How many inquisitions have there been?

1 • One, none, a hundred thousand inquisitions

It is often said that:

• Tomás de Torquemada was “one of the executioners of the Inquisition”;
• Galileo Galilei and Giordano Bruno “were killed by the Inquisition”;
• the infamous Malleus Maleficarum was “the Inquisition’s manual for the fight against witchcraft”;
• “the Inquisition persecuted the ‘moriscos’ (Muslims forced to embrace the Christian faith) and the ‘marranos’ (Jews forcibly converted to Christianity)”;

Now, setting aside the fact that these statements contain some errors (for example, Galileo Galilei died in his own bed, in his villa in Arcetri, and was buried in the Basilica of Santa Croce in Florence; and the ‘Malleus’ was an inquisitorial manual – among many – written in the 15th century, and not “THE” manual… towards which, by the way, the Spanish Inquisition was very skeptical, as I mentioned here), I find that the generic use of the term “inquisition” is quite a gross inaccuracy.

Oh, let’s be clear: saying that “the inquisitorial system has caused deaths” is not incorrect…

…I was saying, stating that “the inquisitorial system has caused deaths” is not incorrect!

But it’s a bit like saying “concentration camps have caused deaths”: a statement like that might help us understand how many people died, but it doesn’t clarify why they died.

“Concentration camps” is, in fact, a too generic term, encompassing Nazi concentration camps, Soviet Gulags, Vietnamese “reeducation” camps, South African, Chinese, North Korean internment camps, etc. (check Wikipedia for the complete list).

In short, often the term “inquisition” is used as a kind of synecdoche – using a “generic” term to describe “specific” realities.

“The inquisition” (generic) never actually “existed.”

There were the inquisitionS.

2 • How many inquisitions have there been?

In all the books I have read on this topic (which you can find in the blog’s bibliography), scholars are very careful to emphasize that it is incorrect to speak of a generic “inquisition” and that instead, one must distinguish the different forms of inquisition that have existed throughout history.

There have been, in fact:

• Medieval Inquisition (12th-16th century): a term referring to the first form of inquisition, born in the Middle Ages and organized in tribunals managed by individual bishops of their respective dioceses.
• Spanish Inquisition (15th-19th century): which was an instrument of state absolutism; born by the will of Ferdinand II of Aragon, it was always under the control of the crown.
• Roman Inquisition (16th-19th century): in practice, it was the “evolution” of the medieval inquisition, created to “centralize” control of various tribunals by the Roman Curia, so that bishops of various Italian dioceses would not abuse their power in their entrusted territories.
• Portuguese Inquisition (16th-19th century): similar to the Spanish Inquisition, it was an institution created by the Portuguese monarchy, under King João III.

These are the main inquisitions that existed.

Let’s then draw a compassionate veil over the fact that among the “misdeeds” attributed to the “inquisition” (which one?), often the wrongdoings are included for which it is not guilty:

• Judicial injustices that occurred in secular courts between the 15th and 18th centuries (which, among other things, seem to have used torture much more frequently than religious courts, without precise regulation and often without concern for the health conditions of the accused; abuses that occurred in secular courts; refer to Christopher Black’s book in the bibliography, where he also cites the works of historians Henry Kamen and Thomas Madden)
• abuses that happened in religious courts of other religious denominations in Central Europe (unfortunately, even the Protestants – similar to the Spanish Inquisition – were not lenient with Jews and “witches”);
• forms of “judicial fanaticism” that took place in a completely different historical context… just to say: I had to explain to a friend six times that the Salem witch trials have nothing to do with the Inquisition…

Let’s try to clarify and say a few words about the inquisitions I mentioned…

3 • The Medieval Inquisition

Despite the word “heresy” conjuring something occult, sinister, and Mephistophelian to our ears, in reality, the term simply means “the choice (which in Greek is called αἵρεσις, ‘airesis’) of a doctrine different from that of the Church or the rejection of its teachings.”

In the Middle Ages, in many European states, heresy was considered both a sin and a crime.

(And if we have a minimum of critical sense in dealing with other cultures, this should not excessively scandalize us: even today, in many Southeast Asian states, the crime of blasphemy is subject to very severe penalties by civil authorities)

It is precisely in this period that the investigative inquisitorial process emerged through ecclesiastical tribunals. Initially, it was nothing more than a kind of “evolution” of the ordeal:

The tribunals of the medieval inquisition arose primarily to counter the heresy of the Cathars. However, the English historian Christopher Black points out that “canon and civil jurists did not agree on whether the primary responsibility for eradicating heresies belonged to religious or political authorities” (cf. CHRISTOPHER BLACK, Storia dell’Inquisizione in Italia. Tribunali, eretici, censura., Carocci, Roma, p.29).

In 1198, Pope Innocent III took charge of the issue and began to counter heresy with the assistance of the bishops in dioceses where Catharism was spreading. The bishops, in turn, were aided by friars with specific theological training chosen directly by the Pope: these were the first inquisitors, selected from the Dominican order…

However, “the Church” was not the sole authority in issuing condemnations; both because it was the task of princes and various “city councils” to enforce the sentences, and because it was also in the interest of secular authorities to combat Cathar heresy (cf. CHRISTOPHER BLACK, Storia dell’Inquisizione in Italia. Tribunali, eretici, censura., Carocci, Roma, p.30).

Nevertheless, the fight against the Cathars (and more generally, the activity of medieval episcopal inquisition) was characterized by an often excessive zeal in conducting trials and frequent recourse to torture (which, as Black points out, was similarly used in secular courts… nothing “backward” in other words, it was normal for the time).

4 • The Spanish Inquisition

The Spanish Inquisition was established in 1478 by the explicit desire of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile.

Although this inquisition had received the approval of the Pope at the time of its foundation, it remained throughout its duration a state structure under the control of the Spanish crown (even though Isabella was Catholic, Ferdinand saw religion merely as “a tool for controlling his subjects”).

In short, the pope had very limited influence on it… In April 1482 (just four years after its foundation), Pope Sixtus IV wrote a Bull expressing regret for the abuses of the Spanish Inquisition (cruelty, unjustified detentions, etc.), driven by personal interests and greed (cf. HENRY KAMEN, 1997, The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision, Yale University Press, New Haven, p. 49).

But by then, the damage had been done…

One of the early objectives of the Spanish Inquisition was to reaffirm Christianity in the territories of the crown, where many Jews and Muslims lived.

Initially, the tribunals urged “the unbelievers” to convert. However, authorities became concerned that these mass conversions might not be sincere, to the point that the crown began to fear that these minorities of “false converts” could overturn Spanish authority and assume power.

The Spanish Inquisition has gone down in history for its atrocities, and undoubtedly, among the inquisitions mentioned above, it is the one that behaved the worst, especially in its early decades of activity.

However, historians agree that between 1530 and 1550, the situation improved significantly, and the trials became more just (cf. CHRISTOPHER BLACK, Storia dell’Inquisizione in Italia. Tribunali, eretici, censura., Carocci, Roma, p.40).

The initial years of activity, however, so stained its reputation that now “Spanish Inquisition” is synonymous with the “court of horrors.”

The main culprit for this label (considered somewhat unfair by many historians, cf. bibliography) is the anticlerical press of the 17th-18th century, which often portrayed the Inquisition grotesquely to “attack” the Church.

However, amid the various pros and cons, if the Spanish Inquisition had a merit, it was the creation of a centralized legal structure… This was something that had never happened in the medieval inquisition (indeed, many abuses during the Middle Ages occurred because many bishops “did as they pleased” without any higher authority to control them).

This centralization was intended (at least in theory) to prevent violations in local tribunals.

And indeed, this was one of the reasons why the Roman Inquisition was created.

5 • The Roman Inquisition

The bad reputation of the Spanish Inquisition has cast its shadow even over the Roman Inquisition.

In reality, the two inquisitions (Spanish and Roman) were very different regarding:

• legal procedures
• objectives
• number of convictions

However, one thing where the “model” of the Spanish Inquisition served as an example for the creation of the Roman Inquisition was organization.

As I mentioned earlier, what was lacking in the “medieval” inquisition in Italy was a centralized structure for managing the tribunals. A similar organization would have been very useful, among other reasons, to contain abuses by bishops and inquisitors who, in small provincial tribunals, could administer their affairs independently without a “superior” to oversee them.

For this reason, in 1542 Pope Paul III (born Alessandro Farnese) with the bull “Licet ab initio” created a centralised body, based in Rome, to coordinate the activities of all local courts in Italy: the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Thus, the Roman Inquisition was born.

In reality, the term “Roman” is somewhat imprecise to define this inquisition. While in Spain, the only authority was the Crown, and the Spanish Inquisition was a state organ that could exercise its power over the entire national territory, Italy at that time was not politically united. It was divided into a vast number of territories: the Kingdom of Naples, the Papal States, the Republic of Siena, the Duchy of Savoy, the State of Florence, the Republic of Venice, the Duchy of Milan, etc.

And since each territory had a different:

• form of government;
• legislation;
• relationship with the Church;

In each state, the relationship with the “central organ” created in Rome to coordinate the Italian tribunals was highly variable: in some cases, the Holy Office could autonomously manage the tribunals, while in others, local authorities prevented the Church from interfering in jurisdiction (and the issue of heretics was handled through secular courts).

Elsewhere, there was a mediation between the two authorities.

In short, the activity of the Roman Inquisition was a kind of “compromise”… and, from region to region, it had very different outcomes.

Conclusion

(Yes, it’s true, I didn’t talk about the Portuguese Inquisition, but it’s like the “slim” version of the Spanish one… there are fewer books about it, and I haven’t been very interested in it either 🥸…)

What else can I say?

This page was just a “taste” (and even so, I went into quite some detail…) to emphasize that when talking about the “Inquisition” and not immediately adding an adjective next to it (Roman, Spanish, Portuguese, etc.), the risk of generalizing – and therefore saying imprecise things – is very, very high.

So, the next time you hear about the “tortures of the Inquisition,” its “death sentences,” its “abuses,” etc… start asking yourself questions like:

• But which Inquisition are we talking about?
• In what year did this happen?
• Did the courts of this Inquisition normally behave like this?
• Or was it an anomaly compared to their normal operation?

You might discover that the reality is a bit different from how we imagined it…

sale

(Summer 2020)