OF THE AUTOS-DA-FE CELEBRATED BY THE INQUISITIONS OF TOLEDO, SARAGOSSA,
VALENCIA, LOGRONO, GRENADA, CUENCA, AND SARDINIA, DURING THE REIGN OF
PHILIP II.
_Inquisition of Toledo._
On the 25th of February, 1560, the inquisitors of Toledo celebrated an
_auto-da-fe_, in which several persons were burnt, with some effigies,
and a great number subjected to penances. This _auto-da-fe_ was
performed to entertain the new queen, Elizabeth de Valois, the daughter
of Henry II., King of France. It is rather surprising that this
melancholy ceremony was chosen to amuse a royal princess of thirteen
years of age, and who in her native country had been accustomed to
brilliant festivals, suitable to her rank and age. The Cortes general of
the kingdoms was also assembled at Toledo at the same time, to swear
allegiance to the heir-presumptive, Don Carlos, so that this
_auto-da-fe_, with the exception of the number of victims, was as solemn
as any of those in Valladolid.
In 1561, another _auto-da-fe_ took place in the same town; four
impenitent Lutherans were burnt, and eighteen reconciled. Among those
condemned to penances was one of the king's pages, a native of Brussels,
named Don _Charles Estrect_, but the young queen Elizabeth obtained his
pardon.
On the 17th of June, 1565 (which was Trinity Sunday), an _auto-da-fe_ of
forty-five persons was celebrated; eleven were burnt, and thirty-four
condemned to penances. Some of these were Lutherans, but the greater
number were Jews. Among those designated as Protestants, some were
called _Lutherans_, others the _Faithful_; there was a third called
_Huguenaos_, after _Huguenots_.
Although the Inquisition of Toledo celebrated as many _autos-da-fe_ as
the other tribunals, I do not find any persons of distinction among the
victims, until the _auto-da-fe_ of the 4th of June, 1571, when two men
were burnt in person, and three in effigy, for Lutheranism, and
thirty-one individuals were condemned to penances. One of the men who
were burnt ought to be particularly mentioned. He was called the _Doctor
Sigismond Archel_, of Cagliari, in Sardinia. He had been arrested at
Madrid, in 1562, as a dogmatizing Lutheran, and after remaining for a
long time in the prisons at Toledo, he contrived to make his escape. He
had not time to get out of the kingdom; descriptions of his person were
sent to all parts of the frontier, and he was again arrested, and fell
into the hands of his judges. He persisted in denying the facts imputed
to him, until the _publication of the witnesses_, when he confessed, and
maintained not only that he was not a heretic, but that he was a better
Catholic than the _Papists_. He was condemned to be burnt, but
persevered in his system, and declared that he was a martyr; he insulted
the priests when they exhorted him, and was then gagged until he was
fastened to the stake. The archers, perceiving that he pretended to the
glory of martyrdom, pierced him with their lances, while the
executioners were lighting the faggots.
_Inquisition of Saragossa._
The Inquisition of Saragossa also celebrated an _auto-da-fe_ every year,
when several people were burnt, and about twenty reconciled. Most of
these were _Huguenots_ who had quitted Bearn, to establish themselves as
merchants in Saragossa, Huesca, Barbastro, and other cities. The
progress which the Calvinistic doctrines had made in Spain, is proved by
an ordinance of the Supreme Council, in which we read, that "Don Louis
de Benegas, the ambassador of Spain at Vienna, informed the
inquisitor-general, on the 14th of April, 1568, that he had learnt from
particular reports, that the Calvinists congratulated each other on the
peace signed between France and Spain, and that they hoped that their
religion would make as much progress in Spain as in England, Flanders,
and other countries, because the great number of Spaniards who had
secretly adopted it might easily hold communication with the Protestants
of Bearn, through Arragon." These, and other reports, induced the
council to recommend additional vigilance to the inquisitors.
The following circumstance shows the injustice and cruelty of the
Inquisition in a strong light. In 1578, a man was condemned, on
suspicion of heresy, to receive two hundred stripes, to be sent for five
years to the galleys, and to pay an hundred ducats. His crime was
sending Spanish horses into France. Since the reign of Alphonso XI., in
the fourteenth century, the introduction of Spanish horses into France
was prohibited, on pain of death and confiscation; the particular
circumstances which caused so disproportionate a punishment to the crime
to be established are not known; it was however renewed in 1499, by
Ferdinand the Catholic. No one will deny that the officers of the
customs were the proper persons to arrest these smugglers; but when the
civil wars broke out between the Catholics and Protestants in France,
Philip thought proper to employ the Inquisition in repressing the
practice, pretending, according to the Papal bull, that those who
furnished the Protestants with arms, ammunition, &c., were favourers of
heretics, and liable to suspicion of heresy. Philip II. commissioned the
Inquisition of Logrono, Saragossa, and Barcelona, to take cognizance of
all the crimes relating to the introduction of Spanish horses into
France.
The Council of the Inquisition added a clause to the annual edict of
denunciations, which obliged every Spanish Catholic Christian to
denounce persons known to have bought horses to send to France, for the
use of the Protestants. Besides these motives of religion, the zeal of
the inhabitants was excited by the promise of a reward.
In 1575, the punishment of whipping was decreed for this crime; but
though the law is expressed in general terms, the following event shows
that it was only inflicted on those whose power and credit were small.
In 1576, a Commissary of the Inquisition met a servant of the viceroy of
Arragon going into France with two horses; he seized the horses, but
allowed the servant to go away. He gave an account of his proceedings to
the inquisitors, who approved of his conduct in not arresting the
servant; their opinion was confirmed by the Supreme Council. The
inquisitors were on the point of writing to the viceroy, to demand an
explanation of the conduct of his servant, and the destination of the
horses, when the council ordered them to desist, if they thought it
would be disagreeable to the viceroy.
This law was afterwards applied to those who were suspected of
smuggling, and to those who favoured the practice. In 1607, Philip II.
ordered the inquisitors to offer rewards to those who intercepted this
trade, and the people were at last inspired with so great a horror of
it, and those who practised it became so odious, that the government was
obliged to declare that the misfortune of being convicted and punished
for this crime, did not exclude a person from enjoying honours and
offices.
The inquisitors, always eager to extend their jurisdiction, wished to
have the right of undertaking the trials for smuggling saltpetre,
sulphur, and gunpowder; this attempt did not succeed, and was, in fact,
the cause of their being deprived of the powers bestowed on them by
Philip, respecting the introduction of horses into France.
_Inquisition of Grenada._
In the yearly _autos-da-fe_ of the Inquisition of Grenada, there
generally appeared about twenty condemned persons; for although the
Morescoes who denounced themselves were treated with great clemency, yet
there were many who refused to accuse themselves, either from the fear
which the severity of the Inquisition inspired, or because they were
persuaded that those who declared they had been treated with great
gentleness, did not dare to assert the contrary; and others, after
having emigrated to Africa, had returned to Spain without considering
the danger they were in of being arrested by the Inquisition.
On the 27th of May, 1593, a grand _auto-da-fe_ took place at Grenada;
five individuals were burnt in person, and five in effigy; eighty-seven
were condemned to penances. The only considerable person among these,
was Donna Inez Alvarez, the wife of Thomas Martinez, alguazil to the
royal chancery. She was condemned to be burnt, but making a confession
on the scaffold, she was reconciled.
The proceedings were the same in the Inquisition of Valencia. The number
of Morescoes who relapsed into Mahometanism, and refused to accuse
themselves, was so considerable, that many appeared in every
_auto-da-fe_, either to be burnt as _impenitent_, or to suffer different
penances.
_Inquisition of Logrono._
The Inquisition of Logrono was not less active in prosecuting heretics.
An _auto-da-fe_ was celebrated every year, composed of about twenty
persons condemned for Judaism, and some others for different heresies,
particularly Lutheranism; for after the time of Don Carlos de Seso,
corregidor of Toro (who was arrested at Logrono, in 1558, and burnt in
the following year at Valladolid), there were always some individuals to
be found who professed his opinions, and succeeded in obtaining Lutheran
books. The council which was informed of this circumstance, wrote to the
inquisitors in 1568, enjoining them to redouble their vigilance in
preventing the introduction of heretical books, and informed them, that
Don Diego de Guzman, ambassador to England, had written that the
Protestants of that country boasted that their doctrine was well
received in Spain, particularly in Navarre, and that it was even
preached there.
While the inquisitors of Logrono were preparing for the _auto-da-fe_ of
1570, they had the mortification of being blamed for their conduct in
two instances by the Supreme Council. One was in the case of Lope de
Arguinaraz, and the other in that of Juan Floristan Maestuz, who were
accused of Judaism. Arguinaraz denied the fact, was tortured, and then
confessed having committed the actions, but asserted that he did not do
them with the sentiments and belief that he was accused of. He ratified
his confession some days after, and demanded reconciliation. The judges
when they assembled to vote for the definitive sentence, resolved to
refer the case to the Supreme Council, which pronounced that they had
not sufficiently examined the accused on the sentiments and intentions
which he entertained in committing the actions he had confessed, and
commanded them to return to that stage of the trial, and vote according
to the result. The inquisitors sent an account of the motives of their
conduct, and gave notice that they should wait until the council had
considered their observations, before they proceeded further. The reply
to this message enjoined the inquisitors to execute the orders they had
received immediately, and harshly reproached them for not having obeyed
them in silence, and for having failed in their duty, in the
interrogation, when they ought to have examined the accused on his
doctrine.
In the other affair of Juan Floristan Maestuz, the council expressed its
surprise, that the inquisitors did not examine the accused on some
heretical propositions which were proved against him, though he refused
to confess even during the torture; and above all, that the inquisitor,
who had qualified the accused as _negatively_ perjured, had voted for
his reconciliation, since the constitutions of the holy office
prohibited the reconciliation of those who persisted denying the charges
proved against him. The reconciliation of the two prisoners took place
in the _auto-da-fe_.
An _auto-da-fe_ took place at Logrono, on the 14th of November, 1593,
where forty-nine persons appeared; five were burnt in person, seven in
effigy; the others were subjected to penances.
The custom of celebrating one _general auto-da-fe_ every year was so
well established, that when the inquisitors of Cuenca, in 1558, gave up
a man to secular justice in a _particular auto-da-fe_, it was doubted if
the rules of the holy office permitted it; and though the council
decided in the affirmative, the custom of reserving all the condemned
persons for the general _auto-da-fe_ prevailed, unless any very
particular circumstance made it necessary to deviate from it.
_Inquisition of Sardinia._
I have already stated, that Philip II. introduced the Spanish
constitution into Sardinia, in 1562. Don Diego Calvo first began to put
it into execution, but the novelty made so great an impression on the
inhabitants, that they demanded that the tribunal should be visited.
This commission was confided by the inquisitor-general to the
licentiate, Martinez del Villar, who fulfilled it in 1567. He received
so many complaints against the inquisitor Calvo, that he was recalled,
and Martinez took his place; he, however, did not remain there long, but
was succeeded by Don Alphonso de Lorca.
In 1575, an appeal was made to Rome against the tribunal of Sardinia,
and Philip II. interposed in its defence. Don Francis Minuta, a
Sardinian gentleman, had been subjected to a penance for bigamy, and
condemned to serve for three years as a common soldier in the galleys
of Spain, and without the liberty of going out of the Goletta, in Malta.
He had not been there a month, before he contrived to escape, and
returned to Sardinia; the inquisitor-general then ordered him to be
again arrested, and doubled his punishment; Minuta was taken back to the
Goletta, whence he escaped a second time, and fled to Rome. He
represented to the Pope that he was not guilty of bigamy, and that the
manner in which the inquisitor-general had treated him was unjust, since
he had left the fort with the permission of the governor. Don Francis
demanded, and obtained of the Pope, two briefs of commission: the first
for the examination of the principal question, that of bigamy; the other
to judge of the reasons which he advanced against the sentence, which
prolonged his detention. In the interim, the inquisitor of Sardinia
declared him a contumacious fugitive, and condemned him to eight years'
labour in the galleys. The apostolical judge required the inquisitor to
suspend the proceedings; he informed the inquisitor-general, who applied
to the king, whose interference they had never requested in vain. Philip
II. wrote to Don Juan de Zuniga, his ambassador at Rome, to demand a
revocation of the briefs of commission, and to obtain permission for the
inquisitor of the island to continue the prosecution, or that it might
at least be referred to the inquisitor-general, to whom the right of
judging the cause belonged. The Pope revoked his bulls to please the
King of Spain, and the unfortunate Don Francis Minuta experienced the
fate which he might have expected; for, in cases of this nature, the
inquisitor-general always delegates one of the members of the accused
tribunal to be the examining judge, on pretence that they are in
possession of the writings of the trial.
Don Andrea Minuta, brother to Don Francis, was also condemned to the
same punishment for three years. He fled to Rome, and appealing to the
Pope, obtained a brief of commission for a bishop of Sardinia. Philip
II. made the same request to the Pope, and Andrea was treated in the
same way as his brother.
Don Pedro Guisa, Baron de Casteli, in Sardinia, was prosecuted and
condemned for the same crime of bigamy; but having learnt what had
happened to the two brothers Minuta, he had recourse to entreaties and
humiliations, to appease the inquisitor-general and obtain a commutation
of his punishment.