible increase in the severity of punishment is traceable after the thirteenth century, and I am inclined to attribute this to the influence exercised by the Inquisition over the criminal jurisprudence of Europe.

[208] Lucæ Tudens. de altera Vita Lib. iii. c. 15.—T. Aquinat Summ. Sec. Sec. Q. x. Artt. 3, 6.—Von der Hardt, T.I.P. xvi. p. 829.—Nic. Eymerici Direct. Inquis. Præfat.

[209] Galton, Inquiries into Human Faculty, pp. 66-68.—Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. IV.

As early as the fourth century the tendency of exaggerated asceticism to affect the mind was noted, and St. Jerome had the common-sense to point out that such cases required a physician rather than a priest (Hieron. Epist. cxxv. c. 16).

[210] Martene Thesaur. V. 1817, 1820.—Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 20 Mart. 1262, § 13.—Clem. PP. IV. Bull. Prœ cunctis mentis, 23 Feb. 1266 (Arch. de l’Inq. de Carc., Doat, XXXII. 32).

[211] Tamburini, Storia Generale dell’ Inquisizione, I. 362-5, 561.—Chron. Veronens. ann. 1233 (Muratori S.R.I. VIII. 626, 627).

[212] Gregor. PP. I. Homil. in Evangel. xl. 8.—Pet. Lomb. Sententt. Lib. IV. Dist. 50 §§ 6, 7. Peter Lombard even presses into service a passage from St. Jerome which had no such significance (Hieron. Comment. in Isaiam Lib. XVIII. c. lxvi. vers. 24).—St. Bonaventuræ Pharetræ IV. 50.—S. Thomæ Aquinat. contra Impugn. Relig. cap. XVI. §§ 2, 3.

[213] S. Thomæ Aquinat. Summ. Sec. Sec. Q. X. art. 8, 12.—Zanchini de Hære. c. ii.

[214] Chron. Laudunens. ann. 1198.—Ottonis de S. Blasio Chron. (Urstisius I. 223 sq.).—Joann. de Flissicuria (D. Bouquet, XVIII. 800).—Rob. Autissiodor. Chron. ann. 1198, 1202.—Rog. Hoveden. Annal. ann. 1198, 1202.—Rigord. de Gest. Phil. Aug. ann. 1195, 1198.—Guillel. Brit. de Gest. Phil. Aug. ann. 1195.—Grandes Chroniques, ann. 1195, 1198.—Jacob. Vitriens. Hist. Occident. c. 8.—Radulph. de Coggeshall ann. 1198, 1201.—Chron. Cluniacens. ann. 1198.—Chron. Leodiens. ann. 1198, 1199.—Alberic. T. Font. Chron. ann. 1198.—Geoff. de Villehardouin c. 1.—Annal. Aquicinctin. Monast. ann. 1198.—Joann. Iperii Chron. ann. 1201-2.

[215] Pet. Sarnens. c. 6.—Guillel. Pod. Laur. c. 8.—Innoc. PP. III Regest. XI. 196, 197; XII. 17.

[216] Innocent. PP. III. Regest. XI. 98; XII. 67, 69; XIII. 63, 78, 94; XV. 90, 91, 92, 93, 96, 137, 146.—Ripoll. Bull. Ord. FF. Prædic. I. 96.—Berger, Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 2752.

[217] Bremond de Guzmana Stirpe S. Dominici, Romæ, 1740, pp. 11, 12, 127, 133, 288.

[218] Bern. Guidon. Tract. Magist. Ord. Prædicat. ann. 1203-6.—Nic. de Trivetti Chron. ann. 1203-9.

[219] Pet. Sarnens. c. 7.—Innoc. PP. III. Regest. IX. 185.—Paramo de Orig. Offic. S. Inquis. Lib. II. Tit. 1, c. 2, §§ 6, 7.—Nic. de Trivetti Chron. ann. 1205.—Chron. Magist. Ord. Prædic. c. 1.—Bern. Guidon. Hist. Fundat. Convent. (Martene Ampl. Collect. VI. 439).

[220] Lacordaire, Vie de S. Dominique. p. 124.—Nic. de Trivetti Chron. ann. 1203.—Jac. de Voragine Legenda Aurea, Ed. 1480, fol. 88b, 90a.

As St. Francis had the distinguishing peculiarity of the Stigmata, so the Dominicans boasted that their founder had the special characteristic that when his tomb was opened the odor of sanctity exhaled from it was a delicious scent from paradise hitherto unknown, so penetrating in quality that it pervaded the whole land, and so persistent that those who touched the holy relics had their hands perfumed for years.—Prediche del Beato Frà Giordano da Rivalto, Firenze, 1831, I. 47.

[221] Nic. de Trivetti Chron. ann. 1215.—Bernardi Guidonis Tract, de Magist. Ord. Prædic. (Martene Ampl. Coll. VI. 400).—Hist. Ordin. Prædic. c. 1 (Ib. 332).

[222] Nic. de Trivetti loc. cit.—Chron. Magist. Ord. Prædic. c. 1.—Bernard. Guidonis loc. cit.—Concil. Lateran. IV. c. xiii.—Harduin. Concil. VII. 83.

[223] Hist. Ordin. Prædicat. c. 1, 2, 3.—Chron. Magist. Ordin. Prædicat. c. 1.—Bernard. Guidonis Tract. de Magist. Ord. Prædic. (Martene Ampliss. Coll. VI. 332-4, 400).

[224] Bernard. Guidon. Tract de Ordin. Prædic. (Martene Ampl. Collect. VI. 400, 402-3).—Ejusd. Hist. Fund. Convent. Prædic. (Ib. 446-7).—Hist. Ordin. Prædic. c. 9.—Nic. de Trivetti Chron. ann. 1220, 1228.—Chron. Magist. Ordin. Prædic. c. 3.—Constit. Frat. Prædic. ann. 1228, Dist. I. c. 22; II. 26, 34 (Archiv für Literatur-und Kirchengeschichte, 1886, pp. 209, 222, 225).

[225] Nic. de Trivetti Chron. ann. 1215, 1217, 1218.—Chron. Magist. Ord. Prædic. c. 2.—Hist. Ordin. Prædic. c. 1, 5.—Bern. Guidon. Tract. de Magist. Ord. Prædic. (Martene Ampl. Coll. VI. 401).—Hist. Convent. Parisiens. Frat. Prædic. (Ib. 549-50).

[226] Bern. Guidon. Tract. de Magist. (Martene VI. 403-4).—Ejusd. Hist. Convent. Prædic. (Ib. 459).—Nic. de Trivetti Chron. ann. 1221, 1243, 1276.—Hist. Ordin. Prædic. c. 7.—Mag. Bull. Roman. I., 73, 74, 77, 94.

An enumeration of the Dominican Order made in 1337, at the request of Benedict XII., showed about twelve thousand members. Preger, Vorarbeiten zu einer Geschichte der deutschen Mystik (Zeitschrift für die hist. Theol. 1869, p. 12).

[227] Bonaventuræ Vit. S. Fran. c. I., c. II. No. 1-4.

[228] S. Bonavent. c. II., III.

This account is doubtless colored by the result and adapted unconsciously to the successive stages of a formal religious organization. At first, however, the brethren were not expected to abandon their ordinary pursuits. They were required to follow their regular handicraft, earning their livelihood, and not living on alms except in case of necessity. See the First Rule, as reconstructed by Prof. Karl Müller, Die Anfänge des Minoritenordens, Freiburg, i. B., 1885, p. 186.

[229] Bonavent. Vit. Franc. c. IV. No. 10.—Frat. Jordani Chron. (Analecta Franciscana I. 6. Quaracchi, 1885).—Waddingi Annal. Minorum ann. 1260, No. 14.—Th. de Eccleston de Adventu Minorum Collat. 2.

[230] Frat. Jordani Chron. (Analecta Franciscana I. 3).—S. Francisci Colloq. IX.—Liber Conformitatum, Lib. I. Fruct. 9 (Ed. 1513, fol. 77a).—Potthast Regesta No. 7108.

The dates and details of the successive Rules drawn up by Francis are involved in considerable obscurity. The subject has been discussed with much acuteness by Karl Müller, op. cit.

[231] B. Francisci Regul. II.

[232] Lib. Conformitatum Lib. II. Fruct. 5, fol. 155b.

[233] Bonavent. Vit. Francis, c. 8.—Lib. Conformitatum Lib. I. Fruct. 1, fol. 13a; Lib. III. Fruct. 3, fol. 210a.—Thomæ de Eccleston de Adventu Minorum Collat. XII.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Quia longum ann. 1259—Wadding, ann. 1256, No. 19.—Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 79, 108.—Potthast Regesta No. 10308.—See also Mr. J.S. Brewer’s eloquent tribute to the Franciscans in his preface to the Monumenta Franciscana (M.R. Series).

In 1496 the University of Paris condemned as scandalous and savoring of heresy the attempts of the Franciscans to assimilate their patron to Christ.—(D’Argentré, Coll. Judic. de nov. Error. I. ii. 318.)

When the Dominicans claimed for St. Catharine of Siena the honor of the Stigmata, Sixtus IV., in 1475, issued a bull prohibiting her being represented with them, as they were reserved for St. Francis (Martene Ampliss. Collect. VI. 1386). They had not as yet been vulgarized by La Cadière and Louise Lateau.

[234] S. Francis. de Perfecta Lætitia; Ejusd. Epistt. xi., xv.—Waddingi Annal. ann. 1298, No. 24-40.—Cantù, Eretici d’Italia, I. 128.

[235] Lib. Conform. Lib. I. Fruct. 8, fol. 47.—Thom. de Eccleston Collat. I.—Frat. Jordani Chron. c. 27 (Analecta Franciscana I. 10).—S. Francis. Collat. Monasticæ, Collat. 20.

[236] Waddingi Annal. ann. 1262, No. 3, 4, 8; ann. 1273, No. 12.

[237] S. Francis. Collat. Monast. Collat. 5.—Ejusd. pro Paupertate obtinenda Oratio.—Lib. Conform. Lib. III. Fruct. 4, fol. 215a.

[238] S. Francis. Colloq. 27.—Th. de Eccleston de Adventu Minorum Collat. 1, 2.

[239] Philip. Bergomat. Supplem. Chronic. Lib. XIII. ann. 1215.—Bonavent. Vit. S. Fran. c. IV. No. 5; c. XI—Regula Fratrum Sororumque de Pœnitentia.—Potthast Regest. No. 6736, 7503, 13073.—Chron. Magist. Ordin. Prædicat. c. 2, 9.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1233, No. 40.—Nicolai PP. IV. Bull. Supra montem, ann. 1289.

[240] Chron. Augustens. ann. 1250.—Matt. Paris. ann. 1252.

[241] Pierre de Fontaines, Conseil, ch. xxi. art. 8.—Le Grand d’Aussy, Fabliaux, II. 112-3.—The existence of the “droit de marquette” has been questioned, but without reasonable ground. The authorities may be found in the author’s “Sacerdotal Celibacy,” 2d Ed. p. 354.

[242] Matt. Paris ann. 1251 (pp. 550-2).—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1251.—Amalrici Augerii Vit. Pontif. ann. 1251.—Bern. Guidon. Flor. Chronic. (Bouquet, XXI. 697). A similar extraordinary movement took place in 1309 (Chron. Corn. Zanflict ann. 1309), and another, on a larger scale, in 1320 (Guill. Nangiac. Contin. ann. 1320.—Grandes Chroniques V. 245-6.—Amal. Auger. Vit. Pontif. ann. 1320).

[243] Monach. Paduan. Lib. III. ann. 1260.—Chron. F. Francisci Pipini ann. 1260.—Gesta Treviror. Archiep. c. 268.—Closener’s Chronik (Chron. der deutschen Städte, VIII. 73, 104).—Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 617.—Verri, Storia di Milano, I. 264.

[244] Potthast Regest. No. 8324, 8326, 9775, 10905, 11169, 11296, 11319, 11399, 11415.—Ripoll. I. 99.—Matt. Paris ann. 1234 (pp. 274-6).—Wadding. Annal. ann. 1295, No. 18.—Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 174.—Ripoll II. 40.

The exemption of the Mendicants from all local jurisdiction save that of their own Orders was a source of almost inconceivable trouble in every portion of Christendom. When, for instance, in 1435, the legates of the Council of Basle were on their way to Brünn to settle the terms of pacification with the Hussites, they were called upon in Vienna to silence a Franciscan whose abusive sermons created disorder, and it was with much trouble that they forced him to admit that, as representing a general council, they had authority to discipline him. On their arrival at Brünn they found the public agitated over a dreadful scandal, the Dominican provincial having seduced a nun of his own order. The woman had borne a child to him, and no steps had been taken against him. The ordinary judicial machinery of the Church was utterly powerless to deal with him, and the precautions which the legates deemed it prudent to take before they ventured to commence proceedings show how arduous and dangerous they felt the task to be, though when they got to work they sentenced him to deposition and imprisonment for life on bread and water.—Ægidii Carlerii Liber de Legationibus (Monument. Concil. General. Sæc. XV. T. I. pp. 544-8, 553, 555, 557, 563-6, 572, 577, 587, 590, 595). This, however, seems to have been a mere brutum fulmen, as there is no allusion to any attempt to execute the sentence.

[245] Potthast No. 11040, 11041:—The usefulness of the Mendicants in aiding the papacy to unlimited domination is seen in the condemnation, by the University of Paris, in 1429, of the Franciscan Jean Sarrasin for publicly teaching that the whole jurisdiction of the Church is derived from the pope. He was forced to admit that it was bestowed by God on the several classes of the hierarchy, and that the authority of councils rested, not on the pope, but on the Holy Ghost and the Church (D’Argentré, Coll. Judic. de nov. Error. I. ii. 227).

[246] Richard, de S. Germano Chron. ann. 1229, 1239.—Potthast Regesta No. 10725, 13360.—Ripoll I. 158, 172.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. VI. pp. 405, 699-701, 710-11. Waddingi Annal. ann. 1246, No. 4; ann. 1253, No. 35-6.—Martene Ampliss. Coll. II. 1192.—Barbarano de’ Mironi, Hist. Eccles. di Vicenza, II. 73.

[247] Potthast Regesta No. 7380, 8027, 8028, 10343, 10363, 10364, 10365, 10804, 10807, 10906, 10956, 10964, 11008, 11159.—Martene Thesaur. V. 1812.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. III. p. 416.—Gest. Archiep. Trevirens. c. 190-271.

[248] Martene Ampliss. Collect. I. 1146-9.—Innoc. PP. III. Regest. XV. 240.—Berger, Registres d’Innocent IV. No. 2712.

[249] Constit. Frat. Prædic. ann. 1228, Dist. ii. cap. 32, 33 (Archiv. für Litt. und Kirchengeschichte, 1886, p. 224).—Innoc. PP. III. Regest. ix. 185.—S. Francis. Orac. xxii.—Ejusd. Regul. Sec. c. 9.—Stephan. de Borbone (D’Argentré, Collect. Judic. de nov. Error. I. i. 90-1).—Bern. Guidon. (Martene Ampl. Collect. VI. 530).—Potthast Regest. No. 6508, 6542, 6654, 6660, 7325, 7467, 7468, 7480, 7890, 10316, 10332, 10386, 10629, 10630, 10657, 10990, 10999, 11006, 11299, 15355, 16926, 16933.—Martene Thesaur. I. 954.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1227 c. 19.—Baluz. Concil. Gall. Narbon. App. pp. 156-9.

There were not many prelates like Robert Grosseteste of Lincoln, who wrote to both Jordan and Elias, the generals of the two Orders, to let him have friars, as his diocese was large and he required help in the duties of preaching and hearing confessions.—Fascic. Rer. Expetend. et Fugiend. II. 334-5. (Ed. 1690).

[250] Brev. Hist. Ord. Prædic. (Martene Ampl. Coll. VI. 357).—Extrav. Commun. Lib. III. Tit. vi. c. 8.—Concil. Nimociens. ann. 1298, c. 17.—Constit. Joann. Archiep. Nicos. ann. 1321, c. 10.—C. Avenionens. ann. 1326, c. 27; ann. 1337, c. 82.—C. Vaurens. ann. 1368, c. 63, 64.—Epistt. Sæculi XIII. T.I. No. 437 (Monument. Germ. Hist.).—Berger, Les Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 1875-8, 3252-5, 3413.—Ripoll I. 25, 132-33, 153-4; II. 61, 173; VII. 18.—Matt. Paris ann. 1234, p. 276; ann. 1235, pp. 286-7; ann. 1255, p. 616.—Potthast Regesta No. 8786a, 8787-9, 10052.—Trithem. Annal. Hirsaug. ann. 1268.—Conc. Biterrens. ann. 1233, c. 9.—C. Arelatens. ann. 1234, c. 2.—C. Albiens. ann. 1254, c. 17, 18.—S. Bonaventuræ Libell. Apologet. Quæst. 1.—Abbat. Joachimi Concordiæ v. 49.

The details of the disgusting quarrels over the dying and dead are impressively set forth in a composition attempted by Boniface VIII., in 1303, between the clergy of Rome and the Mendicants (Ripoll II. 70). The constant litigation on the subject was one of the chief grievances of the spiritual section of the Franciscans (Hist. Tribulationum, ap. Archiv für Litteratur-u. Kirchengeschichte, 1886, p. 297).

[251] Alex. PP. Bull. Quasi lignum vitæ.—Waddingi Annal. ann. 1255, No. 2.—Dupin, Bib. des Auteurs Éccles. T. X. ch. vii.

For the exemption of students from secular jurisdiction see Berger, Registres d’Innocent IV. No. 1515.—Molinier (Guillem Bernard de Gaillac, Paris, 1884, pp. 26 sqq.) gives a good account of the educational organization of the Dominicans at this period.

[252] Waddingi Annal. ann. 1234, No. 4, 5; ann. 1255, No. 3.—Brev. Hist. Ord. Præd. (Martene Ampl. Coll. VI. 356-7).—Potthast Regesta No. 15562.—Matt. Paris, ann. 1253, p. 590.

William of St. Amour was a pluralist. Not satisfied with a canonry of Beauvais and a church with a cure of souls, we find him, in 1247, obtaining of Innocent IV. a dispensation to hold another cure.—Berger, Les Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 3188.

[253] Waddingi Annal. ann. 1254, No. 3; ann. 1255, No. 5.—Brevis Historia (Martene VI. 357).—Martene Thesaur. I. 1059.

[254] Waddingi Annal. ann. 1254, No. 20; ann. 1255, No. 1.—Ripoll I. 266-7.

[255] Ripoll I. 289, 291, 296, 298, 301, 306, 308, 311, 312, 320, 322, 324, 333, 334, 336, 342, 345, 350.—Matt. Paris ann. 1255, pp. 611, 616.—Wadding. Annal. ann. 1255, No. 4; ann. 1256, No. 20-37.—Fasciculus Rer. Expetend. II. 18 sqq. Ed. 1690.—Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 112.—D’Argentré Collect. Judicior. de nov. Error. I. I. 170 sqq.—Guill. Nangiac. Gesta S. Ludov. ann. 1255.—Grandes Chroniques, IV. 373-4.—Bern. Guidon. Flor. Chron. (Bouquet, XXI. 698).

[256] Ripoll I. 346, 348, 349, 352-3, 372, 375-9.—Waddingi Annal. ann. 1256, No. 38; ann. 1257, No. 1-4, 6; ann. 1259, No. 3-6; ann. 1260, No. 10.—Clement. PP. IV. Bull. Virtute conspicuos, ann. 1265.—Dupin, Bib. des Auteurs Éccles. T.X. ch. vii.

When, in 1632, an edition of St. Amour’s works was published in Constance (Paris) the Dominicans had sufficient influence with Louis XIII. to obtain its suppression in a savage edict. All the copies were seized: to retain one was punishable with a fine of three thousand livres, and it was declared a capital offence for a bookseller to have a single copy for sale (Mosheim de Beghardis, p. 27). The “Pericula Novissimorum Temporum” had, however, been printed, with two of St. Amour’s sermons, by Wolfgang of Weissenburg in his “Antilogia Papæ,” Basle, 1555, and this was reprinted in London in 1688, and embodied by Brown in his edition of the “Fasciculus Rerum Expetendarum et Fugiendarum” in 1690.

[257] Bonavent. Apol. Pauperum. Resp. I. c. 1.—Waddingi Annal. ann. 1269, No. 6-8.

[258] Ripoll I. 338.

[259] Clement PP. IV. Bull. Providentia, ann. 1268.—Ripoll I. 341, 344.—Ptol. Lucens. Hist. Eccles. Lib. XXIII. c. 21, 24-5.—Henr. Steronis Annal. ann. 1287, 1299.—Annal. Dominican. Colmariens. ann. 1277.—Waddingi Annal. ann. 1291, No. 97; ann. 1303, No. 32.—Concil. Valentin. ann. 1255.—Concil. Ravennat. ann. 1259.—Martene Ampliss. Collect. II. 1291.—Concil. Remens. ann. 1287.—Salimbene Chronica, pp. 371, 378-9.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1298; Ejusd. Continuat. ann. 1351.—Revelat. S. Brigittæ Lib. VI. c. 63; cf. Lib. I. c. 41.—c. 2 Extravagant. Commun. III. vi.—c. 1. Ejusd. v. 7.—Ripoll II. 92-3.—P. de Herenthals Vit. Joann. XXII. ann. 1233.—Martene Thesaur. I. 1368.—c. 2 Extravagant. Commun. v. iii.—Alph. de Spina Fortalicium Fidei, fol. 61a (Ed. 1494).—Hecker, Epidemics of the Middle Ages, p. 30 (Babington’s Transl.).—Fascic. Rer. Expetend. et Fugiend. II. 466 (Ed. 1690).—Theiner Monument. Hibern. et Scotor. No. 634, p. 313.—Cosentino, Archivio Storico Siciliano, 1886, p. 336.—Concil. Salisburgens. ann. 1386, c. 8.—Gudeni Cod. Diplom. III. 603.—D’Argentré, Collect. Judic. de Novis Error, I. II. 178.

During the Black Death, of one hundred and forty Dominicans at Montpellier, but seven survived; in Marseilles, of a hundred and sixty, not one. The mortality in the Franciscan Order was reckoned at one hundred and twenty-four thousand four hundred and thirty-four members, which is a manifest exaggeration.—Hoffman, Geschichte der Inquisition, II. 374-5.

[260] D’Argentré, Collect. Judic. de nov. Error. I. II. 180-4, 242, 251, 340, 347, 352, 354, 356.—Religieux de S. Denis, Hist. de Charles VI., Liv. XXIX. ch. 10.—Gersoni Sermo contra Bullam Mendicantium.—Alph. de Spina Fortalicium Fidei. fol. 61 (Ed. 1494).—C. 2 Extravagant. I. 9.—Ripoll III. 206, 256, 268.—Wadding. ann. 1457, No. 61.—H. Cornel. Agrippæ Epistt. II. 49.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1515, No. 1.—Concil. Lateran. Sess. XI. (Harduin. IX. 1832).—Erasmi Epist. 10 Lib. XII. (Ed. 1642, pp. 585-6).

[261] Potthast Regest. No. 8326, 9172, 11299.—Martene Thesaur. V. 1816, 1820.

[262] S. Francis. Collat. Monast. Collat. XXI., XXV.—Ejusd. Prophet. XIV., XV.—Ejusd. Epist. 6, 7.—Pet. Rodulphii Hist. Seraph. Relig. Lib. I. fol. 177-8.—Th. de Eccleston de Adv. Minorum Collat. XII.—Waddingi Annal. ann. 1253, No. 30.—S. Bonavent. Opp. Ed. 1584, T.I. pp. 485-6.—Matt. Paris. ann. 1243 (p. 414).—S. Brigittæ Revelat. Lib. IV. c. 33.

[263] Bonavent. Vit. S. Francis, c. 9.—Lacordaire, Vie de S. Dominique, pp. 182-3.—Potthast Regest. No. 7429, 7490, 7537, 7550, 9130, 9139, 9141, 10350, 10383, 10421, 11297.—Raynald. ann. 1233, No. 22, 23; ann. 1237, No. 88.—Hist. Ordin. Prædicat. c. 8 (Martene Ampliss. Coll. VI. 338).—Chron. Magist. Ordin. Prædicat. c. 3 (Ibid. 350-1).—Waddingi Annal. ann. 1258, No. 1; ann. 1278, No. 10, 11, 12; ann. 1284, No. 2; ann. 1288, No. 3, 36; ann. 1289, No. 1; ann. 1294, No. 10-12; ann. 1492, No. 2; ann. 1493, No. 2-8.—Rodulphii Hist. Seraph. Relig. Lib. I. fol. 120.—Paramo de Orig. Offic. S. Inquisit. p. 238.

In 1246 Innocent IV. received a very civil letter from Melik el-Mansur Nassir, the ruler of Edessa, expressing his regret that mutual ignorance of each others’ language prevented his engaging in theological disputation with the Dominicans sent for his conversion.—Berger, Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 3031.

[264] Campana, Vita di San Piero Martire, p. 257.—Juan de Mata, Santoral de San Domingo y San Francisco, fol. 13.—Zurita, Añales de Aragon, Lib. II. c. 63.—Ricchinii Proœm. ad. Monetam, Dissert. I. p. xxxi.—Paramo de Orig. Off. S. Inquis. Lib. II. Tit. ii. c. 1.—Pegnæ Comment. in Eymeric. p. 461.—Chron. Magist. Ord. Prædic. c. 2 (Martene Ampl. Coll. VI. 348).—Monteiro, Historia da Santo Inquisição P. I. Liv. I. c. xxv., xlviii.

It is an interesting illustration of the softened temper of the nineteenth century to see, in 1842, the learned and zealous Dominican, Lacordaire, writing his “Vie de S. Dominique” to prove the impossibility of Dominic’s participation in the cruelty of the Inquisition exactly one hundred years after an equally learned and zealous Dominican, Ricchini, had claimed the Inquisition as the glorious work of the saint. Yet since the time of Lacordaire there has been a reaction, and M. l’Abbé Douais does not hesitate to state, on the authority of Sixtus V., that “Saint Dominique aurait ainsi reçu une délégation pontificale pour l’Inquisition après l’année 1209” (Sources de l’Histoire de l’Inquisition, Revue des Questions Historiques, 1 Oct. 1881, p. 400).

[265] Gregor. PP. IX. Bull. Ille humani generis. Ap. 22, 1233.—Potthast Regesta, No. 9143, 9152, 9153, 9155, 9386, 9388, 9995, 10362.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Inter alia, 20 Oct. 1248 (Baluze et Mansi I. 208).—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Coll. Doat, XXXI. fol. 21).—Archives de l’Évêché d’Albi (Ib. XXXI. 255).

[266] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1235.—Concil. Biterrens, ann. 1233; ann. 1246.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 17, 18.—Martene Thesaur. V. 1806, 1808-10, 1817, 1819-20.—Ripoll I. 38.—Aguirre Concil. Hispan. VI. 155-6.—Raynald. Annal. ann. 1233, No. 40, 59 sqq.—Waddingi Annal. ann. 1246, No. 2; ann. 1254, No. 7, 8; ann. 1257, No. 17; ann. 1259, No. 3; ann. 1277, No. 10; ann. 1286, No. 4; ann. 1288, No. 14-16.—Rodulphii Hist. Seraph. Relig. Lib. I. fol. 126b.—Potthast Regesta, No. 9386, 9388, 9762, 9766, 9993, 10052, 11245, 15304, 15330, 15069.

[267] MSS. Bib. Nat. Coll. Doat, XXI. 143; XXXII. 15.—Matt. Paris Hist. Angl. ann. 1243 (p. 414).—Guill. Pod. Laur. c. 43.—Raynald. ann. 1238, No. 51.—Harduin. Concil. VII. 1319.—Paramo de Orig. Inq. p. 244.—Wadding Annal. ann. 1238, No. 6, 7; ann. 1266, No. 8; ann. 1277, No. 10; ann. 1291, No. 14.—Potthast No. 16132.—Sixti PP. IV. Bull. Sacri Prædicatorum, 26 Jul. 1479.—Martene Thesaur. II. 346, 353, 359, 451.—Ripoll II. 82, 164, 617, 695.

The disturbances at Marseilles show the favoritism always manifested towards the Mendicants. Two clerks, whom the Dominicans had procured to depose falsely against the inquisitor, were punished with perpetual prison, degradation, and inability to hold benefices; the bishop who had listened to them was suspended from his office and jurisdiction, while the friars who had suborned the perjury and caused the whole trouble were let off with rendering humiliating apologies and transferred to another province. (Martene ubi sup.)

There has been some dispute as to whether Frà Filippo Bonaccorso was a Franciscan or a Dominican. Wadding (l. c.) prints a bull of 1277 in which he is addressed as a Franciscan, but one in the Coll. Doat, T. XXXII. fol. 155, characterizes him as a Dominican.

[268] Anon. Cartus. de Relig. Orig. c. 309 (Martene Ampl. Coll. VI. 68).—Lib. Conformitatum, Lib. I. Fruct. ii. fol. 16b.—MSS. Bib. Bodleian., Arch. S. 130.

[269] S. Bernard. Serm. lxvi. in Cantic. c. 12.—Hist. Vizeliacens. Lib. IV.—Concil. Remens. ann. 1137 c. 1.—Cæsar. Heisterb. Dial. Mirac. III. 16, 17; v. 18.—Guibert. Noviogent. de Vita sua Lib. III. c. 18.—Pet. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. c. 78.—Innoc. PP. III. Regest. XIV. 138.—Alex. PP. III. Epist. 74.—C. 8 Extra v. xxxiv.—C. Lateran. IV. c. 18.

[270] Chron. Laudunens. Canon, ann. 1204 (D. Bouquet, XVIII. 713).—Chronolog. Roberti Autissiodor. ann. 1201.—Innocent PP. III. Regest. XIV. 15; XVI. 17.

[271] Martene Ampl. Collect. I. 776-8.—Alex. PP. III. Epist. 118, 122; Varior. ad Alex. III. Epist. 16.—Hist. Vizeliacens. Lib. IV.—Guibert. Noviogent. l. c.

[272] Hartzheim Concil. German. I. 76, 85-6.—Capit. Car. Mag. ann. 769, c. 6; Capit. II. ann. 813, c. 1.—Gratiani Decret. P. I. Dist. X. I have elsewhere considered in some detail the growth of the spiritual jurisdiction of the Church, through the False Decretals, in the anarchy accompanying the fall of the Carlovingian empire. See “Studies in Church History,” 2d Ed. pp. 81-7, 326-39.

[273] S. Bernardi de Consideratione Lib. I. c. 4.—Rogeri Bacon Op. Tert. c. xxiv.—Pet. Blesens. Epist. 202.—Concil. Rotomag. ann. 1231 c. 48. For the rapidity with which the Church assimilated the Roman law see the collection of decretals by Alexander III. post Concil. Lateran.

[274] Fournier, Les Officialités du moyen âge, Paris, 1880, pp. 256 sqq., 273-4.—Cap. 19, 21, §§ 1, 2, Extra v. 1.

[275] Fr. 13, Dig. I. (Ulpian.).—Allard, Histoire des Persecutions, Paris, 1885, p. iii.—Capit. Car. Mag. i. ann. 802; iii.. ann. 810; iii. ann. 812.—Capit. Ludov. Pii v., vi. ann. 819; ann. 823, c. 28; Capit. Wormatiens. ann. 829.—Caroli Calvi Capit. apud Carisiacum ann. 857; Edict. Pistens. ann. 864.—Carolomanni Capit. ann. 884.—Guillel. Nangiac. Gest. S. Ludov. ann. 1255 (D. Bouquet, XX. 394, 400).—Ducange, s. v. Inquisitores.—Les Olim, T. III. pp. 169, 181, 211, 231, 358, 471, 501, 522, 529, 616.—Assisæ de Clarendon § 1 (Stubbs’s Select Charters, p. 137, cf. p. 25).—Stubbs’s Constitutional History, I. 99-100, 313, 530, 695-6.—Lib. Juris Civilis Veronæ c. 171 (Ed. 1728, p. 130).—Carta de Logu cap. xvi.(Ed. 1805, pp. 30-2).

[276] Reginon. de Eccles. Discip. Lib. II. c. 1-3.—Burchardi Decret. Lib. I. c. 91-4.—Gratiani Decret. P. II. c. XXXV. Q. vi. c. 7.—C. 7 Extra II. xxi.—Matt. Paris ann. 1246 (Ed. 1644, p. 480).

[277] Lucii PP. III. Epist. 171.

[278] Concil. Avenionens. ann. 1209 c. 2.—Concil. Monspessulan. ann. 1215 c. 46.—Douais, Les sources de l’histoire de l’Inquisition (Revue des Questions Historiques, 1 Oct. 1881, p. 401).—C. Lateran. IV. c. 2.

[279] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1227 c. 14.—Lucæ Tudens. de altera Vita c. 19.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1234 c. 5.

[280] Potthast No. 7260.—Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1229 c. 1, 2.—Guill. de Pod. Laur. c. 40.—Guill. Pelisso Chron. Ed. Molinier, p. 18.

[281] Concil. Arelatens. ann. 1234 c. 5.—Concil. Turonens. ann. 1239 c. 1.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 1.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 1.—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Coll. Doat, XXX. 250).—Vaissette, III. Pr. pp. 385-6.—Raynald Annal. ann. 1237, No. 32.—Archives de France, J. 430, No. 19-20.—Archivio di Firenze, Riformagioni, Classe v. fol. 80.—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 230).

[282] Lami, Antichità Toscane, pp. 484, 504, 524.—Muratori Antiq. Ital. Diss. lx. (T. XII. p. 447).—D’Achery Spicileg. III. 588, 598.—Charvaz, Origine dei Valdesi, Torino, 1838, App. No. xxii.—Isambert, Anc. Loix Fran. I. 228.—Corio, Hist. Milanese, ann. 1228-9.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. III. p. 466.

[283] De Lagrèze, La Navarre Française, I. xxi; II. 6.—Concil. Lateran. IV. c. 3 (C. 13 Extra v. vii.).

[284] Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. II. pp. 4-6, 422; T. IV. pp. 6-8, 299-302; T. V. pp. 201, 279-80. The coronation-edict, which formed the basis of all subsequent legislation against heresy, was drawn up by the papal curia, and sent, a fortnight before the ceremony, to the Legate Bishop of Tusculum, with orders to procure the imperial signature and return it, so that it could be published under the emperor’s name in the church of St. Peter (Raynald. ann. 1220, No. 19.—Hist. Dipl. I. II. 880). Nothing could seem a plainer duty to an ecclesiastic of the time than that the Church should stimulate the temporal ruler to the sharpest persecution of heresy.

It was doubtless the outlawry of heretics pronounced by the edicts of Frederic which enabled the Inquisition to establish the settled principle that the heretic could be captured and despoiled at any time and by any person, and that the spoiler could retain his goods—provided always that he was not an official of the Holy Office (Tract. de Inquisitione, Doat, XXXVI.).

[285] Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. II. p. 7.—Post Libb. Feudorum.—Post constt. iv. xix. Cod. I. v.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Cum adversus, 1243, 1252, 1254; Bull. Orthodoxœ, 27 Apr., 14 Maii, 1252.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Cum adversus, 1258.—Ejusd. Bull. Cupientes, 1260.—Clement. PP. IV. Bull. Cum adversus, 1265.—Wadding. Annal. Minor. ann. 1261, No. 3; ann. 1289, No. 20.—Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 1262, § 12.—Epistt. Sæculi XIII. No. 191 (Monument. Hist. German.).—Eymerici Direct. Inquis. Ed. Pegnæ, 1607, p. 392.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Ad aures, 2 Apr. 1253.—Sclopis, Antica Legislazione del Piemonte, p. 440.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s.v. Executio, No. 3.—Archivio di Firenze, Riformagioni, Classe II. Distinz. 1, No. 14.—Potthast No. 7672.—C. 2 in Septimo, v. 3.

[286] Isambert, Anc. Loix Fran. I. 230-33; III. 126.—Harduin. Concil. VII. 203-8—Guill. de. Pod. Laur. c. 42.—Établissements, Liv. I. ch. 85, 123.—Livres de Jostice et de Plet, Liv. I. Tit. iii. § 7.

[287] Archives Nat. de France, J. 426, No. 4.—Martene Ampliss. Collect. VII. 123-4.—Bernard. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Coll. Doat, XXX.).—Clem. PP. IV. Bull. Præ cunctis, 23 Feb. 1266.

In 1229 the Council of Toulouse had already prohibited all laymen from possessing any of the Scriptures, even in Latin (Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1229, c. 14).

[288] Raynald. Annal. ann. 1231, No. 13, 18.—Ripoll I. 38.—Ricobaldi Ferrar. Hist. Impp. ann. 1234.—Paramo de Orig. Offic. S. Inq. p. 177.—Richardi di S. Germano Chron. ann. 1231.—C. 15 Extra v. vii. (In this canon “noluerint” is evidently an error for “voluerint”).—Hartzheim Concil. German. III. 540.

[289] Constit. Sicular. Lib. I. Tit. 1.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. IV. pp. 435, 444.—Rich. de S. Germano Chron. ann. 1233.—Giannone, Istoria Civile di Napoli, Lib. XVII. c. 6; XIX. 5.

[290] Lami, Antichità Toscane, pp. 493-4, 509-10, 546.

[291] Lami op. cit. 511, 519-22, 528, 531, 543-4, 546-7, 554, 557, 559.—Archiv. di Firenze. Prov. S. Maria Novella 1227, Giugn. 20; 1229, Giugn. 24; 1235, Agost. 23.—Ughelli, Italia Sacra, III. 146-7.—Ripoll I. 69, 71.

[292] Ripoll I. 45, 47.—C. 8 § 8, Sexto v. 2.—Gregor. PP. XI. Bull. Ille humani generis; Licet ad capiendos.—Potthast No. 9143, 9152, 9235.—Arch, de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 21, 25).

[293] Potthast No. 9263; cf. No. 9386, 9388.—Guill. de Pod. Laur. c. 43.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 143, 153.—Ripoll I. 66.

Guillem Arnaud generally qualifies himself as acting under commission from the legate, but sometimes as appointed by the Dominican provincial. In several sentences on the Seigneurs de Niort, in February and March, 1236, he acts with the Archdeacon of Carcassonne, both under legatine authority. As yet there was evidently no settled organization (Coll. Doat, XXI. 160, 163, 165, 166).

[294] Vaissette, III. Pr. 364, 370-1.—Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1229.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1234.—Concil. Arelatens. ann. 1234.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 143, 155, 158.

[295] Vaissette, III. 452.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246.—Berger, Les Registres d’Innocent IV. No. 2043, 3867, 3868.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXXI. 68, 74, 75, 77, 80, 152, 182).—Potthast No. 12744, 15805.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.—Concil. Valentin. ann. 1248 c. 10.—Baluz. Conc. Narbonn. App. p. 100.

The system devised by the councils of Languedoc became generally current. In 1248 Innocent IV. ordered the Archbishop and Inquisitor of Narbonne to send a copy of their rules of procedure to the Provincial of Spain and Raymond of Pennaforte, to be followed in the Peninsula (Baluz. et Mansi I. 208); and their canons are frequently cited in the manuals of the mediæval Inquisition.

[296] Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat. XXVII. 7, 156; XXX. 107-9; XXXI. 149, 180, 216).—Vaissette, III. Pr. 479, 496-7.—Martene Thesaur. I. 1045.—Ripoll I. 194.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 30 Mai, 1254.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 24.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 20 Jan. 1257; Ejusd. Bull. Ad capiendum, ann. 1257.—Clement. PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 17 Sept. 1265.—Gregor. PP. X. Bull. Præ cunctis mentis, 20 Apr. 1273.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. passim.—C. 17 Sexto v. 2.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 580.—Albert. Repert. Inq. s. v. Episcopus.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. XV.—Isambert, II. 747.—Pegnæ Comment, in Eymeric. p. 578.

[297] Wadding. Annal. Minorum ann. 1288, No. 17.—C. 1 Extrav. Commun. v. iii.

[298] Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Ad extirpanda, ann. 1252 (Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 91).—Ejusd. Bull. Orthodoxæ, 1252 (Ripoll I. 208, cf. VII. 28).—Ejusd. Bull. Ut commissum, 1254 (Ibid. I. 250).—Ejusd. Bull. Volentes, 1254 (Ib. I. 251).—Ejusd. Bull. Cum venerabilis, 1253 (Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 93-4).—Ejusd. Bull. Cum in constitutionibus, 1254 (Pegnæ App. p. 19).—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Cum secundum, 1255 (M. B. R. I. 106).—Ejusd. Bull. Exortis in agro, 1256 (Pegnæ App. p. 20).—Ejusd. Bull. Exortis in agris, 1256 (Ripoll I. 297).—Ejusd. Bull. Delecti filii, 1256 (Ripoll I. 312).—Ejusd. Bull. Cum vos, 1256 (Ripoll I. 314).—Ejusd. Bull. Fœlicis recordationis, 1257 (M. B. R. I. 106).—Ejusd. Bull. Implacida, 1257 (M. B. R. I. 113).—Ejusd. Bull. Implacida, 1258 (Potthast No. 17302).—Ejusd. Bull. Ad extirpanda, 1259 (Pegnæ App. p. 30).—Clement. PP. IV. Bull. Ad extirpanda, 1265 (M. B. R. I. 148-51).—Ejusd. Bull. Ad extirpanda, 1266 (Pegnæ App. p. 43).—Archivio di Firenze, Riformagioni, Classe II. Distinzione, 1, No. 14.

About 1330 Bernard Gui (Practica P. IV.—Coll. Doat, XXX.) quotes the provisions of the bull as still among the privileges of the Italian inquisitors.

[299] Bernard. Guidon. Gravamina (Coll. Doat, XXX. 90 sqq.).—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1229 c. 1, 2.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 3, 5, 8.—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXX. 110-11, 127; XXXI. 250).—Vaissette, III. Pr. 528-9, 536.—Archivio di Napoli, Registro 6, Lett. D. fol. 180.—Eymerici Direct. Inquis. pp. 390-1, 560-1.—Bernardi Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).

It was sometimes a work of some labor and time for the inquisitor to obtain his royal letters-patent. When, in 1269, the Franciscans Bertrand de Roche and Ponce des Rives were appointed inquisitors of Forcalquier, they were obliged to travel to Palermo, where Charles of Anjou happened to be residing, and whence he gave them letters, August 4, 1269, to his seneschal and other officials.—Archivio di Napoli, Registro 6, Lett. D, fol. 180.—Cf. Regist. 20, Lett. B, fol. 91.

[300] Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 118.—C. 9 Sexto v. 1.—Zanchini Tract, de Hæret. c. xxxi.—Cf. Eymerici Direct. Inq. p. 561.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Statutum.

[301] Bernard. Guidon. Gravam. (Doat, XXX. 107-9).—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Cupientes, 15 Apr. 1255; Ejusd. Bull. Exortis in agro, 15 Mar. 1256.

[302] Pegnæ Append. ad Eymeric. pp. 37-8.—Zanchini Tract, de Hæret. c. xxxvii.

[303] Arch. Nat. de France, J. 431, No. 23.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Devotionis, 2 Mai. 1245 (Coll. Doat, XXXI. 70).—Berger, Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 1963.—Ripoll I. 132; II. 594, 610, 644.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Ut negotium, 5 Mart. 1261.—Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Ut negotium, 4 Aug. 1262.—Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 116, 120, 126, 139, 267, 420.—C. 10 Sexto v. 2.—Potthast No. 13057, 18389, 18419, 19559.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 136, 137.

It is curious that the question whether the commission of an inquisitor did not expire with the death of the appointing pope was still considered in doubt as late as 1290, when it was settled in favor of permanence by Nicholas IV. in the bull Ne aliqui (Potthast No. 23302). In the earlier period Alexander IV. shortly after his accession, in 1255, considered it necessary to renew the commission of even so distinguished an inquisitor as Rainerio Saccone (Ripoll I. 275).

[304] Coll. Doat, XXXI. 73; XXXII. 15, 105.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Odore suavi, 13 Mai. 1256; Ejusd. Bull. Catholicæ fidei, 15 Jul. 1257; Ejusd. Bull. Quod super nonnullis, 9 Dec. 1257; Ejusd. Bull. Meminimus, 13 Apr. 1258.—Clem. PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 30 Sept. 1265.—C. 1, 2, Clementin. v. 2.—Bern. Guidon. Gravam. (Doat, XXX. 114).

[305] Wadding, ann. 1323, No. 17; ann. 1327, No. 5; ann. 1339, No. 1; ann. 1347, No. 10, 11; ann. 1375, No. 30; ann. 1432, No. 10, 11; ann. 1474, No. 17-19.—Archivio di Firenze, Prov. del Convento di S. Croce 26 Ott. 1439.—Ripoll II. 324, 421, 570-1.—Sixti PP. IV. Bull. Sacri, 16 Jul. 1479, § 11.

[306] Eymeric. pp. 540-9, 553.—Archivio di Firenze, Prov. del. Conv. di. S. Croce, 16 Apr. 1418.

[307] Eymerici Direct. Inquis. p. 559.—Greg. PP. X. Bull. 20 Apr. 1273 (Martene Thes. V. 1821).—Zanchini de Hæret. c. viii.—Johann. PP. XXII, Bull. Ex parte vestra, 3 Jul. 1322 (Wadding. III. 291).—C. 16 Sexto v. 2.—C. 3 Extrav. Commun. v. 3.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 204).

[308] Pegnæ App. ad. Eymeric. pp. 66-7.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXXII. 143, 147).—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 537-8.—Albert. Repert. Inq. Ed. 1494, s.v. Delegatus.—Franz Ehrle, Archiv für Litteratur-u. Kirchengeschichte, 1886, p. 158.—Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 583.—Archivio di Firenze, Riformagioni, Classe V. No. 129, fol. 46, 62-70.—Martene Ampl. Collect. VI. 344.

[309] MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 4270, fol. 146. In the trial of Friar Bernard Délicieux, in 1319, it was held that he was guilty of “impeding” the Inquisition because, among other acts, he had been concerned in enlarging somewhat the powers of the agents appointed by the city of Albi to prosecute their appeal to Pope Clement V. against their bishop and inquisitor (Ib. fol. 165).

[310] Concil. Turonens. ann. 1239 c. 1.—C. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 1.—C. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 1, 21.—C. Insulan. ann. 1251 c. 2.—Tract. de Paup. de Lugduno (Martene Thesaur. V. 1793).

[311] Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXXV. 85, 184).—Ripoll II. 299, 311; III. 135.

[312] D’Argentré, Collect. Judic. I. I. 185, 234.—Harduin. Concil. VII. 1065-8, 1864.—Capgrave’s Chronicle, ann. 1286.—Nic. Trivetti Chron. ann. 1222 (D’Achery III. 188).—Bracton. Lib. III. Tit. ii. cap. 9, § 2.—Myrror of Justice, cap. I. § 4, cap. II. § 22; cap. IV. § 14.—5 Rich. II. c. 5.—Rymer’s Fœdera, VII. 363, 447, 458.—2 Henr. IV. c. 15.—Concil. Oxoniens. ann. 1408 c. 13.—2 Henr. V. c. 7.—25 Henr. VIII. c. 14.—1 Edw. VI. c. 12, § 3.—1 Eliz. c. 1, § 15.—29 Car. II. c. 9.—London Athenæum, May 31, 1873; Nov. 29, 1884.

[313] Wright, Proceedings against Dame Alice Kyteler, Camden Soc. 1843.—Wadding. Annal. ann. 1317, No. 56; ann. 1335, No. 5, 6.—Theiner Monument. Hibern. et Scotor. No. 531-2, p. 269; No. 570-1, p. 286; No. 599, p. 299.

[314] Wadding. Annal. ann. 1421, No. 1.

[315] Paramo, pp. 252-3.—Monteiro, Historia da Santo Inquisição, P. I. Lib. I. c. 59.—Ripoll II. 299, 310; III. 9, 110.

[316] Wadding, ann. 1290, No. 2; ann. 1375, No. 27, 28.

It is worthy of note that in the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem heresy seems to have been justiciable by the lay court, and the heretic knight was entitled to be judged by his peers.—Assises de Jerusalem, Haute Court, c. 318 (Ed. Kausler, Stuttgart, 1838, p. 367-8).

[317] Trésor des Chartes du Roi en Carcassonne (Doat, XXI. 34-49).—Lib. Confess. Inquis. Albiæ (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, 11847).—Archives Nat. de France, J. 431, No. 22-29.—Vaissette, III. 446.—Coll. Doat, XXVII. 161.—Molinier, L’Inquisition dans le midi de la France, Paris, 1880, pp. 275-6.

[318] Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 122.—Wadding. Annal. ann. 1265, No. 3.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Coll. Doat, XXXII. 32).—Martene Thesaur. V. 1818—C. 17 Sexto v. 2.—C. 1 Extrav. Comm. v. 3.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 539, 580-1.—C. 1, § 1, Clement, v. 3.

Urban’s bull of 1262 is virtually the same as his “Præ cunctis” of 1264, printed by Boutaric, Saint-Louis et Alph. de Toulouse, pp. 443 sqq.

[319] Vaissette, III. 515.—Archidiac. Gloss. sup. c. 17, 20 Sexto v. 2.—Harduin. VII. 1017-19.—C. 17, 19 Sexto v. 2.—C. 1, Clement, v. 3.—Concil. Melodun. ann. 1300, No. 4.—Bernard. Guidon. Hist. Conv. Albiens. (Bouquet, XXI. 767).—Albert. Repert. Inquis. s.v. Episcopus.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. I.—Ripoll I. 512; VII. 53.—Joann. Andreæ Gloss, sup. c. 13 § 8 Extra, v. vii.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 626, 637, 650.—C. 1 Extrav. commun. v. 3.—Bernard. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s.v. Bona hæreticorum.

As early as 1257 we find that the Inquisition had already extended its jurisdiction over usury as heresy (Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Quod super nonnullis [Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. Doat, XXXI. 244]—a bull which was repeatedly reissued. See Raynald. Annal. ann. 1258, No. 23; Potthast Regesta 17745, 18396; Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. Ed. Pegnæ, p. 133. Cf. c. 8 § 5 Sexto v. 2). The Council of Lyons, in 1274 (can. 26, 27), in treating of usury, alludes only to its punishment by the Ordinaries. The Council of Vienne, in 1311, directed inquisitors to prosecute those who maintained that usury is not sinful (c. 1 § 2 Clementin. v. 5); but Eymerich (Direct. Inquis. p. 106) deprecates attention to such matters as an interference with the real business of the Inquisition. Zanghino lays down the rule that a man may be a public usurer, or blasphemer, or fornicator without being a heretic, but if he, in addition, manifests contempt for religion by not frequenting divine service, receiving the sacrament, observing the fasts and other ordinances of the Church, he becomes suspect of heresy, and can be prosecuted by the inquisitors (Zanchini Tract. de Hæres. c. XXXV.).

We shall see that usury became a very profitable subject of exploitation by the Inquisition when the diminution of heresy deprived it of its legitimate field of action. As the offence was one cognizant by the secular courts (see Vaissette, IV. 164), there was really no excuse for the exercise of spiritual jurisdiction over it.

[320] Coll. Doat, XXVII. 7; XXXIV. 87.—Concil. Bergamens. ann. 1311, Rubr. 1.—MSS. Bib. Nat. Coll. Moreau. 1274, fol. 72.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan, pp. 268, 282, 351-2.

[321] W. Preger, Meister Eckart und die Inquisition, München, 1869.—Denifle, Archiv für Litteratur-und Kirchengeschichte, 1886, pp. 616, 640.—Raynald. ann. 1329, No. 70-2.—Gustav Schmidt, Päbstliche Urkunden und Regesten, Halle, 1886, p. 223.—Cf. Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 453 sqq.

The power of the Inquisition over the specially exempted orders of the Mendicants varied at times. Jurisdiction was conferred by Innocent IV., in 1254, by the bull Ne comissum vobis (Ripoll I. 252). About two hundred years later, Pius II. placed the Franciscans under the jurisdiction of their own minister-general. In 1479 Sixtus IV., by the golden bull Sacri prædicatorum, § 12, forbade all inquisitors from prosecuting members of the other Order (Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 420). Soon afterwards Innocent VIII. prohibited all inquisitors from trying Franciscan friars; but, with the rise of Lutheranism, this became inexpedient, and in 1530 Clement VII., in the bull Cum sicut, § 2, removed all exemptions, and again made all justiciable by the Inquisition (Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 681), which was repeated by Pius IV. in the bull Pastoris æterni, in 1562 (Eymeric. Direct. Inq. Append. p. 127; Pegnæ Comment. p. 557).

Whether a bishop could proceed against an inquisitor for heresy was a debatable question, and one probably never practically tested. Eymerich holds that he could not, but must refer the matter to the pope; but Pegna, in his commentaries, quotes good authorities to the contrary (Eymeric. op. cit. pp. 558-9).

[322] Concil. Parisiens, ann. 1350 c. 3, 4.—Arch, de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXV. 132).—Archives de l’Évêché d’Albi (Doat, XXXV. 187).—Eymerici Direct. Inquis. p. 529.—Sprengeri Mall. Maleficar. P. III. Q. 1.—Ripoll II. 311, 324, 351.—Cornel. Agrippæ de Vanitate Scientiarum, cap. xcvi. Yet a bull of Nicholas V. to the inquisitor of France in 1451 seems to render him independent of episcopal co-operation (Ripoll III. 301).

[323] C. 17 Sexto v. 2.—See the “Modus examinandi hæreticos” printed by Gretser (Mag. Bib. Patrum XIII. 341) prepared for a German episcopal Inquisition.

[324] Coll. Doat, XXXVII. 7; XXIX. 5.

[325] Coll. Doat, XXX. 132; XXXII. 155.

[326] Coll. Doat, XXXV. 18.

[327] Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. ad finem (Doat, XXX.). This sketch of the model inquisitor seems to have been a favorite. I find it in another MS. Tractatus de Inquisitione (Doat, XXXVI.).

[328] Gregor. PP. IX. Bull. Ille humani generis, 20 Mai. 1236 (Eymeric. App. p. 3).—Vaissette, III. 410-11.—Guill. Pod. Laur. c. 43.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append, c. 1.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 5).—Raynald. ann. 1243, No. 31.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Quia sicut, 19 Nov. 1247 (Potthast 12766.—Doat, XXXI. 112).—Ejusd. Bull. Ad extirpanda § 31.—Anon. Passaviens. (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 308).—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1809-11).—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Cupientes, 4 Mart. 1260 (Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 119).—Ripoll I. 128.—Guill. Pelisso Chron. Ed. Molinier, p. 27.—Bernardi Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 407-9.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 220.

[329] Guill. Pod. Laur. c. 43.—Vaissette, III. 402, 403, 404; Pr. 386.—Raynald. ann. 1243, No. 31.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 1.—Concil, Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 2, 5.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carc. circa 1245 (Doat, XXXI. 5).—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. it.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymerici Direct. Inquis. pp. 407-9.—Practica super Inquisit. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 227-8).—Archivio Storico Italiano, 1865, No. 38, pp. 16-17.

[330] B. Guidon, loc. cit—Ripoll I. 46.

[331] C. 2 Clement, v. iii.—Bern. Guidon Gravam. (Doat, XXX. 117, 128).—Ripoll II. 610.—In 1431 Eugenius IV. dispensed with the rule in the case of an inquisitor appointed in his thirty-sixth year (Ripoll III. 9).

[332] Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 4.—Molinier, pp. 129, 131, 281-2.—Hauréau, Bernard Délicieux, p. 20.—Wadding. Annal. ann. 1261, No. 2.—Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Ne catholicæ fidei, 26 Oct. 1262.—Bernardi Guidonis Practica, P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymerici Direct. Inq. p. 557, 577.—Archivio di Napoli, MSS. Chioccarello T. VIII.; Ibid. Registro 6, Lett. D. f. 35.

[333] C. 11, 19, 20 Extra I. 29.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 3.—Coll. Doat, XXV. 230.—Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 20 Mart. 1262.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. IV.—C. 11 Sexto v. 2.—C. 2 Clement. v. 3.—Bernardi Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymerici Direct, pp. 403-6.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxx.

It is not easy to understand why, in 1276, the Lombard Inquisitors Frà Niccolò da Cremona and Frà Daniele Giussano assembled experts in Piacenza to determine whether they had power to appoint delegates, when the question was decided in the negative (Campi, Dell’ Historia Ecclesiastica di Piacenza, P. II. p. 308-9).

[334] Archives de l’Évêché d’Albi (Doat, XXXV. 136, 187).—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. XV.—Eymerici Direct. p. 407.

[335] Coll. Doat, XXII. 237 sqq.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 30 Mai. 1254.—Bernardi Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Clement PP. IV. Bull. Prœ cunctis, 23 Feb. 1266.—C. 11, § 1 Sexto v. 2.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 4.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Prœ cunctis, 9 Nov. 1256.—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXIV. 11).—Molinier, L’Inquis. dans le midi de la France, pp. 219, 287.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 426.

[336] Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, ann. 1263, §§ 6, 7, 8 (Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 122).—C. 1 § 3 Clement v. 3.—Coll. Doat, XXX. 109-10.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 550.

The peculiar importance attached to the notariate and the limitations imposed on its membership are seen in the papal privileges issued for the appointment of notaries. Thus there is one of November 27, 1295, by Boniface VIII. to the Archbishop of Lyons authorizing him to create five; one of January 28, 1296, to the Bishop of Arras to create three, and one of January 22, 1296, to the Bishop of Amiens to create two. (Thomas, Registres de Boniface VIII., I. No. 640 bis, 660, 678 bis.)

In 1286 the Provincial of France complained to Honorius IV. of the scarcity of notaries in that kingdom, and was authorized to create two (Ripoll II. 16).

[337] Guill. Pelisso Chron. Ed. Molinier p. 28.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 6.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 31, 37.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 21.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Licet vobis, 7 Dec. 1255; Ejusd. Bull. Prœ cunctis, 9 Nov. 1255, 13 Dec. 1255.—Lib. Sentt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 198-9.—Coll. Doat, XXXIV. 104.

[338] Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXXIV. 123).—Ripoll I. 356, 396.—Vaissette, III. 406; Pr. 467.—Coll. Doat, XXXI. 105, 149.—Molinier, p. 35.—Bern. Guidon. Hist. Conv. Carcass, (D. Bouquet, XXI. 743).—Lib. Sententt. Inquis. Tolos. p. 232.

[339] Paramo de Orig. Offic. S. Inquis. p. 102.—Pegnæ Comment, in Eymeric. p. 584.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 70; XXXII. 143).

[340] Statuta Pistoriensia, c. 109 (Zachariæ Anect. Med. Ævi, p. 23).—Lib. Juris civilis Veronæ, ann. 1228, c. 104, 183 (Veronæ, 1728).—Statut. criminal. Communis Bononiæ, Ed. 1525, fol. 36 (cf. Barbarano de’ Mironi, Hist. Eccles. di Vicenza, II. 69).—Antiqua Ducum Mediolan. Decreta (Ed. 1654, p. 95).—Statuta Criminalia Mediolani, Bergomi, 1594, cap. 127.—Actes du Parl. de Paris, I. 257.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, X. Pr. 610.

[341] Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXXI. 81).—Archivio di Napoli, MSS. Chioccarello T. VIII.; Registro 3, Lett. A, fol. 64; Registro 6, Lett. D, fol. 35.—Coll. Doat, XXX. 119-20.—C. 2 Clement, v. 3.—Johann. PP. XXII. Bull. Exegit ordinis, 2 Mai. 1321.—Archivio di Firenze, Riformagioni, Archiv. Diplom. XXVII., LXXVIII.-IX.; Riform. Classe. II. Distinz. 1, No. 14.—Villani, Cronica, Lib. XII. c. 58.—Archivio di Venezia, Misti, Cons. X. Vol. XIII. p. 192; Vol. XIV. p. 29.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 374-5.—Bernard. Guidonis Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxxi.—Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 1262 (Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 123).—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s.v. Inquisitores, No. 14.

For further authorities on the subject, see Farinacii de Hæresi Quæst. 182, No. 89-94.

[342] Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 7.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. 392-402.—Gloss. Hostiens. super. Cap Excommunicamus, § Moneamus.—Gloss. Joan. Andreæ sup. eod. loc.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 1, 7, 36, 39, 292.—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 118).—Isambert, Anc. Loix Françaises, IV. 364-5.—Ogniben Andrea, I Guglielmiti del Secolo XIII., Perugia, 1867, p. 111.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Quæsivistis, 28 Mai. 1260.

As in France the office of bailli was a purchasable one, while the incumbent was forbidden to sell it, it is evident that he would be loath to endanger its tenure by risking disobedience to inquisitorial demands.—Statuta Ludov. IX. ann. 1254, c. xxv.-vii. (Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 1349).

[343] Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. 5.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 226, 308.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 8.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 34.—Practica super Inquisit. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 223-4).

[344] C. 1, § 1, Clement v. 3.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 580.—Coll. Doat, XXXI. 57.—Bernardi Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Coll. Doat, XXX. 104.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. passim, especially pp. 208-10.—Ibid. p. 300.—Archivio Storico Italiano, No. 38, p. 26 sqq.—Curiosità di Storia Subalpina, 1874, p. 215.

[345] Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Cupientes, 15 Apr. 1255.—Ejusd. Bull. Præ cunctis, 9 Nov. 1256.—Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, § 10, 1262 (Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 122).—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Zanchini de Hæret. c. XV.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisitor, s. v. Advocatus.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 143; XXVII. 156-62, 232; XXXI. 139.—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1795).—Tractatus de Inquis. (Doat, XXXVI.).—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 205.

[346] Coll. Doat, XXVII. 118, 140, 156, 162.

[347] Coll. Doat, XXVII. 118, 131, 133.—Eymerici Direct. Inq. p. 630.—Bernard. Comens. Lucerna Inquisitor. s. v. Advocatus.

[348] Lami, Antichità Toscane, pp. 557-9.—Coll. Doat, XXXI. 139.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Prœ cunctis, § 15, 9 Nov. 1256.

[349] Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 503-12.—Doctrina de modo Procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1795-6).—Tract. de Paup. de Lugduno (Ib. 1792).—Lib. Sententt. Inquis. Tolosan. pp. 1, 6, 39, 98.

[350] Lib. Sententt. Inquis. Tolosan. pp. 37, 39-93, 99-175, 178-9.

[351] Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 252-4.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, 11847 ad finem.—Arch. de l’Inquis. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 83, 94-5).—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. v.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Cupientes, 4 Mart. 1260.—Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, § 11, 1262.—Ejusd. Bull. Prœ cunctis, 2 Aug. 1264.—C. 2 Sexto v. 2.—Bern. Guidon Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. viii.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 20.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 461-5.

[352] Archivio di Napoli, Registro 3, Lett. A, fol. 64.—Wadding. ann. 1359, No. 1-3.

[353] Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 350-1.

[354] Ripoll I. 285.

[355] Ripoll I. 434.—Pegnæ Comment. in Eymeric. pp. 406-7.—Wadding. Annal. Regest. Nich. PP. III. No. 10.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXII. 101).—Raynald. ann. 1278, No. 78.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 218.

[356] Paramo de Orig. Offic. S. Inquis. pp. 124-5.—Wadding. Annal. ann. 1294, No. 1.—Milman, Latin Christianity, IV. 487.

[357] Arch. de l’Inquis. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 5, 103).—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. ix.

In the Cismontane Inquisition the preliminary oath seems only to pledge the accused to tell the truth as to himself and others (Eymeric. p. 421). In Italy, however, it was the more elaborate affair described in the text. In the trials of the Guglielmites at Milan, in 1300, the accused were, in addition, made to impose on themselves, in case of violating its pledges, a forfeit varying from ten to fifty imperial lire, to secure which they pledged to the inquisitor all their property, real and personal, and renounced all legal defence. Moreover, this pecuniary penalty was not to relieve them from the canonical punishment attendant upon the non-fulfilment of the obligations assumed. This, I presume, was the official formula customary in the Lombard Inquisition.—Ogniben Andrea, I Guglielmiti del Secolo XIII., Perugia, 1867, pp. 5-6, 13, 27, 35, 37, etc.

In some witch trials of 1474 in Piedmont the oath to tell the truth was enforced with excommunication and “tratti di corde,” or infliction of the torture known as the strappado, varying from ten to twenty-five times—and also with pecuniary forfeits.—P. Vayra (Curiosità di Storia Subalpina, 1875, pp. 682, 693).

[358] Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. ii.

[359] Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 413-17.—Archivio di Napoli, Reg. 138, Lett. F, fol. 105.

To appreciate the contrast between the processes of the Inquisition and of the secular courts, it will suffice to allude to the practice of the latter in Milan in the first half of the fourteenth century. An accuser bringing a criminal action was obliged to inscribe himself and to furnish ample security that in case of failure he would undergo the fitting penalty and indemnify the accused for all expenses; in default of security he was to remain in jail until the end of the trial. The judge was, moreover, bound to render his decision within three months.

If the judge proceeded by inquisition he was obliged to give the accused notice in advance. The latter was entitled to counsel and to have the names and testimony of the witnesses communicated to him, and the judge was required, under a penalty of fifty lire, to complete the matter within thirty days.—Statuta Criminalia Mediolani, e tenebris in lucem edita, Bergami, 1594, c. 1-3, 153.

It is true that, under the influence of the Inquisition, the lay courts outgrew these wholesome provisions against injustice, but meanwhile it is important to bear them in mind when considering the secrecy, the delays, and the practical denial of justice in every way which characterized the proceedings against heretics. The gradual demoralization of the secular courts under these influences was a subject of complaint. In 1329 the consuls of Béziers represented to Philippe de Valois that his judges were neglecting to take from accusers proper security to indemnify the accused in case of the failure of the prosecution, and the king promptly ordered the abuse to be corrected.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, X. Pr. 687.

[360] Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1805).—Molinier, L’Inquisition dans le midi de la France, pp. 186-7.

[361] Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1229 c. 10.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1244 c. 31.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 5.—Modus examinandi hæreticos (Mag. Bib. Patrum XIII. 341).—Joan. Andreæ Gloss. sup. c. 13 Sexto v. 2.—Pegnæ Comment. in Eymeric. p. 490.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s. vv. Minor, Torturœ No. 33.

[362] C. 8 Extra II. 14.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 19.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 8; Append. c. 14.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. VI.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 143.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 382, 495, 528-31.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 175, 367-74.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. ii., viii., ix.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 221.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. vv. Contumax, Convincitur.—Concil. Lateran. IV. ann. 1215 c. 28.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. II. p. 4.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 28.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Consultationi vestrœ, 28 Mai. 1260.—C. 13 Extra. v. 38 (cf. Concil. Trident. Sess. 25 de Reform. c. 3).—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXXI. 83).—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Procedere, No. 10.

[363] Muratori, Antiquitat. Ital. Dissert. 60.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxiv., xl.—Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 497.

[364] Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Præ cunctis, § 11, 9 Nov. 1256.—Ejusd. Bull. Cupientes, 10 Dec. 1257; 4 Mart. 1264.—Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 1262 (Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 122).—Ejusd. Bull. Præ cunctis, 2 Aug. 1264.—Clement. PP. IV. Bull. Præ cunctis, 23 Feb. 1266.—C. 20 Sexto v. 2.—Joan. Andreæ Gloss. sup. cod.—C. 2 Clement. v. 11.—Bernardi Guidonis Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 583.

[365] Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1811-12).—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 16.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 156, 162, 178).—Bern. Guidon. Gravamina (Doat, XXX. 102).—Ejusd. Practica (Doat, XXIX. 94).—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 631-33.—Jacob. Laudens. Orat. ad Concil. Constant. (Von der Hardt. III. 60).—Paramo de Orig. Offic. S. Inquis. pp. 32-33.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. ix.

[366] Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 413, 418, 423-4, 461-5, 521-4.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. ix.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Impœnitens.—Albertin. Repert. Inquis. s. v. Cautio.

The contrast between this and the secular jurisprudence of the thirteenth century is illustrated in the charter granted by Alphonse of Poitiers to the town of Auzon (Auvergne), about 1260. Any one accused of crime by common report could clear himself by his own oath and that of a single legal conjurator, unless there was a legitimate plaintiff or accuser; and no one could be tried by the inquisitorial process without his own consent.—Chassaing, Spicilegium Brivateuse, Paris, 1886, p. 92.

[367] Bernard. Guidon. Practica P. IV., v. (Doat, XXX.).—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append, c. 16.—Tractat. de Paup. de Lugdun. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1791-4).—Anon. Passaviens. (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 308).—Const, xvi. Cod. I., v.—Molinier, L’Inquisition dans le midi de la France, p. 240.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. p. 147,—Epist. Petri Card. Alban. (Doat, XXXI. 5).—Bernard. Guidon. Gravamina (Doat, XXX. 114).

[368] Bernard. Guidon. Practica P. v.(Doat, XXX.).—Modus examinandi Hæreticos (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 342).—Tractat. de Paup. de Lugd. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1793-4).—MS. Vatican, No. 8668(Ricchini, Prolog.ad Monetam, p. xxiii.).—Anon. Passav.(Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 301).—Molinier, L’Inq. dans le midi de la France, p. 234.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Quod super nonnullis, § 10, 15 Dec. 1258.

[369] Tract, de Paup. de Lugduno (Martene Thes. V. 1792).—Cf. Bernard. Guidon. Practica P. v. (Doat, XXX.).

[370] Practica super Inquisitione (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 221).

[371] Tract. de Paup. de Lugduno (Martene Thesaur. V. 1793).—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 433-4.—Modus examinandi Hæreticos (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 341).

[372] Tract, de Paup. de Lugduno (Martene Thesaur. V. 1787-88).—Eymeric. p, 434.—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXVII. 150).

[373] Wadding. Annal. ann. 1228, No. 45.—Nideri Formicar. Lib. III. c. 10.

[374] Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. 514, 521.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 17.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Illius vicis, 12 Nov. 1247.—Lib. Confess. Inq. Albiens. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, 11847).—Bernard. Guidon. Practica P. v. (Doat, XXX.).—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1795).—Molinier, l’Inq. dans le midi de la France, p. 330.—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXVII. 7 sqq.).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 22, 76, 102, 118-50, 158-62, 184, 216-18, 220-1, 228, 244-8, 266-7, 282-5.—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXIV. 89).—Archives de l’hôtel-de-ville d’Albi (Doat, XXXIV. 45).—Coll. Doat, XXXIV. 189.

[375] Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 57).—Vaissette, III. Pr. 551-3.—Tract, de Paup. de Lugd. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1787).—Joann. Andreæ Gloss, sup. c. 1, Clement, v. 3.—Bernard. Guidon. Practica P. v. (Doat. XXX.).—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXIV. 45).

[376] Superstition and Force, 3d Ed. 1878, pp. 419-20.—Lib. Jur. Civ. Veronæ, ann. 1228, c. 75.—Constit. Sicular. Lib. I. Tit. 27.—Frid. II. Edict. 1220. § 5.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Ad extirpanda, § 26.—Concil. Autissiodor. ann. 578 c. 33.—Concil. Matiscon. II. ann. 585 c. 19.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Ut negotium, 7 Julii, 1256 (Doat, XXXI. 196); Ejusd. Bull. Ne inquisitionis, 19 Apr. 1259.—Urban. PP. IV. Bull. Ut negotium, 1260, 1262 (Ripoll, I. 430; Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 132).—Clement. PP. IV. Bull. Ne inquisitionis, 13 Jan. 1266.—Bern. Guidon. Pract. P. IV. (Doat. XXX.).—Pegnæ Comment. in Eymeric. p. 593.—Archivio di Napoli, MSS. Chioccarello, T. VIII.—Historia Tribulationum (Archiv für Litt. u. Kirchengeschichte, 1886, p. 324).

The earliest allusion to the use of torture in Languedoc is in 1254, when St. Louis forbade its use on the testimony of a single witness, even in the case of poor persons.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 1348.

[377] Chassaing, Spicilegium Brivatense, p. 92.—Vaissette, IV. Pr. 97-8.—Archives de l’hôtel-de-ville d’Albi (Doat, XXXIV. 45 sqq.).—Lib. Confess. Inq. Albiens. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, 11847).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 46-78, 132, 169-74, 180-2, 266-7.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. v. (Doat, XXX.).

[378] C. 1, § 1, Clement, v. 3.—Bern. Guidon. Gravamina (Doat, XXX. 100, 120).—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 422.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xv.

[379] Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 453-5.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. v. (Doat, XXX.).—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. ix., xiv.—Processus contra Waldenses (Archivio Storico Italiano, No. 38, pp. 20, 22, 24, etc.).—Pauli de Leazariis Gloss. sup. c. 1, Clem. v. 3.—Silvest. Prieriat. de Strigimagar. Mirand. Lib. III. c. 1.—Bernard. Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. vv. Jejunia, Torturœ.

That the Clementines had practically fallen into desuetude is shown by Carlo III. of Savoy, in 1506, procuring from Julius II. as a special privilege that in his territories the inquisitors should not send to prison or pronounce sentence without the concurrence of the episcopal ordinaries, and this was enlarged in 1515 by Leo X. by requiring their assent for all arrests.—Sclopis, Antica Legislazione del Piemont. p. 484.

[380] Eymeric. pp. 480, 592, 614.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. ix.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s. vv. Indicium, Torturœ No. 19, 25.

[381] Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 480-2.—MSS. Bib. Nat., funds latin, No. 4270, fol. 101, 146.—Responsa prudentum (Doat, XXXVII. 83 sqq.).—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s. vv. Confessio, Torturœ.

The care with which the inquisitors concealed the means by which confessions were procured is illustrated in the ratification obtained from Guillem Salavert in 1303, of his confession made three years before. He is made to declare it “esse veram, non factam vi tormentorum, amore, gratia, odio, timore, vel favore alicujus, non subornatus nec inductus minis vel blanditiis, seu seductus per aliquem, non amens nec stultus sed bona mente,” etc. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 11847). Yet Salavert belonged to a group of victims on whom, as we shall see hereafter, torture was unsparingly used.

[382] Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. p. 481.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s. vv. Confessio, Impœnitens, Torturœ No. 48.—Responsa prudentum (Doat, XXXVII. 83 sqq.)—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXVII. 126; XXXII. 251).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 266-7.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxiii.

[383] Fortescue de Laudibus Legum Angliæ, c. xxvii.

[384] Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. vv. Infamia, Inquisitores No. 7.

[385] Fournier, Les officialités an moyen âge, pp. 177-8.—C. 14 Extra II. 23.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).

[386] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 29.—Trésor des chartes du roi en Carcassonne (Doat, XXI. 34).—Molinier, L’Inquisition dans le midi de la France, p. 342.—Livres de Jostice et de Plet, Liv. I. Tit. iii. § 7.

[387] Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 27.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. IX.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Lib. Confess. Inq. Albiens. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, 11847).—Ripoll, I. 72.

[388] Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 376-81.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. iii.

[389] Archidiaconi Gloss. super c. xi. § 1 Sexto v. 2.—Joann. Andreæ Gloss. sup. c. xiii. § 7 Extra v. 7.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 445, 615-16.—Guid. Fulcodii Quæst. XIV.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xiii., xiv.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).

In the lay courts, if a witness swore to the innocence of the accused and subsequently changed his testimony, the first statement was held good and the second was rejected, but in cases of heresy the incriminating evidence was always received.—Ponzinibii de Lamiis c. 84.

[390] C. 17 Cod. IX. ii. (Honor. 423).—Pseudo-Julii Epist. II. c. 18 (Gratiani Decret.) P. II. caus. v. Q. 3, c. 5.—Pseudo-Eutychiani Epist. ad Episcopp. Siciliæ.—Gratiani Comment. in Decret. P. II. caus. II. Q. 7, c. 22; caus. VI. Q. 1, c. 19.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. IV. pp. 299-300.—Guill. Pod. Laur. c. 40.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Consuluit, 6 Mai. 1260 (Doat, XXXI. 205); Ejusd. Bull. Quod super non nullis, 9 Dec. 1257; 15 Dec. 1258.—C. 5 Sexto v. 2.—C. 8 § 3 Sexto v. 2.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 12.—Jacob. Laudun. Orat. in Conc. Constant. (Von der Hardt III. 60).—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 221.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xi., xiii.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 602-6.

Under the contemporary English law, criminals and accomplices were rejected as accusers, even in high-treason (Bracton, Lib. III. Tract. ii. cap. 3, No. 1).

[391] Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Testis, No. 14.—Concil Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 18.—Coll. Doat, XXII. 237 sqq.

In the German feudal law of the period no witness was admitted below the age of eighteen.—Sächsisches Lehenrechtbuch, c. 49 (Daniels, Berlin, 1863, p. 113).

[392] Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 611-13.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 25.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 14.—Arch, de l’Inq. de Carcass, (Doat, XXXI. 149).

[393] Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. VIII.—Pegnæ Comment. in Eymeric. p. 601.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xiii.—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1802).

Heresy, of course, was a “reserved” case for which the ordinary confessor could not give absolution. Thus a man of Realmont in Albigeois who repented of having been present at a Catharan conventicle went to a Franciscan and confessed, accepting the penance imposed of the minor pilgrimages and some other penitential acts. On his return from their performance, however, he was seized by the Inquisition, tried and imprisoned.—Vaissette, IV. 41.

[394] Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s.v. Probatio, No. 3.—Archidiac. Gloss. sup. c. xi. § 1 Sexto v. 2.—Guill. Pod. Laur. c. 40.—Bern. Guidon. Gravamina (Doat, XXX. 102).—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 22.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 4, 10.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carc. (Doat, XXXI. 5).—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Cum negotium, 9 Mart. 1254; Ejusd. Bull. Ut commissum, 21 Jun. 1254.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Licet vobis, 7 Dec. 1255; Ejusd. Bull. Prœ cunctis, § 6, 9 Nov. 1256; Ejusd. Bull. Super extirpatione, § 9, 1258.—Clem. PP. IV. Bull. Licet ex omnibus, 17 Sep. 1265.—Ejusd. Bull. Prœ, cunctis, 23 Feb. 1266.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. xv.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 221.—C. 20 Sexto v. 2.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. iv. (Doat, XXX.).—Responsa Prudentum (Doat, XXXVII.).—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 450, 610, 614, 626, 627. Cf. Pegnæ Comment, pp. 627-8.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 4270.—Bernardi Comens, Lucerna Inquisit. s.v. Nomina.—Mladenovic Relatio (Palacky Documenta Joannis Hus, pp. 252-3).

[395] Responsa Prudentum (Doat, XXXVII.).—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s. v. Tradere.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. ix.

[396] Lib. Confess. Inq. Albiens. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, 11847).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 96-7, 180, 393.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXVII. 118, 133, 140, 149, 178, 204-16).—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 521.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xiv.

[397] Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 297, 393.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 119, 133, 140, 241).—Pegnæ Comment. in Eymeric. p. 625.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret c. xiv.

[398] Concil. Lateran IV. ann. 1215 c. 8.

So, in 1254, St. Louis orders that in all criminal cases where the inquisitorial process is used, the whole proceedings shall be submitted to the accused.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 1348.

[399] Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append, c. 8.—Concil. Campinacens. ann. 1238 c. 14.—Contre le Franc-Alleu sans Tiltre, Paris, 1629, p. 216.—Fournier, Les Officialités, etc. p. 289.—C. 11, Extra v. 7.—Concil. Valentin, ann. 1248 c. 11.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 23.—Bernard. Guidon. Practica. P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 446, 452, 565, 568.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 220.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisitor, s. vv. Advocatus, Defensor.—C. 13, § 7, Extra v. 7.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Cupientes, 4 Mart. 1260.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXIV. 123).—Vaissette, IV. 72.

[400] Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. xv.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 446, 450, 607, 610, 614.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. ix., xli.—Litt. Petri Albanens. (Doat, XXXI. 5).

In the register of the Inquisition of Carcassonne from 1249 to 1258 M. Molinier has found two cases in which the accused was allowed to introduce evidence in his favor. In one of these G. Vilanière called two witnesses to prove an alibi; in the other Guilleim Nègre brought forward a letter of reconciliation and penitence. In neither case was the defendant successful (L’Inq. dans le midi de la France, p. 346).

[401] Coll. Doat, XXXI. 149.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s.v. Taciturnitas.

[402] Registre de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, Nouv. Acquis. 139, f. 33, 44, 62).—Practica super Inquisitione (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 212).

[403] Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 18.—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1813).—Coll. Doat, XXVII. 97-8; XXIX. 27; XXXIV. 123; XXXV. 61; XXXVIII. 166.—Lib. Sententt. Inquis. Tolosan. pp. 33-4.—Molinier, L’Inquis. dans le midi de la France, p. 287.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Olim ex parte, 24 Sept.; 13 Oct. 1258; Urbani PP. IV. Bull. Idem, 21 Aug. 1262 (Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 117).

[404] Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s.v. Recusatio.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Zanchini Tract, de Hæret. c. ii., vii.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 26.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 9.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 572.

[405] MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 4270, fol. 139.

[406] Pegnæ Comment. in Eymeric. p. 675.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxix.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 453-55.—Grandes Chroniques. ann. 1323.—Guill. Nangiac. Contin. ann. 1323.—Chron. de Jean de S. Victor. Contin. ann. 1323.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisitor, s. vv. Appellatio, Exceptio No. 2.

[407] Vaissette, III. 462; Pr. 447.—Coll. Doat, XXXI. 152, 169, 283; XXXII. 69; XXXV. 134.—Potthast No. 10292, 10311, 10317, 18723, 18895.—Ripoll, I. 287.—Coll. Doat, XXXV. 134.

[408] Molinier, L’Inquisition dans le midi de la France, pp. 332-33.—Responsa Prudentum (Doat, XXXVII.).—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. v. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. p. 474.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xli.

[409] C. 1 Clement, v. 3.—Bern. Guidon. Gravamina (Doat, XXX. 112).

[410] Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. II. p. 4.—Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1229 c. 18.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 16.—Concil. Tarraconens. ann. 1242.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 376-8, 380-4, 494-5, 500.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 31, 36.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. v., vii., xx.—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1802).—Gersonis de Protestatione consid. xii.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Præsumptio, No. 5.—Isambert, Anc. Loix Françaises, IV. 364.

It is somewhat remarkable that Cornelius Agrippa maintains that the law expressly forbade the Inquisition from meddling with cases involving mere suspicion, or the defending, reception, and favoring of heretics (De Vanitate Scientiarum, cap. xcvi.).—His contemporary, the learned jurist Ponzinibio, calls special attention to the fact that mere suspicion, even when not accompanied by evil report, is sufficient to justify proceedings in case of heresy, though not in other crimes.—(Ponzinibii de Lamiis c. 88).

[411] Concil. Tarraconens. ann. 1242.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 376-8, 475-6.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s. vv. Practica, Purgatio.—Albertini Repertor. Inquisit. s. v. Deficiens.—Gregor. PP. XI. Bull. Excommunicamus, 20 Aug. 1229.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. vii., xvii.—Martini App. ad Mosheim de Beghardis, p. 537.

[412] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 6, 12.—Muratori Antiq. Ital. Dissert. lx.—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1800-1).—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 376, 486-7, 492-8.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. pp. 67, 215.

[413] Guid. Fulcod. Quæstt. XIII., XV.—Ripoll, I. 254.—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 139).—Archives de l’Évêché d’Albi (Doat, XXXV. 69).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. p. 32.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 465, 643.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. XX.

In the sentences of Bernard de Caux, 1246-8, though imprisonment is treated as a penance, the expression is more mandatory than in later proceedings (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, 9992).

[414] Arch. de l’Évêché d’Albi (Doat, XXXV. 69).—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 232).—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1234 c. 5.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 29.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 506-7.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xvi.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. XV.

[415] Tamburini, Istoria dell’ Inquisizione, I. 492-502.—Bern. Corio, Hist. di Milano, ann. 1252.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 201).—Ripoll, I. 244, 280, 389.

[416] Concil. Tarraconens. ann. 1242.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Noverit universitas, 1254 (Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 103).—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.)—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 368-72, 376-8.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxxiii.

[417] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 3.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 28.—Coll, Doat, XXI. 200.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.

[418] Paramo de Orig. Offic. S. Inquis. Lib. II. Tit. i. c. 2, § 6.—Martene Thesaur. I. 802.—Coll. Doat, XXXI. 1.

[419] Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 255).—Coll. Doat, XXVII. 136.

[420] Concil. Tarraconens. ann. 1242.—Concil. Narbonnens. ann. 1244 c. 1.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 6.—Bern. Guidon. Practica (Doat, XXIX. 54).—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 214.

[421] Coll. Doat, XXI. 222.—Wadding. Annal. ann. 1300, No. 1.—Cf. Molinier, L’Inq. dans le midi de la France, pp. 400-1.

[422] Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXVII. 11).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 1, 340-1.

[423] Wadding. Annal. ann. 1238, No. 7.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 2.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append, c. 26, 29.—Berger, Les Registres d’Innocent IV. No. 3508, 3677, 3866.—Coll. Doat, XXXI. 17.—Vaissette. III. Pr. 468.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, nouv. acq. 139, fol. 8.—Molinier, L’Inq. dans le midi de la France, pp. 408-9.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. pp. 284-5.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 185, 186, 217.

[424] C. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 26.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 8, 13, 130, 228.

In Italy the crosses appear to be of red cloth (Archiv. di Firenze, Prov. S. Maria Novella, 31 Ott. 1327).

At an early period there is a single allusion to another “pœna confusibilis” in the shape of a wooden collar or yoke worn by the penitent. This occurs at La Charité, in 1233, and I have not met with it elsewhere (Ripoll, I. 46).

[425] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1229 c. 10.—Statut. Raymondi ann. 1234 (Harduin. VII. 205).—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1234 c. 4.—Concil. Tarraconens. ann. 1242.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 1.—Concil. Valentin. ann. 1248 c. 13.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 4.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, nouv. acq. 139, fol. 2.

[426] Coll. Doat, XXI. 185 sqq.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 6.—Molinier, l’Inquis. dans le midi de la France, p. 412.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. p. 350.

[427] Molinier, op. cit. p. 404, 414-15.—Bernard. Guidon. Gravamina (Doat, XXX. 115).—Ejusd. Practica P. II. (Doat, XXIX. 75).—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carc. (Doat, XXXVII. 107, 135, 149).—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 496-99.

[428] Vaissette, III. Pr. 386.—Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 560.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 17.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Quia te, 19 Jan. 1245 (Doat, XXXI. 71).—Molinier, op. cit. pp. 23, 390.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append, c. 27.—Practica super Inquisit. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 222).—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Cum a quibusdam, 14 Mai. 1249 (Doat, XXXI. 81, 116).—Coll. Doat, XXXIII. 198.—Ripoll, I. 194.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 648-9, 653.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xix., xx., xli.—Archivio Storico Italiano, No. 38, pp. 27, 42.—Campi, Dell’ Hist. Eccles. di Piacenza, P. II. p. 309.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 185 sqq.

[429] Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s.v. Pœnam.

[430] Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 152).—Archives Nationales de France, J. 430, No. 1.—Berger, Les Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 4093.—Vaissette, III. 460, 462.—Molinier, op. cit. pp. 173, 283-4, 391, 396, 397.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. p. 40.—Bern. Guidon. Practica (Doat, XXIX. 83).—Coll. Doat, XXXI. 292.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXV. 192).—Zanchini Tract, de Hæret. c. xix.

[431] Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 236).—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 19.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 25.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. VII.—Practica super Inquisit. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930 fol. 221-2).—Molinier, op. cit. pp. 365, 392.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Inquisitores, No. 18.

[432] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 17.—C. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 15.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Cum venerabilis, 29 Jan. 1253; Bull. Cum per nostras, 30 Jan. 1253; Bull. Super extirpatione, 30 Mai. 1254.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Super extirpatione, 13 Nov. 1258, 20 Sept. 1259; Bull. Ad audientiam, 23 Jan. 1260.—Berger, Les Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 3904.—Ripoll, I. 69, 71, 223-4, 247.—Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 576.—MS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, nouv. acquis. 139 fol. 43.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. p. 638.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xix.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. v. (Doat, XXX.).—Albert. Repert. Inq. s. v. Cautio.

The right to offer bail, except in capital offences, was one thoroughly recognized by the secular law. See, for instance, Isambert, Anc. Loix Franç. III. 57.

[433] Molinier, op. cit. pp. 299-302.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXIV. 5. It is perhaps worthy of note that Ripoll, in printing this bull of Boniface VIII., T. II. p. 61, discreetly suppresses the details of inquisitorial wrong-doing).—Grandjean, Registres de Benoît XI. No. 169, 509.—Chron. Girardi de Fracheto Contin. ann. 1303 (D. Bouquet, XXI. 22-3).—Articuli Transgressionum (Archiv. für Litt. u. Kirchengeschichte, 1887, p. 104).—C. 1, § 4, c. 2 Clement, v. 3.—Bernard. Guidon. Gravamina (Doat, XXX. 118-19).—Coll. Doat, XXXV. 113.—Ripoll, VII. 61.—Archivio di Firenze, Riformagioni, Classe XI. Distinz. I. No. 39.—Villani, Cronica, XII. 58.—Alvar. Pelag. de Planct. Eccles. Lib. II. art. vii.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 332.—Decamerone, Giorn. I. Nov. 6.—Archives administratives de Reims, III. 641.

The strictness with which the canons against usury were construed is illustrated in a case decided by the University of Paris in 1490. The Faculty of Theology was consulted as to the righteousness of a contract under which a certain church had bought for three hundred livres an annual rent of twenty livres arising from certain lands, with the right of recalling the purchase-money after two months’ notice; while by a separate agreement the land-owner had the right of redemption for nine years. This is doubtless a specimen of the means adopted of evading the prohibition of interest payment, which must have grown frequent with the development of commerce and industry. The contract ran for twenty-six years before it was questioned and referred to the University. A commission of twelve doctors of theology was appointed, who discussed the subject thoroughly, and reported, eleven to one, that the contract was usurious, and that the annual payments must be computed as partial payments on account of the purchase-money (D’Argentré, Collect. Judic. de nov. Error. I. II. 323).

[434] Cornel. Agrippa de Vanitate Scientiar. cap. xcvi.

[435] Molinier, op. cit. p. 307.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 650, 685.

[436] Constt. v., VIII. § 3, Cod. I. v.—Assis. Clarendon. Art. 21.—Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 124.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. IV. pp. 299-300.—Lib. Juris Civilis Veronæ c. 156 (Ed. 1728, p. 117).—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Ad extirpanda, § 21.—Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1229 c. 6.—Statut. Raymondi ann. 1234 (Harduin. VII. 203).—Vaissette, III. Pr. 370-1.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 35.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 6.—Établissements, Liv. I. c. 36.—Siete Partidas, P. VII. Tit. xxvi. l. 5.—Bern. Guidon. Practica (Doat, XXIX. 89).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 4, 80-1, 168.

[437] Isambert, Anc. Loix Françaises, IV. 364; V. 491.—Ripoll, I. 252.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 248).—Sachsenspiegel, Buch III. Art. I.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxxix., xl.

[438] Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. 280.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carc. (Doat, XXXV. 122).

[439] Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. X.

[440] Gregor. PP. IX. Bull. Excommunicamus, 20 Aug. 1229.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1229 c. 9.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. IV. p. 300.—Concil. Arelatens. ann. 1234 c. 6.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 314.

Gregory’s bull, as inserted in the canon law, provides perpetual imprisonment for those who “redire noluerint” (C. 15, § 1, Extra v. vii.), which is self-evidently an error for “voluerint,” as the previous section directs that persistent heretics are to be handed over to the secular arm. Besides, Frederic’s Ravenna decree, issued soon after, in prescribing lifelong imprisonment for converts, speaks of this being in accordance with the canons.

[441] Concil. Tarraconens. ann. 1242.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 9, 19.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append, c. 20.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 152.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).

[442] Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. passim, pp. 347-9.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 507.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.—Practica super Inquisit. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 222).

[443] Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXIII. 143).—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 23, 25.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 507.

[444] Arch. de l’hôtel-de-ville d’Albi (Doat, XXXIV. 45).—Bern. Guidon. Gravam. (Doat, XXX. 100).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. pp. 32, 200, 287.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 136, 156).—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.

The cruelty of the monastic system of imprisonment known as in pace, or vade in pacem, was such that those subjected to it speedily died in all the agonies of despair. In 1350 the Archbishop of Toulouse appealed to King John to interfere for its mitigation, and he issued an Ordonnance that the superior of the convent should twice a month visit and console the prisoner, who, moreover, should have the right twice a month to ask for the company of one of the monks. Even this slender innovation provoked the bitterest resistance of the Dominicans and Franciscans, who appealed to Pope Clement VI., but in vain.—Chron. Bardin, ann. 1350 (Vaissette, IV. Pr. 29).

The hideous abuse of keeping a prisoner in chains was forbidden by the contemporary English law (Bracton, Lib. III. Tract, i. cap. 6).

[445] Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. pp. 102, 153, 231, 252-4, 301.—Muratori Antiq. Dissert. lx. (T. XII. p. 519).—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. v. (Doat, XXX.).—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 7).

[446] Beaumanoir, Coutumes du Beauvoisis, cap. 51, No. 7.—G.B. de Lagrèze, La Navarre Française, II. 339. In the accounts of the Sénéchausseé of Toulouse for 1337 there is an item of twenty sols expended in Nov., 1333, for straw for the prisoners to lie on, lest they should perish with cold during the winter. Other items, amounting to eighty-three sols eleven deniers, for the repairs of the fetters and shackles which they wore shows the rigor of their confinement.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, X. Pr. 798-99.

[447] Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1229 c. 11.—Concil. Valentin. ann. 1234 c. 5.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 4.—Coll. Doat, XXXI. 157.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 23, 27.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Cum sicut, 1 Mart. 1249 (Doat, XXXI. 114).—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 24.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. X.

[448] Molinier, op. cit. p. 435.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 536.—Vaissette. Éd. Privat, VIII. 1206.—Arch. de l’hôtel-de-ville d’Albi (Doat, XXXIV. 45).—Bern. Guidon. Gravam. (Doat, XXX. 109).—Isambert. Anc. Loix Françaises, IV. 364.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, X. Pr. 693-4, 813-14.—Les Olim, III. 148.—Hauréau, Bernard Délicieux, p. 19.—Archivio di Napoli, Reg. 113, Lett. A, fol. 385; Reg. 154, Lett. C, fol. 81; MSS. Chioccorello, T. VIII.

[449] Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 14, 16).—Muratori Antiq. Dissert. lx. (T. XII. pp. 500, 507, 529, 535).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. pp. 252-4, 307.—Tract., de Hæres. Paup. de Lugd. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1786).

[450] Practica super Inquisit. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 222).—Molinier, op. cit. p. 449.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXII. 125; XXXVII. 83).

[451] Les Olim, III. 148.—Archives de l’hôtel-de-ville d’Albi (Doat, XXXIV. 45).—Bern. Guidon. Gravam. (Doat, XXX. 105-8).—Ejusd. Practica P. IV. c. 1.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 587.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Carcer.

The passage in the Practica alluded to occurs in MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14579, fol. 258. The allusion to the Clementines is not in the MS. printed by Douais, Paris, 1885, p. 179.

In 1325 Bishop Richard Ledred of Ossory availed himself of the Clementine canon to claim supervision over the imprisonment of William Outlaw, whom he threw into the Castle of Kilkenny on a charge of fautorship of sorcerers—there being, apparently, no episcopal jail.—Wright’s Proceedings against Dame Alice Kyteler, Camden Soc. 1843, p. 31.

[452] Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. pp. 8, 13, 14, 19, 25, 26, 29, 158-62, 246-8, 255-61.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 7, 131; XXVIII. 164).

[453] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 7.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Ut commissum, 20 Jan. 1245 (Doat, XXXI. 68).—Vaissette, III. Pr. 468.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 20.—Zanchini, Tract, de Hæret. c. xxi., xxxviii.

[454] Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 2, 192).

[455] Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 40, 118, 122, 137, 139, 146, 147.—Bern. Guidon. Practica (Doat, XXIX. 85).—Ejusd. P. v. (Doat, XXX.).—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 21, 22.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 467.—Practica super Inquisit. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 222, 224).—Pegnæ Comment. in Eymeric. p. 509.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xx.

[456] Concil. Arelatens. ann. 1234 c. 11.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 26.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 162-7, 203, 246-7, 251-2.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxvii.

[457] Const. 5 Cod. IX. viii.—Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1229 c. 10.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. IV. pp. 8, 302.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Ut commissum, 21 Jun. 1254.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Quod super nonnullis, 9. Dec. 1257 (Doat, XXXI. 244).—Raynald. ann. 1258, No. 23.—Potthast No. 17745, 18396.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 123.—C. 15, Sexto v. ii.

[458] Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. p. 571.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXII. 156).—Regist. Curiæ Franciæ de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXII. 241).—Bernardi Comens, Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Inquisitores, No. 19.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. Index.—Wadding. Regest. Nich. PP. III. No. 10.

[459] Ripoll, I. 208, 394.—Tractatus de Inquisitione (Doat, XXXVI.).—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV, (Doat, XXX.).—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. 360-1.

[460] Constt. 13, 15, 17 Cod. I. v.; 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 Cod. IX. xlix.; 5, 6 Cod. IX. viii.

[461] Constt. Sicular. Lib. I. Tit. 3.—Concil. Turon. ann. 1163 c. 4.—Lucii PP. III. Epist. 171.—Innoc. PP. III. Regest. II. 1.—Cap. 10 Extra v. 7.

It was probably in obedience to the canon of Tours that, in 1178, the property of Pierre Mauran of Toulouse was declared forfeited to the count, and he was allowed to redeem it with a fine of five hundred pounds of silver (Roger. Hoveden. Annal. ann. 1178).

The decree of Alonso II. of Aragon against the Waldenses, in 1194, referred to above (p. 81) (Pegnæ Comment. 39 in Eymeric. p. 281), inflicts confiscation on all who favor the heretics, but there are no traces of its enforcement, or of the subsequent canons of the Council of Girona in 1197 (Aguirre V. 102-3). The same may be said of the edicts of Henry VI., in 1194, repeated by Otho IV. in 1310 (Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 484).

[462] Innoc. PP. III. Regest. XII. 154 (Cap. 20 Extra v. xl.).—Isambert, Anc. Loix Françaises I. 228, 232.—Harduin. VII. 203-8.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 385.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 26.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Cum fratres, ann. 1252 (Mag. Bull. Roman. I. 90).

Confiscation was an ordinary resource of mediæval law. In England, from the time of Alfred, property, as well as life, was forfeited for treason (Alfred’s Dooms 4—Thorpe I. 63), a penalty which, remained until 1870 (Low and Pulling’s Dictionary of English History, p. 469). In France murder, false-witness, treachery, homicide, and rape were all punished with death and confiscation (Beaumanoir, Coutumes du Beauvoisis XXX. 2-5). By the German feudal law the fief might be forfeited for a vast number of offences, but the distinction was drawn that, if the offence was against the lord, the fief reverted to him; if simply a crime, it descended to the heirs (Feudor. Lib. I. Tit. xxiii.-iv.). In Navarre, confiscation formed part of the penalties of suicide, murder, treason, and even of blows or wounds inflicted where the queen or royal children were dwelling. There is a case in which confiscation was enforced on a man because he struck another at Olite, which was within a league of Tafalla, where the queen chanced to be staying at the time (G.B. de Lagrèze, La Navarre Française II. 335).

[463] Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. XV.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 154; XXXIII. 207; XXXIV. 189; XXXV. 68.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.—Coll. Doat, XXVIII. 131, 164.—Responsa Prudentum (Doat, XXXVII. 83).—Grandes Chroniques, ann. 1323.—Les Olim, T. I. p. 556.—Guill. Pelisso Chron. Ed. Molinier, p. 27.—Practica super Inquisit. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 224).—Coll. Doat, XXVII. fol. 118.

In 1460, when the nearly extinct French Inquisition was resuscitated to punish the sorcerers of Arras, confiscation formed part of the sentence.—Mémoires de Jacques du Clercq, Liv. IV. ch. 4.

[464] Coll. Doat, XXXI. 175.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xviii., xxv., xxvi., xli.—Archivio Storico Italiano, No. 38, p. 29.

[465] Lami, Antichità Toscane, 560, 588-9.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxvi.—Archiv. di Firenze, Prov. S. Maria Novella, Nov. 18, 1327.—Archivio di Napoli, Regist. 253, Lett. A, fol. 63.

[466] Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. III. p. 466.—Kaltner, Konrad v. Marburg u. die Inquisition, Prag, 1882, p. 147.—Mosheim de Beghardis, p. 347.

[467] Harduin. VII. 203.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1233 c. 4; ann. 1246, Append. c. 35.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 26.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 151.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. xv.—Isambert Anc. Loix Françaises, I. 257.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 263).—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Filii.

[468] Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 152).—Berger, Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 1844.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 158-62.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXVII. 98).—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 663-5.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xviii., xix., xxv.

[469] Archives de l’Évêché de Béziers (Doat, XXXI. 35).—Potthast No. 12743.—Isambert, I. 257.—C. 14 Sexto v. 2.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxv.—Livres de Jostice et de Piet, Liv. I. Tit. iii. § 7.

[470] Hoffmann, Geschichte der Inquisition, II. 370.—Lucii PP. III. Epist. 171.—Innoc. PP. IV. Bull. Ad extirpanda, § 34.—Ejusd. Bull. Super extirpatione, 30 Mai. 1254 (Ripoll, I. 247).—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Discretioni (Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 120).—Potthast No. 18200.

[471] Nich. PP. IV. Bull. Habet vestræ, 3 Oct. 1290.—Raynald. ann. 1438, No. 24.—Lami, Antichità Toscane, pp. 588-9.—Alv. Pelag. de Planctu Eccles. Lib. II. art. 67.—Archivio di Firenze, Riformagioni, Classe v. No. 110; Classe XI. Distinz. I, No. 39.

[472] Archivio di Napoli, Registro 9, Lett. C, fol. 90; Regist. 51, Lett. A, fol. 9; Reg. 98, Lett. B, fol. 13; Reg. 113, Lett. A, fol. 194; MSS. Chioccorelli, T. VIII.

[473] Albizio, Risposto al P. Paolo Sarpi, p. 25.—Sclopis, Antica Legislazione del Piemont, p. 485.

[474] Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xix., xxvi., xli. Cf. Pegnæ Comment. in Eymeric. p. 659.—Grandjean, Registre de Benoît XI. No. 299.—Raynald. ann. 1438, No. 24.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s. v. Bona hæreticorum, No. 6, 8. As early as 1387, in the sentences of Antonio Secco on the Waldenses of the Alpine valleys, the confiscations are declared to be solely for the benefit of the Inquisition (Archivio Storico Italiano, No. 38, pp. 29, 36, 50).

It must be placed to the credit of Benedict XI, that, in 1304, he authorized Frà Simone, Inquisitor of Rome, to restore confiscations unjustly made by his predecessors and to moderate punishments inflicted by them if he considered them too severe (Grandjean, No. 474).

[475] Alonsi de Spina Fortalicii Fidei, Lib. II. Consid. xi. (fol. 74 Ed. 1594).

[476] MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 224.—Livres de Jostice et de Plet, Liv. I. Tit. iii. § 7.—Vaissette, III. 391.—Les Olim, I. 317.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 11847.—Concil. Insulan. ann. 1251 c. 3.—Teulet, Layettes, II. 165.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 4.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 975.—Baluz. Concil. Narbonn. Append. pp. 96-99.—Coll. Doat, XXXV. 48. Cf. Berger, Registres d’Innoc. IV. No. 1543-4, 1547-8.—Vaissette, IV. 170.—Baudouin, Lettres inédites de Philippe le Bel, Paris, 1886, p. xl.

In spite of the general sense of equity manifested by St. Louis, he was by no means indifferent to acquisitions justified by the spirit of the age. In 1246 there seems to have been a raid made upon the Jews of Carcassonne, who were thrown into prison. In July St. Louis writes to his seneschal that he wants to get from them all that he can; they are, therefore, to be held in strict duress, while the amount which they can be made to pay is to be reported to him. In August he writes that the sum proposed is not satisfactory, and the seneschal is instructed to extort all that he can.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 1191-2.

[477] A. Molinier (Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VII. 284-94; VIII. 919).—Coll. Doat, XXXIV. 131, 135, 189; XXXV. 93.—Urbani PP. IV. Epist. 62 (Martene Thesaur. II. 94).—Bern. Guidon. Hist. Conv. Albiens.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 467, 500.—Arch. de l’Inq. de Carcass. (Doat, XXXI. 143, 146).

[478] C. Molinier, L’Inquisition dans le midi de la France, p. 101.—Les Olim, III. 1126-9, 1440-2. See also I. 920.

[479] Archives de l’Évêché d’Albi (Doat, XXXV. 83).—Les Olim, I. 556.—Archivio di Napoli, Regist. 4, Lett. B, fol. 47.—Archives de l’Évêché de Béziers (Doat, XXXI. 35).—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 3.—Isambert, Anc. Loix Françaises, I. 257.—C. 19 Sexto v. 2.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 11847.—Collect. Doat, XXXV. 68.—Molinier, L’Inq. dans de midi de la France, p. 102.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, X. Pr. 370 sqq.

[480] Boutaric, Saint Louis et Alphonse de Poitiers, Paris, 1870, pp. 455-6.—Douais, Les sources de l’histoire de Inquisition (Revue des Questions Historiques, Oct. 1881, p. 436).—Coll. Doat, XXXII. 51, 64.

[481] Archives de l’Évêché d’Albi (Doat, XXXIII. 207-72).—Coll. Doat, XXXV. 93.—Les Olim, II. 111.

[482] Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s. v. Bona hœreticor.—Archidiac. Gloss. sup. c. 19 Sexto v. 2.—Archivio di Napoli, Regist. 15, Lett. C, fol. 77, 78.

The English law of felony was also retroactive, and all alienations subsequent to the commission of the crime were void (Bracton, Lib. III. Tract. ii. cap. 13, No. 8).

[483] Coll. Doat, XXXII. 309, 316.

[484] Les Olim, II. 147.—Doat, XXVI. 253.

[485] Archives Générales de Belgique, Papiers d’État, v. 405.—Mémoires de Jacques du Clercq, Liv. IV. ch. 4, 14.

In Arras a charter of 1335, confirmed by Charles V. in 1369, protected the burghers from confiscation when condemned for crime by any competent tribunal.—Duverger, La Vauderie dans les États de Philippe le Bon, Arras, 1885, p. 60.

[486] C. 6, 8, 9, 14, Sexto XII. 26.—Bernardi Comensis Lucerna Inquis. s. v. Bona hœreticorum.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 570-2.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxiv.—J.F. Ponzinib. de Lamiis c. 76.

Severe as was the contemporary English law against felony, it had at least this concession to justice, that a felon had to be convicted in his lifetime; his death before conviction thus prevented confiscation (Bracton, Lib. III. Tract. ii. cap. 13, No. 17).

[487] Lami, Antichità Toscane, pp. 497, 536-7.—It is true that when, in 1335, Henri de Chamay, Inquisitor of Carcassonne, sent to the papal court the depositions against the memory of eighteen persons accused of heretical acts committed between 1284 and 1290, and asked for instructions, the decision was that no reliance was to be placed on the testimony of witnesses who mostly contradicted themselves, and who only swore to what they had heard long before. Three previous investigations against the same persons had been held without reaching a conclusion, and the papal advisers assumed that there had been good reasons for dropping the matter.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, IX. 401.

How the system worked is seen in the complaint made in 1247 to St. Louis, by Guillem Pierre de Vintrou, that the royal seneschal of Carcassonne had seized his property derived through his mother, because his grandfather, seventeen years after death, had been accused of heresy. St. Louis thereupon ordered an examination and report.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 1196.

[488] Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 1641.

[489] Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xxvii.—Isambert, Anc. Loix Françaises, I. 257.

Yet there is a case in 1269 in which a creditor of two condemned heretics applies to Alphonse of Poitiers to be paid out of the confiscations, and Alphonse orders an inquiry into the circumstances.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 1682.

[490] Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 593.—Archivio di Firenze, Riformagioni, Classe v. No. 110.

[491] MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 228.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. III.—Archivio di Napoli, Regist. 6, Lett. B, fol. 35; Reg. 10, Lett. B, fol. 6, 7, 96; Reg. 11, Lett. C, fol. 40; Reg. 13, Lett. A, fol. 212; Reg. 51, Lett. A, fol. 9; Reg. 71, Lett. M, fol. 382, 385, 440; Reg. 98, Lett. B, fol. 13; Reg. 113, Lett. A, fol. 194; Reg. 253, Lett. A, fol. 63; MSS. Chioccorello, T. VIII.

[492] Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1229 c. 9.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 24.—Harduin. VII. 415.—Archives de L’Évêché de Béziers (Doat, XXXI. 35).—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 22.—D. Bouquet, T. XXI. pp. 262, 264, 266, 278, etc.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 1206, 1573.—Archives de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 250).—Archivio di Napoli, Regist. 20, Lett. B, fol. 91.

The care with which Alphonse looked after the proceeds of the confiscations is seen in his demand for an account from his seneschal, Jacques du Bois, March 25, 1268 (Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 1274).

[493] Molinier, L’Inquisition dans le midi de la France, p. 308.—Bern. Guidon. Fundat. Convent. Prædicat. (Martene Thesaur. VI. 481).—Boutaric, Saint Louis et Alphonse de Poitiers, pp. 456-7.

[494] Coll. Doat, XXXIV. 189.—In 1317 the result had been much less. We have the receipt of the royal treasurer of Carcassonne, Lothaire Blanc, to Arnaud Assalit, dated Sept. 24, 1317, for collections during the year ending the previous St. John’s day, amounting to four hundred and ninety-five livres six sols eleven deniers, being the balance after deducting wages and expenses (Doat, XXXIV. 141).

[495] Doat, XXXV. 79, 100.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, X. Pr. 705, 777, 783.

[496] Potthast No. 13000, 15995.—Monteiro, Historia da Santo Inquisição, P.I. Lib. II. c. 34, 35.

[497] Mosheim de Beghardis pp. 356-63.

[498] Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 652-3.

[499] Vaissette, Éd. Privat, X. Pr. 791-2, 802.—Raynald. ann. 1375, No. 26.—Wadding, ann. 1375, No. 21, 22; 1409, No. 13.—Isambert, Anc. Loix Françaises, V. 491.—Martene Ampl. Collect. VIII. 161-3.

[500] Bernard. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).

[501] Coll. Doat, XXI. 143.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1807).—Lami, Antichità Toscane, pp. 557, 559.—Lib, Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 2, 4, 36, 208, 254, 265, 289, 380.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 510-12.

[502] Pegnæ Comment, xx. in Eymeric. p. 124.—Tract. de Paup. de Lugd. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1792).—S. Thom. Aquinat. Summ. Sec. Sec. Q. XI. Art. 3.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 510-12.—Tract. de Inquisit. (Doat, XXX.).—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—A. de Spina Fortalic. Fidei Ed. 1494 fol. 76a.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds Moreau, No. 444, fol. 10. Cf. Archiv. di Napoli, Reg. 6, Lett. D, fol. 39; Reg. 13, Lett. A, fol. 139.—Coll. Doat, XXXIV. 189.—Malleus Maleficarum P. II. Q. i. c. 2.—Albizio, Risposto al P. Paolo Sarpi, p. 30.

Gregory IX. had no scruple in asserting the duty of the Church to shed the blood of heretics. In a brief of 1234 to the Archbishop of Sens he says, “nec enim decuit Apostolicam Sedem in oculis suis, cum Madianita coeunte Judeo, manum suam a sanguine prohibere, ne si secus ageret non custodire populum Israel.... videretur.”—Ripoll I. 66.

Friar Heinrich Kaleyser was a celebrated doctor of theology, and was subsequently Inquisitor of Cologne (Nider. Formicar. v. viii.).

[503] C. 18 Sexto v. 2.—Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254 c. 22.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. pp. 372, 562.—Pegnæ Comment. in Eymeric. p. 564.—Guid. Fulcod. Quæst. x.—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Ad audientiam, 1260 (Eymeric. Append. p. 34).—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Quœsivisti, 1260 (Ripoll I. 393).—Wadding. Annal. ann. 1288, No. 20.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xviii.—Fortalicii Fidei fol. 74b.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Executio, No. 1, 8.

[504] Guill. Pod. Laur. cap. 48.—Les Olim, I. 317.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 1674. X. Pr. 484, 659.—Baluz. et Mansi, II. 257.

[505] Vaissette, III. 410.—Wadding. Annal. ann. 1288, No. xix.—Hoffmann, Geschichte der Inquisition, II. 391.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Executio, No. 6.—Innoc. PP. VIII. Bull. Dilectus filius, 1486 (Pegnæ App. ad Eymeric. p. 84).—Leo. PP. X. Bull. Honestis, 1521 (Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 617).—Albizio, Risposto al P. Paolo Sarpi. pp. 64-70.

[506] Rodrigo, Historia Verdadera de la Inquisition, Madrid, 1876, I. 176-77.—Von der Hardt, IV. 317-18.

[507] Von der Hardt, III, 50-1.

[508] Concil. Arelatens. ann. 1234 c. 6.—Concil. Tarraconens. ann. 1242.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append. c. 17.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. iv. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 514-16.—Anon. Passaviens. c. ix. (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 308).—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xviii.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. p. 6.

[509] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 26.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, App. c. 9.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 376-77, 521-4.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. pp. 379-80.—Zanchini Tract, de Hæret. c. xxiii.

[510] Lucii PP. III. Epist. 171.—Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. IV. p. 300.—Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 11.—Gregor. PP. IX. Bull. Ad capiendas (Vaissette, III. Pr. 364).—Epistt. Sæcul. XIII. No. 514 (Mon. Germ. Hist.).—Ripoll I. 55.—Concil. Tarraconens. ann. 1242.—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1800).—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, App. c. 20.—Coll. Doat, XXI. 148, 292,—Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 560.

[511] Arch, de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXI. 5, 139, 149).—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 9992.—Martene Thesaur. I, 1045.—Vaissette, III. Pr. 479.—Molinier, L’Inq. dans le midi de la France, pp. 387-8, 418.—Anon. Passaviens. (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 308).—Tract. de Paup. de Lugd. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1791).—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Ibid. 1807).—Practica super Inquisit. (MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 206, 212, 213, 222, 223).—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, App. c. 33.

[512] Boutaric, Saint Louis et Alphonse de Poitiers, pp. 453-4.

[513] Ripoll I. 254.—C. 4 Sexto v. 2.—Potthast No. 17845.—S. Thom. Aquin. Sec. Sec. Q. xi. Art. 4.—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 331, 512.—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. p. 36.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xvi.

[514] Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 2-4, 22, 48, 63, 76, 81-90, 122, 142, 149, 150, 198-99, 230, 232, 287-88.

[515] Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Quod super nonnullis, 9 Dec. 1257, 15 Dec. 1258, 10 Jan. 1260.—Urban. PP. IV. Bull. Quod super nonnullis, 21 Aug. 1262.—Can. 8 Sexto v. 2.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 331.—Bernardi Comens. Lucerna Inquis. s. v. Relapsus.—Zanchini Tract. de Hæret. c. xvi.

[516] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 13.—Doctrina de modo procedendi (Martene Thesaur. V. 1802, 1808).—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Eymeric. Direct. Inq. p. 386.

[517] Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1244 c. 13.—Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, Append, c. 33.—Concil. Valentin, ann. 1248 c. 13.—Archives de l’Évêché d’Albi (Doat, XXXV. 69).—Alex. PP. IV. Bull. Ad audientiam, 1260 (Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 118).—Guidon. Fulcod. Quæst. XIII.—Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 177, 199, 350, 393.—MSS. Bib. Nat., fonds latin, nouv. nequis. No. 139, fol. 2.—Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. p. 643.—Zanchini Tract, de Hæret. c. x.—Bern. Comens. Lucerna Inquisit. s. v. Fuga, No. 5.—Albertini Repertor. Inquisit. s. vv. Deficiens, Impænitens.

[518] Bern. Guidon. Fund. Conv. Prædicat. (Martene Thesaur. VI. 481-3).—Coll. Doat, XXI. 143, 146.—MSS. Bib. Nat., funds latin, No. 9992.—Molinier, L’Inq. dans le midi de la France, pp. 73-4.

[519] Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. p. 513.—Tract. de Paup. de Lugd. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1792).

[520] Mladenowie Narrat. (Palacky Monument. J. Huss II. pp. 321-4).—Landucci, Diar. Fiorent. p. 178.

[521] Coll. Doat, XXXIV. 189.

[522] Guillel. Pelisso Chron. Ed. Molinier p. 45.—Coll. Doat, XXXIV 189.

[523] Sozomen. H. E. II. 20.—Constt. vi.; xvi. § I, Cod. I. 5.—Auth. Novell. cxlvi. c. 1.—Rigord. de Gest. Phil. Aug. ann. 1210.—Petri Venerab. Tract. contra Judæos c. iv.—D’Argentré, Collect. Judicior. de nov. Erroribus I. I. 132, 146-56, 349.—Potthast. No. 10759, 10767, 11376.—Ripoll, I. 487-88.—Pelayo, Heterodoxos Españoles, I. 509.—Coll. Doat, XXXVII. 125, 246.—Harduin. Concil. VII. 485.—S. Martial. Chron. ann. 1309 (Bouquet, XXI. 813).—Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. pp. 273-4.—Bern. Guidon. Practica (Doat, XXIX. 246).—Raynald. ann. 1320, No. 23.—Wadding. ann. 1409, No. 12.—C. 1 in Septimo v. 4.

In the Paris condemnation of 1248 the Talmud only is specified, though in the examination mention is made of the Gloss of Solomon of Troyes, and of a work which from its description would seem to be the Toldos Jeschu, or history of Jesus, which so excited the ire of the Carthusian, Ramon Marti, in his Pugio Fidei, and of all subsequent Christians (cf. Wagenseilii Tela Ignea Satanæ, Altdorfi, 1681). No one can read its curious account of the career of Christ from a Jewish standpoint without wondering that a single copy of it was allowed to reach modern times.

[524] Bern. Guidon. Gravam. (Doat, XXX. 101).

[525] Extrav. Commun. Lib. v. Tit. viii. c. 1.—Amalrici Augerii Vit. Pontif. ann. 1316-17.—Bern. Guidon. Vit. Joann. XXII.

[526] Theod. a Niem de Schismate Lib. I. c. 42, 45, 48, 50, 51, 52, 56, 57, 60.—Gobelin. Personæ Cosmodrom. Aet. VI. c. 78.—Chronik des J. v. Königshofen (Chron. der Deutschen Städte, IX. 598).—Raynald. ann. 1362, No. 13; 1372, No. 10.—Poggii Hist. Florentin. Lib. II. ann. 1376.

[527] I have treated this subject at some length in an essay on torture (Superstition and Force, 3d Edition, 1878), and need not here dwell further on its details. The student who desires to see the shape which the inquisitorial process assumed in later times can consult Brunnemann (Tractatus Juridicus de Inquisitionis Processu, Ed. octava, Francof. 1704), who attributes its origin to the Mosaic law (Deut. XIII. 12; XVII. 4), and vastly prefers it to the proceeding per accusationem. Indeed, a case in which accusatio failed or threatened to fail could be resumed or continued by inquisitio (op. cit. Cap. I. No. 2, 15-18). It supplied all deficiencies and gave the judge almost unlimited power to convict.

The manner in which the civil power was led to adopt the abuses of the Inquisition is well illustrated in a Milanese edict of 1393, where the magistrates, in proceedings against malefactors, are ordered to employ the inquisitorial process “summarie et de plano sine strepitu et figura juditii” and to supply all defects of fact “ex certa scientia” (Antiq. Ducum Mediolan. Decreta. Mediolani, 1654, p. 188). A comparison of this with the Milanese jurisprudence of sixty years earlier, quoted above (p. 401), will show how rapidly in the interval force had usurped the place of justice.

[528] Fortescue de Laudibus Legum Angliæ cap. xxii.—As late as 1823 there is a case in which a court in Martinique condemned a man to the galleys for life for “vehement suspicion” of being a sorcerer (Isambert. Anc. Loix Françaises, XI. 253).

[529] There is evidently something lacking here. It can doubtless be supplied from Moneta, p. 151. “Et e contrario Deuteronomii, 15, v. 9, dicit legislator: Dominaberis nationibus plurimis et nemo tibi dominabitur.”

[530] It was this bull which enabled inquisitors to administer torture. A date several years later has usually been assigned to it.