Imágenes de página



ABOUT three centuries and a half have now elapsed since there existed in Spain a regularly-organised Criminal Tribunal, charged with the prosecution of Heretics; and yet, up to a very recent period, no exact history had appeared of its origin, its establishment, and its progress. Several writers, foreigners as well as native Spaniards, had, indeed, treated of the Inquisitions established in different parts of the Catholic world, and more particularly of that of Spain; but, for reasons to be afterwards explained, all of them were destitute of that accu-. rate knowledge of the subject which the public have a right to expect from those who undertake to write history. This observation applies to the His toire des Inquisitions, which appeared in the course of the seventeenth century, and also particularly to the work of M. Lavallée, published at Paris in 1809, under the title of Histoire des Inquisitions Religieuses d'Italie, d'Es pagne, et de Portugal, which, the author assures us, is little more than a translation of a work that he pretends to have discovered at Saragossa. The former is, in truth, a sort of historical romance, sprinkled over with a small portion of truth, which, however, it is impossible to separate from the mass of fiction with which it is embellished; while the latter, in the four books devoted to the Spanish Inquisition (4th, 6th, 9th, and 10th), contains the history of only sixe trifling prosecutions before the provincial Tribunal of Valladolid, and is, moreover, filled with historical errors, so palpable and gross as to impair the author's credit, even in regard to matters that were probably consistent with his personal knowledge. Nor are the Spanish and Portuguese writers deserving of greater

confidence. Neither has the learned and unfortunate Macanaz, in his unavailing Apology, nor the Monk Monteiro of Lisbon in his History of the Inquisition of Portugal, nor the anonymous Spaniard who published at Madrid, in 1803, an Historical and Juridical Discourse on the Origin, Progress, and Utility of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, nor, indeed, any other native writer of the Peninsu la, prior to Llorente, succeeded in tracing a distinct outline of the se ries of events which led to the institution of this formidable Tribunal, far less in giving an authentic account of its progress, and of the influence it has exerted upon the character of the people and the government. Indeed, the Spanish authors themselves are not agreed either as to the period of its establishment, or the circumstances by which that memorable event was attended. Bernaldez and Hernando del Pulgar, though contemporaries, differ in this respect, in their Chronicles of the Catholic Kings;* and the same observation applies to Illescas, t Zurita, Roman, Garibay,|| Paramo,¶ Ortiz,** and Ferreras,+t each of whom is at variance with the others on this simple point of chronology.

But if these authors have been unable to settle the question as to the exact period from which the Holy Office dates its commencement, still less have they succeeded in giving us any certain information as to the peculiar organization of that tremendous institution. The reason of this must be sought for in the nature of the Holy Office itself. No prisoner of the institution ever obtained a sight of his own process, far less of that instituted against another. All he could learn in regard to his individual cause was con

Hernando del Pulgar, Cronico de los Reyes Catolicos, c. 17; Bernaldez, ejusd. tit. c. 43-4.

+Illescas, Hist. Pontifical, tom. ii. 1. 6.

Zurita, Annales de Arragon, tom. iv. 1. 20, c. 49, an. 1485.

§ Roman, Republicas del Mundo, tom 1, 1. 5, c. 20.

Garibay, Compendio Historial de Espagna, tom. ii. 1. 17, c. 29; l. 18, c. 12 and 17; 1. 19, c. 1.

¶ Paramo, De Origine et Progressu Inquisitionis, 1. ii. c. 2.

** Ortiz, Annales de Sevilla, 1. 12, an. 1478.

Ferreras, Hist. de Espagna, siglo 15, pt. 11.

fined to such inferences as he might deduce from the interrogatories which he was compelled to answer, and from the extracts of the depositions of the witnesses, which, at a certain stage of the proceedings, were communicated to him; at the same time that the names of the witnesses, and all circumstances of time, place, and persons, which might lead the accused to discover his accuser, as well as every part of the evidence favourable to his defence, were carefully concealed from him; according to the maxim of the Holy Office, that the accused must confine himself to answering the different heads of accusation, and that it belonged to the judge, in the discharge of his duty, to compare the answers of the prisoner with those parts of the evidence which were favourable to his defence, and to give such effect to both as, in his wisdom, he might think fit. This mode of conducting procedure in the Inquisition explains the reason why Philip Lim borch and other authors of perfectly good faith have failed to produce an authentic history of the Holy Office. Their principal sources of information were first the relations of prisoners, who, in every case, were entirely ignorant of the real grounds upon which they had

been prosecuted; and, secondly, the meagre details contained in the works of Eyemerick, Paramo, Pegna, Carena, and some other Inquisitors, who were interested in concealing the truth. It is hardly surprising that nothing satisfactory was produced by men who laboured under such disadvantages, and that an authentic history of the most infamous Tribunal which ever existed upon earth, and which systematically shrouded its proceedings in darkness, continued long an almost hopeless desideratum in the general literature of Europe.

The period, however, at length arrived when the mystery was to be dispelled. In the year 1809, Joseph Buonaparte, who had just assumed the title of King of Spain, published a decree, abolishing the Inquisition in that country; and that the nature of the Holy Office might be no longer unknown to the world, the archives of the Council of the Supreme, and of the Inquisition of the Court, were intrusted, by order of Joseph, to D. Juan Antonio Llorente, who had been himself an Inquisitor, and had been for many years occupied in collecting materials for a history of the Inquisition,* that he might carry his original design into execution. Spain could

* Llorente was born at Rincon del Soto, near Calahorra, in Arragon, in the year 1756; and at the age of fourteen received the clerical tonsure from the hands of the Bishop of Calahorra. In 1773, he went to Saragossa, to study law, by which was then understood the Institutes of Justinian and the Pandects, and in 1776 he took his bachelor's degree. He next applied himself to the study of the canon law, was ordained a priest by his diocesan in 1779, and soon after repaired to Valencia, to receive the bonnet of a doctor of laws. In 1781, he was admitted advocate before the Supreme Council of Castille, and the following year was appointed Proctor-General of the Bishopric of Calahorra. In 1785, the Tribunal of the Holy Office at Logrono chose him its commissary; and having proved, in compliance with the standing rule of the Inquisition, that his family, for three generations back, had incurred no punishment for heresy, nor were descended from Jews, Moors, or heretics, he entered upon office. Senor Llorente likewise applied himself with some success to preaching, till, in 1788, the Duchess of Satamayor, first lady to Louisa, Queen of Charles IV., appointed him her Consultor de Camara; in which capacity he must have given great satisfaction, for the Duchess subsequently nominated him one of her testamentary executors, (in conjunction with Grandees, Bishops, and Members of the Council of Castille,) and also tutor to the present Duke of Satamayor, one of the richest proprietors of Spain. At the commencement of 1789, the Inquisitor-General, D. Augustin Rubin de Cevallos, Bishop of Jaen, appointed Llorente Secretary-General to the Inquisition, a post which he held till 1791, and which placed at his disposal the archives of the Holy Office which he was one day to disclose to the world. Cevallos having died in 1792, D. Manuel Abad-y-la-Sierra, Bishop of Astorga, and Archbishop of Selimbria, was appointed his successor; and being a man of an enlightened mind, he immediately cast his eyes upon Senor Llorente, as a proper person to assist him in digesting a plan he had formed for introducing some important modifications in the internal constitution and forms of procedure of the Inquisition. But a Court intrigue displaced the honest Inquisitor before he could carry his project into effect. Not disconcerted by this untoward accident, Llorente pursued his labours, and had

not have supplied an individual better qualified for the honest discharge of this important trust. During two years, several persons were employed, under Senor Llorente's direction, in copying or extracting the original pieces which were found in the archives. All the criminal processes, with the exception of those which, either from their importance and celebrity, or from the quality of the persons prosecuted, seemed to belong to history, were burned; but the registers of the resolutions of the Council, the royal ordonnances, the bulls or briefs of Rome, the memoranda relative to the Tribunal, and the informations on the genealogies of the employés of the Holy Office, were carefully preserved and arranged according to their respective dates, and the subjects to which they referred. From these materials, toge ther with those which he had been occupied in collecting since the year 1789, when he first turned his atten

tion to the subject, Senor Llorente was enabled to produce his Critical History of the Inquisition of Spain, from the epoch of its establishment by Ferdinand V. till the reign of Ferdinand VII.; a work which has entitled him to the eternal gratitude of the friends of true religion and rational liberty, and which has already gained for its author the honourable agnomen of The Suetonius of the Inquisition.

With this invaluable book, therefore, as our guide, with most of the elder authorities on the subject under our eye, and with some private information which we have been fortunate enough to obtain, we shall endeavour to lay before our readers, I. A view of the mode of procedure observed in all the Tribunals of the Holy Office throughout Spain; II. Anecdotes of distinguished individuals who have fallen victims of this diabolical tyranny; and, III. Some remarks on the political degeneracy which this Tri

completed a scheme, the object of which was nothing less than to give full publicity to the hitherto dark and mysterious proceedings of the Holy Office, when the sudden fall of that able and enlightened minister, Jovellanos, who had encouraged him to persevere, utterly ruined the project. Llorente now found himself in danger of falling a victim to that tribunal of which he was a member, but which his projected reform had rendered his mortal enemy. The plan had been found among the papers of the ex-minister, and Llorente had aggravated his fault by paying his respects to Jovellanos as he passed through Callahorra to the place of his exile. By some fortunate accident, however, probably through the interest of some secret friends of the fallen minister, he escaped with the mild punishment of a fine and a short imprisonment; but he continued in disgrace till 1805, when he was recalled to Madrid, to engage in some historical inquiries, which interested the government, nominated Canon of the Metropolitan Church of Toledo, and the year after instituted Ecclesiastical Chevalier of the Order of Charles III., after having given the requisite proofs of nobility. On the invasion of Spain by the French, in 1808, he joined the party of Joseph Buonaparte, who appointed him a Counsellor of State, and, as has been already mentioned in the text, placed at his disposal the archives of the Holy Office, that he might prepare a history of the Inquisition. He shared the fortunes of his master; and on the expulsion of the French from Spain, he retired to France, leaving behind him the whole of his property, which was confiscated. At Paris, he who had been a dignitary of one of the richest churches in the Romish communion, Counsellor of State to the brother of Napoleon, director of the national property, and distributor of the royal bounty, considered himself fortunate in gaining an honourable pittance by instructing young Frenchmen to repeat the accents of that fine Castillian tongue, of which Raynal has said :-" Qu'elle est éclatante comme l'or, et sonore comme l'argent." Chiefly occupied with literary pursuits, he continued to reside in the French capital till the end of 1822, when the intrigues of a junto of ultra fanatics procured an order commanding him to quit Paris in three days, and France without delay. He obeyed, but this abrupt and violent expulsion from his adopted country was to him like a second exile. He reached Madrid on the 1st or 2d of February 1823, and on the 5th of the same month, fell a victim to the fatigue and chagrin to which he had been so cruelly condemned. Besides his Critical History of the Inquisition, Senor Llorente was the author of several other works, the principal of which are, Political Portraits of the Popes, and Memoirs for a History of the Spanish Revolution, with Justificatory Documents, by M. Nellerto (the anagram of Llorente). It is to this work that Dr Southey has been indebted for a large portion of the materials from which he composed his account of the Spanish Revolution.

bunal has entailed on every country where it has been fully established, and suffered to act without any effi cient control.


I. MODE OF PROCEDURE OBSERVED IN THE TRIBUNALS OF THE HOLY OF THROUGHOUT SPAIN. Before entering upon this branch of our subject, it may be necessary to premise, for the information of those who are unac quainted with the history of this Tribunal, that the pretext for its original establishment was furnished by the wars carried on for the extirpation of the Albigenses. Alarmed by the first dawn of those opinions which after wards ushered in the full light of the Reformation, Pope Innocent III. appointed a commission for the prosecution and punishment of heretics in Gallia Narbonnensis (which included the provinces of Languedoc, Provence, Dauphiné, and Savoy); and this was followed by the establishment of an Inquisition, in that country, in 1208. LLORENTE, Crit. Hist. of the Inquisit. 1. 2. art. 2 and 3. Innocent died in 1216, and was succeeded by Honorius III. who, eager to tread in the footsteps of his predecessor, and to share with him the glory of extirpating heretics, organized an Inquisition in Italy; but it was reserved for his successor Gregory IX., who mounted the Papal throne in the year 1227, to give to it the definite form of a tribunal, with a set of constitutions for regulating its procedure. Under the same Pontificate, and, according to Llorente, somewhere about the year 1232, Spain received the benefit which had been already conferred on Gaul and Italy, though not without considerable opposition on the part both of the nobility and people; for it is no less remarkable than true, that the country, over which the Holy Office has exercised more than three centuries of unrelenting despotism, was that in which its establishment was most firmly resisted, and where it was the slowest in taking root. Of the mode of procedure observed in this ancient tribunal, and of its progress during the course of the 13th and 14th cen turies, it is unnecessary to say any thing in this place. It will be enough to state, that it was not till the reign

of Ferdinand V. and Isabella, by whose marriage Arragon was united to Cas tille, that the Inquisition assumed the peculiar form and character which it afterwards maintained even down to the period of its abolition under Jo seph Buonaparte. Under the pretext of punishing the apostacy of the Spanish Jews, who had been converted to Christianity, these Princes systematised the constitution, and extended the powers of the Holy Office, erecting an imperium in the heart of their dominions, which was destined to control and defy the government of the state, to arrest the progress of improvement, exclude the lights of science and philosophy, paralyze the powers of industry, and insulate Spain as a den of bigotry and darkness, in the midst of nations prosperous under the benign lights of knowledge and civilization. It is this Inquisition which has domineered over that unhappy country, from the year 1481 till our own day, when it was suppressed with the approbation of all Europe. Happy, if that abolition had been effectual! The odious monster has, however, once more reared its head, under the fostering and paternal care of the most contemptible despot who ever disgraced a throne, or rendered a nation miserable. But the consolation is, that it cannot survive its patron. Let us now attend to the mode in which its procedure was conducted, taking as our guide the Ordonnances of 1561, promulgated by Valdes, the eighth Inquisitor-General, and constituting what may be considered the corpus of Inquisitorial Law.

1. Denunciation.-The procedure of the Holy Office commences with Denunciation, or some information which supplies its place, such as the disclosure which incidentally results from a deposition given before the Tribunal in another cause; and when the denunciation or deposition is signed, it takes the form of a declaration, in which the delator, after having sworn to speak the truth, points out, by name or otherwise, those individuals whom he believes or presumes capable of deposing against the person or persons denounced.* The witnesses thus indicated are examined; and

* Limborch, who compiled his History of the Inquisition from the best materials to which he had access, but who, nevertheless, is frequently in error, owing to the VOL. XX.


their depositions, in conjunction with that of the first witness, or delator, form the summary information or pre paratory instruction. Anonymous de nunciations are received with the same avidity, and acted upon precisely in the same manner, as those givenunder the sanction of a name; and though, by the constitution of the Holy Office, an information upon oath subjects the informer, if his charge prove to be calumnious, to the same punishment which would have been inflicted upon the denounced had he been condemn ed, yet the Inquisitors have, in no instance, awarded this punishment; on the contrary, the accuser is invariably admitted as a witness against the accused; and in the rare instances in which the latter has been able to overcome all the obstacles, systematically accumulated against a proof of innocence, and to rebut triumphantly the charge brought against him, the Inquisitors have invariably interfered, by every means, to protect the convicted calumniator from the punish ment decreed by their own statutes against him.* Experience indeed taught them, that, under such a sanction, few persons would be disposed to appear as accusers; and, as their

policy has always been to encourage
denunciations, they soon found it ex-
pedient to dispense with a law which
would have rendered the Holy Office
nearly inoperative. They were also
led to adopt this course by their fa
vourite maxim, that the Holy Office
cannot err; for it must be evident that
this maxim would have appeared ab-
solutely ridiculous, had they, in al-
most any instance, suffered a prisoner
to demonstrate his innocence, or,
which comes to the same thing, the
guilt of his accuser, and had they
given effect to their own law by sub-
jecting the latter, when he failed to
make good his charge, to the punish◄
ment of retaliation.

Denunciation was never more fre-
quent than at the approach of the
Easter Communion, when the con-
fessors imposed it as a sacred duty up-
on such of their penitents as said they
had seen, heard, or learned anything
which either was, or appeared to be,
contrary to the Catholic Faith, or to
the rights of the Inquisition. This
abuse of what the Catholics denomi-
nate the Sacrament of Confession, for
the purpose of encouraging the ba-
sest tendencies of the human heart,
was solemnly authorized by the pub-

circumstance of having been obliged to trust to the statements of prisoners, or the partial revelations of Inquisitors interested in perplexing everything connected with the Holy Office, has supposed (vol. II. ch. 5, 6, 7, 8) that there are three methods of beginning a process before the Tribunal of the Inquisition, 1, by Inquisition; 2, by Accusation; and 3, by Denunciation. When the process begins by Inquisition, the delator, according to him, appears before the Tribunal, and says that he does not come in the character of an accuser or denouncer, but merely for the purpose of relating that he has frequently heard it reported by grave and reputable persons that such a one has said or done some things contrary to the Catholic Faith, or the rights and privileges of the Tribunal. When the process begins by accusation, the accuser reports to the Inquisitor some crime committed by another; upon which the latter inquires whether the former will proceed in the affair by accusation or not; and if the answer be in the affirmative, he is to be admonished by the Inquisitor that he renders himself liable to the punishment of retaliation, unless his proof be good; after which he presents his accusation in writing, and so the process begins. But if the delator says that he will not accuse but denounce, and that he does this through fear of incurring the penalty of excommunication incurred by those who fail to discover things pertaining to the Faith within the term prescribed, then the Inquisitor prepares himself to make inquisition; and so the process in this way begins. Thus far Limborch, who, from the imperfect state of his information in regard to the form of process before the Inquisition, has erroneously supposed three varieties of one and the same mode of instituting proceedings to be three different and distinct modes; which supposition is plainly incorrect, as indeed appears on the face of his own statement. The real method pursued is that mentioned in the text, on the authority of Llorente, who, as we have already seen, was himself an Inquisitor.

* “Le delateur est admis comme témoin, au mépris des règles de droit ; et on ne lui applique pas la peine due au calomniateur, lorsqu'il est reconnu comme tel.". LLORENTE, Hist, Crit. de l'Ing. II. 298.

[ocr errors]
« AnteriorContinuar »