Prefect of Seville, and director of the towns and villages recently
built in the _Sierra-Morena_ and in Andalusia, was arrested in 1776, and
taken to the secret prisons of the Inquisition of Madrid; on the
suspicion that he held impious opinions, particularly those of Rousseau
and Voltaire, with whom he maintained an intimate correspondence. It
appeared from the trial, that Olavide had, in the new towns which he
governed, uttered the opinions of these philosophers, on the exterior
worship which is rendered to God in this country. The accused denied
many of the words and actions imputed to him; he explained others which
might not have been understood by the witnesses, but he confessed enough
to induce the inquisitors to believe that he secretly held the same
opinions as his two friends. Olavide asked pardon for his imprudence,
but declared that he could not do so for the crime of heresy, as he had
never lost his interior faith. On the 24th of November, 1778, an
_auto-da-fe_ was celebrated with closed doors, in the hall of the
Inquisition of Madrid, in the presence of sixty persons of high rank:
Don Paul Olavide appeared before them, in the habit of a penitent, and
holding in his hand an extinguished torch. The sentence declared him to
be convicted of _formal heresy_; he ought to have appeared in the
_San-benito_, with a cord round his neck, but this was dispensed with,
as well as the obligation of wearing the _San-benito_ afterwards. He was
condemned to pass eight years in a convent, and to live according to
the orders of a spiritual director chosen by the Inquisition; to be
banished from Madrid, Seville, Cordova, and the new town in the Sierra
Morena. His property was confiscated; he was forbidden to possess any
office or honourable title; to ride on horseback, or to wear any jewels
or ornaments of gold, silver, pearls, diamonds, precious stones, or
habits of silk, or fine wool, but only those of coarse serge or some
other stuff of that kind. The reading of the _factum_ of his trial, by
the secretary, lasted four hours; the fiscal accused him of having
advanced seventy heretical propositions, and seventy-two witnesses were
examined. Towards the conclusion, Olavide exclaimed, _Whatever the
fiscal may say, I have never lost my faith_. No answer was made to him.
When he heard his sentence he fainted, and fell off the bench on which
he had been permitted to sit. When he had recovered, and the reading of
the sentence was finished, he received absolution on his knees, after
having read and signed his profession of faith; he was then taken back
to the prison. The sixty individuals who were invited to this ceremony
were dukes, counts, marquises, generals, members of the councils, and
knights of different military orders; they were most of them his
friends. These persons were, from some circumstances in the trial,
suspected of partaking his opinions, and the invitation was intended to
inform them of what they might expect, and to induce them to be more
reserved in their conversation. Olavide went to the convent where he was
to be confined, but made his escape some time after, and retired to
France. He lived at Paris under the name of the _Count de Pilo_, a title
which he had never borne in Spain. A few years after he published a
work, called _The Gospel Triumphant; or, the Converted Philosopher_.
This composition obtained his pardon, and permission to return to Spain,
where no penances were imposed on him.
_Perez_ (Antonio). See Chapter 35.
_Ramos del Manzano_ (Don Francis), Count de Francos, tutor of Charles
II. and president of the Sovereign Council of the Indies, composed some
treatises on politics, which are mentioned by Nicolas Antonio. In these
writings he maintains the prerogatives and independence of the
sovereigns against the indirect powers of the Popes, the abuses of the
Court of Rome, and the ecclesiastical judges in the holy office. The
Count de Francos suffered much persecution, and his works were
prohibited; if Philip IV. had not protected him, he would have been
arrested, and his books burnt.
_Ricla_ (the Count de), minister of war, and lieutenant-general in the
army under Charles III., was denounced to the holy office as having
adopted the opinions of the philosophers of the eighteenth century.
There was not sufficient proof against him, and the trial was suspended.
_Roda_ (Don Manuel de), Marquis de Roda, minister and secretary of state
in the department of grace and justice, under Charles III. He had been a
celebrated advocate at Madrid, and minister-plenipotentiary at Rome; his
talents and learning made him of the greatest use to Charles III. in the
important affairs relative to the expulsion of the Jesuits. The
imputation of Jansenism, incurred by the archbishops and bishops of the
Council extraordinary, was also brought against this minister, who had
made many enemies by advising Charles III. to reform the six great
colleges established at Salamanca, Alcala, and Valladolid. This
denunciation failed, because it contained no _particular proposition_
which deserved to be censured.
_Salcedo_ (Don Pedro Gonzalez de), procurator to the king in the Council
of Castile, published a treatise _On Political Law_, and some other
works, in which he attacked the abuses committed by the judges of the
privileged tribunals, and the pretensions of the inquisitors and other
ecclesiastics to the royal jurisdictions. He was persecuted, and his
works were condemned, but Philip IV. revoked the prohibition; however
some passages were afterwards retrenched, and they are not found in the
later editions.
_Salgado_ (Don Francis de), member of the Council of Castile, published
some works in defence of the royal jurisdiction against the
ecclesiastical authority; they are mentioned by Nicolas Antonio. The
Court of Rome condemned them; the inquisitors of Spain persecuted the
author, but when they were on the point of publishing the prohibition of
his works, Philip IV. commanded them to suspend their proceedings.
_Samaniego_ (Don Philip de), priest, archdeacon of Pampeluna, knight of
the order of St. James, counsellor to the king, and chief secretary and
interpreter of foreign languages. He was invited to attend the
_auto-da-fe_ of Don Paul Olavide, and was so alarmed that he voluntarily
denounced himself. He presented a declaration, in which he confessed
that he had read prohibited books, such as those of Voltaire, Mirabeau,
Rousseau, Hobbes, Spinosa, Montesquieu, Bayle, d'Alembert, Diderot, and
others; that from this course of reading he had fallen into a religious
pyrrhonism; that having thought seriously on the subject, he had
resolved to remain firmly attached to the Catholic faith, and that in
consequence he had resolved to demand to be absolved from the censures
_ad cautelam_. The tribunal ordered that he should confirm his
declaration by taking an oath. They then obliged him to confess by what
means he had obtained the books, whom he had received them from, and
where they were at that time; with what persons he had conversed on the
subject of religion, and revealed his opinions; what individuals had
refuted or adopted them; who had appeared to be ignorant of the
doctrine, or were acquainted with it; and lastly, how long he had known
it himself: these declarations were the conditions on which he was to
receive absolution. Samaniego wrote a declaration, in which almost all
the learned men of the court were implicated. Some of these persons had
been invited to the _auto-da-fe_ of Don Paul Olavide.
_Sardinia_ (the viceroy of) was excommunicated in 1498, and punished by
the inquisitors for having lent assistance to the Archbishop of Cagliari
in taking a criminal from the prisons of the holy office to those of the
archbishopric.
_Sese_ (Don Joseph de), president of the royal Court of Appeal of the
kingdom of Aragon. This magistrate wrote a work, in which he had
collected many definitive sentences which had been pronounced in trials
for competency; they were all favourable to the secular power. The
author was the victim of his zeal; he was persecuted, and his work
prohibited, but Philip IV. caused it to be revoked.
_Solorzano_ (Don Juan de), member of the Sovereign Council of the
Indies. He was the author of a work on _Indian Politics_, and several
others of the same nature. They were written in the same spirit as those
of Salgado; Solorzano and his works shared his fate.
_Sotomayor_ (Don Guiterre de), knight commander of the order of
Alcantara, brother of the Count de Benalcazar, and governor of the
fortress of that name. See _Benalcazar_.
_Terranova_ (the Marquis de). See Chapter 16.
_Toledo_ (the royal judge of) was excommunicated, imprisoned, and
received much ill treatment from the inquisitors in 1622, in a contest
for jurisdiction.
_Valdes_ (Don Antonio), member of the royal Council of Castile. He was
excommunicated by the inquisitors in 1639, because he refused to exempt
the familiars of the holy office who possess land, from paying a
contribution.
_Valencia_ (the viceroy of), captain-general, was obliged in 1488, to
appear before the Supreme Council of the Inquisition, and ask pardon and
absolution for having set at liberty a soldier who was detained in the
prisons of the holy office. He had the mortification of being obliged to
appear in a _lesser auto-da-fe_.
_Vera_ (Don Juan-Antonio de). See Chapter 36.
_Zarate_ (Diego Ruiz de), chief alcade of Cordova, was punished by the
Supreme Council in 1500, and suspended from his office for six months,
because he refused to allow the inquisitors of Cordova to take
cognizance of the trial of the chief alguazil of that city.
Many other instances might be quoted: but these are sufficient to show
that the nature of the tribunal of the holy office will be contrary to
the independence of the sovereign, while the royal jurisdiction is
confounded with that of the inquisitors, and while the members of the
holy office are exempted from the civil and criminal jurisdiction of the
royal tribunals.
CHAPTER XXVII.
OF THE TRIALS OF SEVERAL SOVEREIGNS AND PRINCES UNDERTAKEN BY THE
INQUISITION.
It is not surprising that the Inquisition should persecute magistrates
and learned men, when it has not scrupled to attack kings, princes, and
grandees. Some writers (particularly the French and Flemish) have
singularly exaggerated the accounts of these trials; some of them having
but a vague and slight foundation for what they have advanced, and
others have filled their accounts with invectives and fictions. The
history is derived from the archives and writings of the trials of the
Inquisition, and I have attended more to these authentic documents than
to the narratives of those who have not had the same advantages. This
Chapter will contain _all that is certainly known_ of the trials of the
princes and other potentates by the Inquisition.
The _Holy Tribunal_ was scarcely established in Aragon, when it attacked
Don James de Navarre, sometimes called the _Infant of Tudela_, and the
_Infant of Navarre_. His crime was an act of benevolence. The
assassination of Pedro Arbues, the first inquisitor of Aragon, which
took place in 1485, obliged many of the principal inhabitants of
Saragossa to take flight. One of these persons went to Tudela de
Navarre, where the Infant of Navarre resided, and asked and obtained an
asylum in his house for several days, until he could make his escape
into France. The inquisitors being informed of this humane action,
arrested and took Don James to their prisons in 1487, as an enemy to the
holy office. He was condemned to hear solemn mass, standing in the
presence of a great concourse of people, and of his cousin Don Alphonso
of Aragon (a natural son of Ferdinand V. and Archbishop of Saragossa),
and to receive absolution from the censures which he was supposed to
have incurred, after submitting to be _scourged_ by two priests, and
having gone through all the ceremonies prescribed in such cases by the
Roman ritual.
In 1488, the Inquisition tried John Pic de la Mirandola and de
Concordia, a prince who was considered a prodigy of science, from the
age of twenty-three years. Innocent VIII. instigated them to this
measure by a brief addressed to Ferdinand and Isabella, dated the 16th
of December, 1487, in which he said, that he had been informed that John
Pic was going into Spain, with the intention of maintaining, in the
universities and other schools of the kingdom, the erroneous doctrine of
several theses which he had already published at Rome, and had abjured,
which rendered him still more culpable. His Holiness added, that he was
most afflicted in perceiving that the youth, the pleasing manners and
agreeable conversation of the prince would gain him many partisans; he
said that these considerations had induced him to request the two
sovereigns to arrest the prince when he arrived in Spain, as the fear of
corporal punishment might have more effect than the anathemas of the
Church. De la Mirandola doubtless received information of what awaited
him in Spain, as he did not undertake the journey; at least nothing is
to be found in the archives concerning it. The learned historian Fleury
must have been ignorant of the existence of this bull, since he says
that the affair of the Prince de la Mirandola terminated in the
suppression of his theses at Rome, in 1486. This prince had published
and defended nine hundred propositions on theology, mathematics,
physics, cabala, and other sciences. Thirteen of these were examined and
qualified as heretical; the author published an apology, showing the
ignorance of his judges. His adversaries, finding that they could not
dispute with him, accused him of being a magician; and asserted, that so
much knowledge in so young a person could only be acquired by a compact
with the devil.
In 1507 the Inquisition, instigated by Ferdinand V., undertook to
prosecute and arrest Caesar Borgia, Duke de Valentinois, and
brother-in-law to John d'Albret, King of Navarre. It is most probable
that this prince would have been taken, if he had not been killed in the
same year before Viana, not far from Logrono, by the governor of a
fortress, Juan Garces de los Fayos. Caesar Borgia was the natural son of
Don Rodrigo de Borgia (afterwards raised to the papal see, by the name
of Alexander VI.), and the famous _Vanoci_. He had been a cardinal, but,
in 1499, his father, in compliance with the request of Louis XII. King
of France, who adopted him, granted him dispensations to marry the
sister of the King of Navarre; he then obtained the titles and estates
of the dukedom of Valentinois. A short time after the death of Caesar
Borgia's father, in 1503, he was arrested at Naples, by the order of
Gonzalo de Cordova, viceroy of that monarchy, on the pretence that he
disturbed the tranquillity of the kingdom. He was taken to Spain, and
confined in the Castle of Medina del Campo, from whence he made his
escape, and fled to Navarre. Ferdinand, finding that his niece, the
Queen of Navarre, would not give up this prince to him, resolved to
secure him by means of the Inquisition.
It has been already stated that the inquisitors did not prosecute the
memory of Charles V.; but in 1565, they were concerned in the
proceedings against Jane d'Albret, the hereditary Queen of Navarre, and
against her son, Henry de Bourbon, afterwards Henry IV. of France, and
his sister, Margaret de Bourbon Albret, who married the sovereign Duke
of Bar. The holy office, however, did not take an active part in this
affair. After Ferdinand V. had taken possession of the five districts of
the kingdom of Navarre, called _Merindades_, he refused to recognise
either Jane or Henry de Bourbon as sovereigns of Navarre. These princes
were deprived of all their dominions, except the sixth _Merindade_ of
Navarre, by a papal bull in 1512; the Court of Rome also refused to
grant them the title of Kings of Navarre until the year 1561. The first
to whom it was given was Anthony de Bourbon.
Charles V. had ordered in his will that the right of his successors to
the crown of Navarre should be examined, and that it should be restored
to its rightful owners if it had been unjustly seized. In 1561, Philip
II., who had not yet thought of executing the intentions of his father,
perceiving that the king, Anthony de Bourbon, inclined towards
Calvinism, entered into a negociation with him on this subject. In order
to attach him to the Catholic party, Philip promised to obtain a
dissolution of his marriage with Jane, who was a heretic, to induce his
holiness to excommunicate her, and to give her states to him, with the
consent of the Kings of France and Spain; to restore Navarre, or to give
the island of Sardinia in exchange for it, and to negotiate a marriage
between him and Mary Stuart, Queen of Scotland. Anthony accepted this
offer, but died before it could be executed. Philip then, through the
intrigues of his agents at Rome, obtained the excommunication of Jane
d'Albret, and that her states should be offered to the first Catholic
prince who would take possession of them on the condition of expelling
the heretics. Pius V. published a bull on the 28th September, 1563,
excommunicating Queen Jane, for having adopted the heresy of Calvin, and
promulgating his doctrines in her states; and according to the
requisition of the procurator-fiscal of the Inquisition, his Holiness
summoned her to appear at Rome, within six months, to answer these
charges.
Catherine de Medicis, regent of France, who was then reconciled to the
Prince of Conde, the brother of the late King of Navarre, was displeased
at the Inquisition of Rome; and in order to stop the proceedings, sent
an ambassador extraordinary to the Pope, with a very learned memorial,
which has been printed, with the bull, in the _Memoires du Prince de
Conde_.
Charles IX., and Catherine de Medicis, his mother, wrote to Philip II.,
(who was married to Elizabeth of France, the daughter of Catherine,) and
informed him of what had passed, requesting that he would act in concert
with them. Philip replied, that he not only disapproved of the conduct
of the court of Rome, but he offered to protect the Princess Jane
against any one who should attempt to deprive her of her states. It has,
however, been proved by the letters of the French king to the Cardinal
d'Armagnac, that Philip at the same time offered assistance to the
Catholic subjects of Jane, to induce them to rebel against her, and that
he privately introduced Spanish troops into her territories. This event
was the origin of a confederation, known by the name of the _Catholic
League_, which forms part of the histories of M. de Varillas, and of the
secret memoirs of M. de Villeroi.
The Spanish monarch endeavoured to obtain, by means of the Inquisition
of Spain, what he had been refused by that of Rome. The
inquisitor-general Cardinal Espinosa, in concert with the Cardinal de
Lorraine, caused several witnesses to be examined, to prove that Jane
d'Albret and her children were Huguenots, and that, as they encouraged
this heresy in their states, it might spread into Spain. Espinosa (who
pretended that Philip was ignorant of his proceedings) informed the
council that it was necessary to impart this circumstance to his
majesty, and entreat him to do all in his power to prevent Jane from
persecuting the Catholics.
Philip secretly directed the affairs of the _League_ in France by means
of communications with the chiefs of the party; and according to his
orders the inquisitor-general formed a plot to carry off the Queen of
Navarre and her two children, and confine them in the dungeons of the
Inquisition of Saragossa. He hoped to succeed in this enterprise,
through the assistance afforded him by the Cardinal de Lorraine, and the
other chiefs of the _League_.
Those French historians who wrote after this period (such as the Abbe
St. Real, Mercier, and others) have endeavoured to throw all the odium
of this plot on Philip II. and the Duke of Alva; but as truth is the
first duty of historians, I am compelled to say, that the De Guises were
the authors of it. Nicolas de Neuville, Lord of Villeroy, minister and
first secretary of state during the reigns of Charles IX., Henry III.,
Henry IV., and Louis XIII., has left details of this affair, in a
_Memoir_ which was found after his death among his papers, and which has
been printed with many others, under the title of _Secret Memoirs of M.
de Villeroi_. This author, who was a contemporary, and acquainted with
the secrets of the government, seems to be more deserving of confidence
than any other.
Philip II. took advantage of the attempt, though it entirely failed; and
wrote to represent to the Pope, that his subjects in the neighbourhood
of France might imbibe the heresy, and demanded and obtained an order to
separate from the bishopric of Bayonne the villages of the valley of
Bastan, and those of the arch-priesthood of Fontarabia.
In 1563, the Inquisition of Murcia condemned another prince, called Don
Philip of Aragon. See Chapter 23.
In 1589, the Prince Alexander Farnese, governor-general of the Low
Countries and Flanders, and uncle to Philip II., was denounced to the
Inquisition of Spain, as suspected of Lutheranism, and a favourer of
heretics; it was also said, that he intended to become the sovereign of
Flanders, for which purpose he courted the Protestants. No proofs of
heresy were produced, and the inquisitor-general suspended the
proceedings. Although the enemies of Prince Farnese made every effort to
ruin him, Philip did not deprive him of his office, and he remained
Governor of the Low Countries till his death in 1592. It has been said
that he was poisoned by Philip II.
The Cardinal Quiroga, and the Council of the Inquisition, treated the
Sovereign Pontiff, Sextus Quintus, with little respect. This Pope
published a translation of the Bible in Italian, and prefaced it by a
bull, in which he recommended every one to read it, saying, that the
faithful would derive the greatest advantages from it. This conduct of
the Pope was contrary to all the regulations from the time of Leo X. All
doctrinal works had been forbidden to be in the vulgar tongue for fifty
years, by the expurgatory index of the council, and by the inquisitions
of Rome and Madrid. The Cardinals, Quiroga at Madrid, and Toledo at
Rome, and others, represented to Philip II., that great evils would
arise from it, if he did not employ his influence to induce the Pope to
relinquish his design. Philip commissioned the Count d'Olivarez to
expostulate with the Pontiff; the Count obeyed, but at the peril of his
life, for Sextus Quintus was on the point of depriving him of it,
without respect for the rights of nations, or for the privileges of
Olivarez as an ambassador.
This formidable Pope died in 1592, and Philip was suspected of having
shortened his days by slow poison. After this event, the Inquisition of
Spain having received witnesses to prove that the _infallible_ oracle of
the law was a favourer of heretics, condemned the Sextine Bible, as they
had already condemned those of Cassiodorus de Reyna, and many others.
A preparatory instruction was commenced against Don John of Austria, a
natural son of Philip IV., but the proceedings were suspended by the
king. This event was caused by the intrigues of the inquisitor-general,
John Everard Nitardo, who was the mortal enemy of Don John; and some
persons were found base enough to accuse the king's brother of
Lutheranism, in order to flatter him.
The Grandees of Spain may be numbered among the princes, since Charles
V. declared them to possess that title, and that they were equal in rank
to the sovereigns of the Circles of Germany; they had likewise the
privileges of being seated and covered in the presence of the king, as,
for example, when the emperor was crowned.
Among the princes humiliated by the Inquisition, the following persons
must be included. The Marquis de Priego, the grand-master of the
military order of Montesa, the Duke de Gandia, St. Francis de Borgia,
the blessed Juan de Ribera, the venerable Don Juan de Palafox, and many
others, among whom were several ladies. None of these trials had any
serious result; the denounced persons only received a severe
remonstrance, except in the case of the Dowager Marchioness d'Alcanices,
who was imprisoned in the Convent of St. Catherine, at Valladolid. These
persons were all innocent; the only foundation for the accusations was
their intimacy with the Doctors Pedro and Augustine Cazalla, Fray
Dominic de Roxas, and Don Pedro Samiento de Roxas: they were also
accused of having heard conversations on justification, and of not
having denounced them.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
OF THE CONDUCT OF THE HOLY OFFICE TOWARDS THOSE PRIESTS WHO ABUSED THE
SACRAMENT OF CONFESSION.
While the Inquisition was occupied in persecuting the peaceable
Lutherans, they were obliged to take measures to punish Catholic
priests, who abused the ministry of confession, by seducing their
penitents. The inquisitors were compelled to act with great reserve and
caution in this affair, that they might not furnish the Lutherans with
new arguments against auricular confession, and the Catholics with a
motive for employing it less frequently.
On the 18th of January, 1556, Paul IV. addressed a brief to the
Inquisitors of Granada, in which his Holiness commanded them to
prosecute those priests whom the _public voice_ accused of seduction,
and not to pardon _one_ of them. He also recommended that they should
ascertain if the doctrine of the priests on the sacrament of penitence
was orthodox, and if it was necessary to pursue the course prescribed
for the prosecution of heretics. The inquisitors communicated this brief
to the Archbishop of Granada, and the Council of the Inquisition, which
informed them in reply, that the publication of the brief in the usual
form would produce great inconveniences, and that it was necessary to
act with prudence and moderation.
For this reason the archbishop summoned the cures, and other
ecclesiastics, while the inquisitors did the same with the prelates of
the regular communities, to recommend to them to notify the brief of the
Pope to all the confessors, that they might be more strict in their
conduct for the future, and that the people might not be made acquainted
with the order of his Holiness. At the same time, informations were
taken against those who were suspected, and some who were guilty were
privately punished under other pretexts.
This measure convinced the Pope that the abuse was not confined to the
kingdom of Granada; and, in 1561, he addressed a brief to the
inquisitor-general Valdes, authorizing him to proceed against the
confessors guilty of this crime in the domains of Philip, as if they
were heretics. As this bull did not affect the inquisitors-general who
succeeded Valdes, several others were afterwards expedited.
It was the custom to read the _Edict of Denunciations_ in the churches
every year, on some Sunday in Lent, and as the number of crimes
increased, new articles were added to the Edict. The inquisitors of some
provinces introduced that of the priests who corrupted their penitents,
and Raynaldus Gonzalvius Montanus, speaking of the occurrences at
Seville after the publication of this edict, declares that it was
published in 1563, and that the denunciations were so numerous that the
notaries of the holy office refused to receive them, and that the
inquisitors were obliged to relinquish the prosecution of the criminals.
The edict was not published till 1564, and the denunciations were much
less numerous than he pretends. The denunciations ceased, because the
obligation imposed on the penitents to inform against the criminals was
annulled by the Supreme Council. Several other edicts were afterwards
published on this subject, and they were framed to include a great
number of cases.
This crime is never punished in a public _auto-da-fe_, because it might
prevent the faithful from confessing themselves. The _auto-da-fe_ was
held in the hall of the holy office; the secular confessors were
summoned to attend it, two from each of the establishments in the town,
and four from that of the condemned person, if there were any. No laymen
were permitted to be present, except the notaries. When the sentence,
and the motives for it, had been read, the dean of the inquisitors
exhorted the criminal to acknowledge his crime, and prepared him to make
the abjuration of all heresies in general, and of that of which he was
suspected in particular. He then placed himself on his knees, pronounced
his confession of faith, and signed his abjuration: the inquisitor
absolved him _ad cautelam_ from all the censures he had incurred: this
act terminated the _auto-da-fe_, the criminal was taken back to the
prison, and the next day he was transferred to the convent in which he
was to be imprisoned, according to his sentence. The confessors who
attended this ceremony, were commanded to inform others of the affair,
to deter them from committing the same crime.
CHAPTER XXIX.
OF THE TRIALS INSTITUTED BY THE INQUISITION AGAINST THE PRELATES AND
SPANISH DOCTORS OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT.
_Prelates._
Eight venerable prelates and nine doctors of theology, who were sent by
Spain to the Council of Trent, were attacked in secret by the
Inquisition of their country. From particular circumstances, rather than
from the will of the inquisitors, some of these trials were suspended,
before any attempt had been made on the liberty of the doctors.
The trial of the Archbishop of Toledo ought to be introduced in this
place, but its importance and interest renders it worthy of a separate
chapter.
_Don Pedro Guerrero_, born at Leza-de-rio-Leza, in Rioxa, archbishop of
Granada, was one of those prelates who, from their learning and virtue,
had the greatest influence in the Council of Trent. He was prosecuted
by the Inquisition of Valladolid, for the favourable opinion he
expressed in 1558, of the Catechism of Carranza, and for the letters he
wrote to him in the following year. It was also known that he voted for
the archbishop, in the commission employed by the Council of Trent to
examine his book, and likewise in the particular congregation of that
assembly, which approved his conduct in 1563. Guerrero averted the
danger by retracting his opinion in 1574, when he was informed of the
inclinations of Philip on this subject. He then gave a new opinion,
entirely different from the first, persuaded that it would be sent to
Rome, which in fact was done, in order to strengthen the charges against
Carranza: this is proved by the letter of the Supreme Council to Philip
II., in which it announces that the censures which his majesty had
demanded of the Archbishop of Granada were prepared, and that it was
absolutely necessary to send them to Rome, because _it was to be
apprehended that the affair would be soon concluded, that the trial went
on quickly_[33], and _that it was necessary to send this document, on
account of the high esteem in which the opinion of the archbishop was
held in Rome_.
It would be difficult to give a just idea of the intrigues which were
employed to obtain so contrary an opinion from Guerrero. The Pope
commanded, in a particular brief, that those censors who had been
favourable to the Catechism should examine and censure it again, and
afterwards give their opinions of the inedited works of Carranza. On the
arrival of this brief, the Cardinal Quiroga, who was in the king's
confidence, despatched persons whom he could depend upon, to the
Archbishop of Granada, to induce him to renew his censure, _without
saying that he had done it before, to conform to the king's intentions,
but as if he only did it in obedience to the orders of his Holiness_.
This intrigue is proved by the private instructions which Quiroga gave
to his messengers. It must be confessed that the conduct of the
Archbishop of Granada does little honour to his memory, but it must also
be remembered how formidable the policy of Philip II. rendered him, and
that Guerrero was advanced in years.
_Don Francisco Blanco_, born at Capillas, in the bishopric of Leon, had
been bishop of Orense and Malaga, when he was prosecuted on suspicion of
Lutheranism, for the same reason as Guerrero.
The arrest of Carranza alarmed Blanco so much, that he wrote immediately
to the inquisitor-general, and sent him several inedited works of the
archbishop of Toledo. He received an order to repair to Valladolid,
where he entered into the convent of Augustins: he made his declarations
on the 14th of September, and on the 13th of October, 1559, acknowledged
two of his approbations, but declared that he could not consent to
ratify them, until he had re-examined the book, since he had given them
without reflection, and was only influenced by the great reputation of
Carranza. It is impossible to read his declarations, and the letters
which he wrote to the inquisitor-general, without perceiving the extreme
terror which had seized him. He had recourse to the same means as
Guerrero, to extricate himself from his embarrassment. This prelate died
in 1581, after having composed several works, which are mentioned by
Nicholas Antonio.
_Don Francisco Delgado_, born at Villa de Pen, in Rioxa, founder of the
eldership of the Counts de Berberana, bishop of Lugo, and afterwards of
Jaen, and one of the fathers of the council of Trent, was suspected of
heresy for the same reasons as the two preceding prelates. He avoided
the sentence which threatened him, by retracting his opinions in 1574.
_Don Andres Cuesta_, bishop of Leon, was prosecuted for the same cause.
The inquisitor-general wrote to him before the arrest of Carranza, to
know if he had given a favourable opinion of his Catechism. The Bishop
replied in the affirmative, and sent him a copy of his opinion. Valdes
kept this paper, but could not make any use of it. As the Archbishop of
Toledo had then been arrested, the trial of the Bishop of Leon was
begun, and the inquisitor-general resolved to summon him to Valladolid.
Valdes informed the king of this resolution, and he wrote to Cuesta,
saying, that all that was to be done was in the cause of God, and the
service of his majesty. The Bishop of Leon submitted without resistance;
and on the 14th of October, 1559, he was examined in the Council of the
Inquisition, and in the presence of all its members. The opinion which
he had given of the catechism, in 1558, was shown to him, and he
acknowledged it to be his, but said that if he examined it again, he
should be able to judge differently of Carranza's doctrine. He returned
to his diocese, and sent another favourable opinion of the catechism to
the inquisitor-general; it was founded on many doctrinal considerations
and reflections, which he had not made in that which he sent to
Carranza. His letters, declarations, and opinions, show a bold and
strong mind, which may induce one to believe that he was not provoked to
retract in 1574, or that his trial recommenced at that period; for the
inquisitor-general and the Supreme Council finding in 1560 that the
trial of Carranza caused them much trouble and embarrassment, resolved
to _suspend_ the trials of the other bishops, until the result of the
first was known.
_Don Antonio Gorrionero_, bishop of Almeria, was prosecuted for his
favourable opinion of the Catechism, and some letters which he wrote on
the subject. He however attended the third convocation of the council of
Trent, which took place in 1560, and the following years.
_Don Fray Melchior Cano_, born in Tarancon, in the province of Cuenca:
he had resigned the bishopric of the Canaries, and attended the second
session of the Council of Trent, in 1552. He was a member of the order
of St. Dominic, as well as Carranza, and his rival in the government and
administration of the affairs of his order, particularly after Carranza
had obtained the preference, when they were both candidates for the
office of Provincial of Castile. When the Catechism was denounced to the
Inquisition, Valdes appointed Cano to examine it, affecting to favour
its author, by choosing qualifiers from the monks of his order, but not
doubting, at the same time, that the opinion of Fray Melchior would be
unfavourable.
Fray Melchior examined the catechism, and some inedited works of
Carranza; but it appears that he did not strictly observe the secrecy
recommended by the inquisitors, since Carranza received information of
what was passing, while he was in Flanders, and wrote to Fray Melchior,
who replied to him from Valladolid, in 1559. About this time, Fray
Dominic de Roxas, and some other Lutherans confined in the secret
prisons of the holy office, deposed to certain facts, which caused some
suspicion of Fray Melchior.
However, the prosecution begun against him had no result; for at the
time when Cano was about to be reproved by the inquisitor-general, he
offered him the dedication of his Treatise _de Locis Theologicis_, which
was accepted; and as he had not time to publish it, he left it to the
inquisitor-general in his will, some time before his death, which
happened in 1560. His censure of the Catechism of Carranza, and some
propositions which he had maintained against the archbishop, and which
caused the faith of that prelate to be suspected, contributed to
preserve him from punishment. His calumnious discourse concerning
Carranza was no doubt the reason why he was thought to be his denouncer.
_Don Pedro del Frago_, bishop of Jaca, was born in 1490, in Uncastillo,
in the diocese of Jaca. Pedro studied at Paris, and became a Doctor of
the Sorbonne: he learnt Hebrew and Greek, and was considered one of the
best Latin poets of his age. He was appointed theologian to Charles V.,
for the first convocation of the Council of Trent; he assisted at it in
1545, and when the second assembly took place in 1551, he preached a
Latin sermon to the fathers, on Assumption-day: this discourse forms
part of the collection of documents relating to the council. In 1561,
Philip II. created him Bishop of Alguer in Sardinia, and he attended the
third convocation of the council in that quality. Don Pedro was made,
first, Bishop of Jaca, in 1572; and in the following year, when he was
sixty-four years of age, the Council of the Inquisition commanded the
inquisitors of Saragossa to take informations against this worthy
prelate, as suspected of heresy, because he had been denounced as not
being known to confess himself, and that he had no regular confessor; he
was likewise accused of not celebrating mass with sufficient solemnity.
It is surprising that the council should admit these charges, since a
bishop is not obliged to have a regular confessor, and it is not
necessary for any person to confess, so that the public may be informed
of it. The other charge brought against an old man of sixty-four, shows
that there was nothing more serious to accuse him of. Philip II., to
reward his services, gave Don Pedro the bishopric of Huesca, in 1577,
where he founded an episcopal seminary. He died in 1584. He held a synod
at Huesca, in which he established constitutions, which he had drawn up
and caused to be printed; he also composed a Journal of the most
remarkable events in the Council of Trent, from the year 1542 to 1560,
and much Latin poetry.
Among the doctors of theology of the Council of Trent, who were
persecuted or punished by the Inquisition, the most celebrated is
_Benedict Arias Montano_, perhaps the most learned man of his age in the
oriental tongues.
Several towns in Spain have disputed the honour of being the place of
his birth. Montano understood Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, Greek,
Latin, French, Italian, English, Dutch, and German: he was almoner to
the king, a knight of the order of St. Jago, and doctor of theology in
the university of Alcala.
As there were no more copies in the trade of the _Polyglott_ Bible of
the Cardinal Ximenez de Cisneros, the celebrated Plantin, a printer at
Antwerp, represented to Philip II. the advantages which might arise from
a new edition, with corrections and additions. The king approved of the
scheme, and in 1568 appointed Arias Montano to be the director of the
undertaking; he went to Flanders to fulfil the intentions of that
monarch, and to compose the Expurgatory _Index_, known as that of the
Duke of Alva's. In order to make the re-impression of the Polyglott
Bible as perfect as possible, a great number of unpublished copies of
the Bible, in all languages, were procured; this great work is in eight
folio volumes. St. Pius V. and Gregory XIII. expressed their approbation
of the execution of this undertaking, in particular briefs addressed to
their nuncios in Flanders. Arias Montano went to Rome, and presented a
copy to the Pope in person: he made a very eloquent speech in Latin on
the occasion, which gave great pleasure to the Pope and cardinals. The
King of Spain made presents of these Bibles to all the princes of
Christendom: it has been called the _Royal Bible_, because it was done
by the king's command; the _Philippine_, from his name; of _Antwerp_,
because it was printed in that place; _Plantinian_, from the name of the
printer; _Polyglott_, from being in several tongues; and of _Montano_,
because he had the direction of it, though he was assisted by many
learned men of the universities of Paris, Louvain, and Alcala de
Henares.
Arias returned to Spain, where the reputation he had acquired caused
many persons to become his enemies, particularly among the Jesuits,
because he had not consulted Diego Lainez, Alphonso Salmeron, or the
other Jesuits of the Council of Trent: he made another enemy in Leon de
Castro, a secular priest, professor of the oriental languages at
Salamanca, because he did not consult the university, and employ him in
the work. The certainty that he should be protected by the Jesuits
induced him to denounce Arias Montano to the Inquisition of Rome: this
denunciation was in Latin: he addressed another, in Spanish, to the
Supreme Council at Madrid. Leon de Castro accused him of having given
the Hebrew text of the Bible according to the Jewish MSS., and of having
made the version accord with the opinions of the rabbis, without
regarding those of the fathers of the church. He also qualified him as
suspected of Judaism, because he affected to take the title of Rabbi,
_master_; this, however, may be looked upon as a calumny, for in a copy
of this Bible, which I have seen, his superscription is that of
_Thalmud_, which means _disciple_. Other accusations were brought
against him by the Jesuits. Leon de Castro, impatient to see Arias
arrested, wrote on the 9th of November, 1576, to Don Fernando de la Vega
de Fonseca, a counsellor of the _supreme_, and renewed his denunciation,
showing by his letter that he was only actuated by resentment, at
finding his pretended zeal so ill repaid. There is no doubt that Arias
would have been arrested, if he had not been protected by the king, and
if the Pope had not signified his approbation of his Bible by a special
brief; he, however, thought it necessary to go to Rome to justify
himself.
Leon de Castro circulated copies of his denunciation, and the Jesuits
did the same. He was attacked by Fray Luis Estrada, in a discourse
addressed to Montano, in 1574; and his denunciation was also refuted by
Pedro Chacon, another learned Spaniard, who proved the injury that would
accrue to the Christian religion, if it was admitted that the Hebrew
MSS. were falsified. De Castro published a reply, which he called
_Apologetic_.
Arias returned from Rome, and he could depend upon the favour of the
king; he was not arrested, but confined to the city of Madrid. The
council decreed that a copy of the denunciations should be given to him;
Arias replied to and refuted the charges, insinuating that this attack
was a plot of the Jesuits.
The inquisitor-general, in concert with the council, appointed different
theologians as qualifiers in the trial of Arias, and remitted to them
the denunciation of de Castro and his apology, the reply of the accused,
and the two writings of Estrada and Chacon. The principal censor was
Juan de Mariana, a Jesuit, who was considered very learned in the
oriental languages, and in theology. This choice, in which the Jesuits
had some influence, induced them to suppose that Arias would be
condemned. They were, however, disappointed; for though Mariana declared
that the Polyglott Bible was full of errors and inaccuracies, he
acknowledged that they were of no importance, and were not deserving of
theological censure. This decision induced the council to pronounce in
favour of Arias, who was soon after informed that he had gained his
cause at Rome. Mariana was never forgiven by the Jesuits for his
impartiality, and they afterwards made him a victim of the Inquisition.
_Doctor Don Diego Sobanos_, rector of the university of Alcala, a
theologian of the third convocation of the Council of Trent, not only
expressed a favourable opinion of the Catechism of Carranza, but chiefly
by his ascendancy over the theologians of his university, induced them
to approve the work. He was tried by the Inquisition of Valladolid, and
condemned to a pecuniary penalty, and to be absolved _ad cautelam_, from
the censures which he had incurred by approving the Catechism.
_Diego Lainez_, born in Almazan, in the diocese of Siguenza, second
general of the Society of Jesus, was denounced to the Inquisition as
suspected of Lutheranism, and the heresy of the _illuminati_. The
Jesuits did not pardon Valdes for having prosecuted their general, and
they contributed to his dismission in 1566. Diego Lainez, who was at
Rome, succeeded in evading the jurisdiction of the Inquisition of Spain.
_Fray Juan de Regla_, a Jeronimite, who had been confessor to Charles
V., and provincial of his order in Spain, theologian of the Council of
Trent at the second convocation, was arrested by the Inquisition of
Saragossa, on the denunciation of the Jesuits, as suspected of
Lutheranism: he abjured eighteen propositions, was absolved and
subjected to a penance.
_Fray Francisco Villalba_, a Jeronimite of Montamarta, born at Zamora,
was one of the theologians at the second Council of Trent, and preacher
to Charles V. and Philip II. He attended the emperor at his death, and
pronounced his funeral oration. Philip II. had often consulted him. The
Inquisition of Toledo began an action against him as a Lutheran, and
being descended from the Jews. This arose from the envy of some monks of
his order, who denounced him. The general of his order, and his
coadjutors, made inquiries on the genealogy of Villalba, and discovered
that he was not descended either from the Jews or any persons punished
by the Inquisition. The protection of the king prevented the Inquisition
from obtaining witnesses soon enough to substantiate the charges, and
they did not dare to arrest him without further information. At this
period, in 1575, Villalba died at the Escurial, leaving, among honest
Spaniards, the reputation of being a good Catholic.
_Fray Michel de Medina_, a Franciscan, was a theologian of the third
convocation of the Council of Trent. He was born at Benalcazar, and
became a member of the college of St. Peter and St. Paul at the
university of Alcala, and guardian of the convent of Franciscans at
Toledo; he died in 1578, in the secret prisons of that city, after
having been sentenced as suspected of professing the opinions of
Luther. This accusation was occasioned by his great esteem for the
theological writings of Fray Juan de Fero, a monk of his order. He
published some of his works, which were denounced to the Inquisition,
and Medina wrote an apology for them, which was placed in the index by
Cardinal Quiroga, in 1583. Nicolas Antonio has given notices of some
works of Medina, and asserts that he justified himself on his doctrine.
This statement is inaccurate, for Medina was declared to be suspected,
and however innocent he may be supposed, his works were condemned, and
he would have been obliged to abjure and receive absolution _ad
cautelam_, if death had not arrested the progress of his trial.
_Fray Pedro de Soto_, a Dominican, confessor to Charles V. and first
theologian of Pope Pius IV. in the third convocation of the Council of
Trent. He was persecuted by the Inquisition of Valladolid in 1560, on
suspicion of Lutheranism: this suspicion was founded on the declarations
of some accomplices of Cazalla, of the favourable opinion given by Fray
Pedro on the Catechism of Carranza, of his letters to the archbishop,
his efforts to induce Fray Dominic de Soto to retract his first opinions
of the work, and to approve it, and on what he said at the council.
Pedro de Soto was not arrested, as he died at Trent in 1563, during the
first forms of his trial. He was taken by Philip II. to England, to
labour in the cause of religion. Nicolas Antonio mentions his works.
_Fray Dominic de Soto_, a Dominican, professor at Salamanca, attended
the two first convocations of the Council of Trent; he had a great
knowledge of theology, but he showed himself full of deceit and without
any resolution, when, wishing to favour two adverse parties at the same
time, he lost the esteem of both. An account of his conduct towards the
Doctor Egidius has been already given. He did not act with more
sincerity in the affair of the companion of his studies, the Archbishop
of Toledo. The inquisitors of Valladolid commissioned him to examine
and censure the Catechism of Carranza: he noted two hundred
propositions, as _heretical_, _ill-sounding_, or _favouring the
heretics_. The archbishop being informed of his conduct, wrote to Pedro
de Soto in September, 1558, to complain of Fray Dominic, and begged that
he would take his part and defend him. An epistolary correspondence was
the result of this letter, and when Carranza was arrested, the letters
were found among his papers: among them was one which deserves
particular attention; in it Fray Dominic speaks of the trials he had
been put to by the inquisitors of Valladolid, and the violence which was
used to make him censure the Catechism as he had done, although he had
said that he thought it good and according with sound doctrine. These
words were the origin of his trial, and it is certain that he would have
been arrested and taken to the secret prisons; but he died on the 17th
of December, 1560, when his trial began to assume a dangerous aspect.
_Fray Juan de Ludena_, Dominican, born at Madrid, prior of the convent
of St. Paul at Valladolid, and the author of several controversial works
against the Lutherans. He was prosecuted by the Inquisition of
Valladolid in 1559 for Lutheranism, because he gave a favourable opinion
of the Catechism of Carranza. He was not taken to the prisons, but
appeared at the _audiences of the charges_ in the hall of the tribunal.
He justified himself by declaring that he had only read the work through
rapidly, on account of his great confidence in the virtue of the author,
and because he did not discover any error in doctrine: he was condemned
to a private penance, which was not at all humiliating. This precaution,
which prevented his trial from becoming public, gave him the liberty of
attending the third convocation of the Council of Trent in the quality
of procurator to the Bishop of Siguenza, and of preaching before the
fathers of that assembly on the first Sunday in Advent, 1563. If Ludena
had had the boldness to defend his censure, he would certainly have
been punished severely.
To this account a list of other prelates prosecuted by the Inquisition
is added, but those mentioned in the former chapters are omitted.
_Abad y la Sierra_ (Don Augustine), bishop of Barbastro. He was
denounced at Madrid in 1796 as a Jansenist, because he corresponded with
some of the French bishops who had taken the oaths. This denunciation
had no result. He was attacked a second time at Saragossa in 1801. His
accusers renewed the charge of correspondence with the French bishops,
and his having granted matrimonial dispensations according to a royal
order was imputed to him as a crime. This accusation failed as well as
the former.
_Abad y la Sierra_ (Don Manuel), archbishop of Selimbria _in partibus
infidelium_, inquisitor-general after Don Augustine Rubin de Cevallos.
In 1794 Charles IV. commanded him to quit his office, and to retire to
Sopetran, a Benedictine monastery near Madrid. Don Manuel was possessed
of great talents and profound learning; his opinions were enlightened in
the highest degree. In 1793 this prelate commanded me to make him a plan
for an establishment of learned qualifiers to censure books and persons.
After being informed of the principles of my system, he commissioned me
to write a work to expose the vices of the procedure of the holy office,
and to propose one more useful to religion and the state. When this
prelate lost his office of inquisitor-general, he was denounced as a
Jansenist by a fanatical monk, but the information was neglected.
_Arrellano_ (Don Joseph Xavier Rodriguez d'), archbishop of Burgos, and
a member of the council extraordinary of Charles III. This prelate has
composed a great number of works on the theological principles of the
_Summary of St. Thomas_, which are taught by the Dominicans, and are in
opposition to the moral of the Jesuits. The partisans of the Jesuits,
and some friends of the Inquisition, denounced Arellano as a Jansenist,
because he expressed opinions favourable to temporal power, and defended
the royal and civil authorities against the holy office. The inquisitors
could not take any advantage of the denunciation, because it did not
express any particular proposition.
_Buruaga_ (Don Thomas Saenz de). He was archbishop of Saragossa, and
incurred the same danger as Arellano.
_Muzquiz_ (Don Raphael de), born at Viana in Navarre. He was almoner and
preacher to Charles III. and Charles IV., confessor of the Queen Louisa,
successively bishop of Avila and archbishop of Santiago. He was
implicated in the affairs of Don Antonio de la Cuesta and his brother,
and this was sufficient to induce the inquisitors to prosecute him. This
prelate was one of the persecutors of the two brothers. Charles IV.,
having ordered the writings of the trial to be submitted to him,
discovered the intrigue, and condemned the archbishop to pay a
considerable fine, and receive a reprimand.
_Acuna_ (Don Antonio), bishop of Zamora, commander of one of the armies
of Castile, which were raised by the people for the war of the _Commons_
against the oppression of the Flemings, who governed Spain in the name
of Charles V. That prince wished that the bishop and the priests who
engaged in the war, as soldiers, should be punished by the Inquisition
as suspected of heresy, because they acted in opposition to the spirit
of peace taught by Jesus Christ and his Apostles, and contrary to the
spirit of the Catholic Church. Leo X., however, pretended that it would
be a scandal if the bishop was punished by the holy office; and that it
would be sufficient if he was judged at Rome, and the priests by their
diocesan prelates.
_La Plana-Castillon_ (Don Joseph de), bishop of Tarragona. He was a
member of the council-extraordinary convoked by Charles III. The
inquisitors noted him as a Jansenist for the same reasons as
_Arellano_.
_Mendoza_ (Don Alvarez de), bishop of Avila. He was noted in the
registers of the Inquisition as suspected of heresy, from the
declarations of some of the witnesses in the trial of Carranza.
CHAPTER XXX.
OF THE PROSECUTION OF SEVERAL SAINTS AND HOLY PERSONS BY THE
INQUISITION.
An account has been already given of the persecutions of Don Ferdinand
de Talavera, first Archbishop of Granada; of Juan Davila, surnamed the
Apostle of Andalusia; and of San Juan de Dios, founder of the
congregation of Hospitallers. The following is a list of other holy
persons who have been prosecuted by the holy office:--
St. Ignacius de Loyola was denounced as an _illuminati_ to the
Inquisition of Valladolid; and when the inquisitors were about to arrest
him, he went to France, afterwards to Italy, and arrived at Rome, where
he was tried and acquitted; after having been so likewise in Spain by a
juridical sentence of the vicar-general of the Bishop of Salamanca. His
real name was Inigo.
Melchior Cano says, in an unpublished work written during the life of
Inigo, "that he fled from Spain when the Inquisition intended to arrest
him as a heretic of the sect of _Illuminati_. He went to Rome, and
wished to be judged by the Pope. As no person appeared to accuse him, he
was discharged."
It is certain that St. Ignacius was arrested at Salamanca in 1527, as a
_fanatic_ and _illuminati_, and that he recovered his liberty in about
twenty-two days; he was enjoined in his preaching from qualifying mortal
or venial sins, until he had studied theology four years. It is also
true that when the inquisitors of Valladolid learnt that the saint was
in prison, they wrote to cause an inquest to be made of the words and
actions which caused a suspicion that he was one of the _Illuminati_.
But it is not proved that Ignacius quitted Spain to escape from
punishment; it appears that he only fulfilled his intention of studying
theology at Paris. The humility of the saint was so great, that when he
was denounced a second time in that city, to Matthew d'Ory the
apostolical inquisitor, he surrendered himself voluntarily, and had no
difficulty in proving his orthodoxy.
It is not more certain that he went to Rome at that time, since he was
still at Paris in 1535, and he afterwards returned to Spain, where he
remained a year without being molested, though he preached in several
provinces. He then embarked for Italy, went first to Bologna, and then
to Venice, where he was a third time denounced as a heretic, but
justified himself to the papal nuncio, and was admitted into the
priesthood in that city. Ignacius arrived in Rome in 1538.
It cannot be proved that he was acquitted at Rome because he had no
accuser, since any criminal may be prosecuted by the minister of the
public and punished. It is true that there was not at that time a
particular tribunal of the Inquisition at Rome; but the civil judges
could punish heretics, and the procurator-fiscal impeached the
criminals. St. Ignacius was again denounced by a Spaniard named Navarro.
The informer deposed that Ignacius had been accused and convicted of
several heresies in Spain, France, and Venice, and charged him with some
other crimes. Fortunately his three judges knew his innocence, and he
was acquitted. His accuser was banished for life, and three Spaniards
who had supported his evidence were condemned to retract.
Thus it appears that Melchior Cano was misinformed when he wrote, ten
years after, that Inigo was acquitted because no accuser appeared.
St. Francis de Borgia, a disciple of Loyola, and third general of his
order, succeeded Lainez, in 1565, and died 1572. He had been the Duke de
Gandia, and was cousin to the king in the third degree, by his mother,
Jane of Arragon.
In 1559, the Inquisition of Valladolid tried several Lutherans, who were
condemned. Many of these heretics, who endeavoured to justify themselves
by supporting their doctrine by the opinions of St. Francis de Borgia,
whose virtue was well known, related some discourses and actions of this
saint, to prove that they thought as he did on the justification of
souls by faith, on the passion and death of Jesus Christ; and added, to
strengthen their defence, the authority of some mystic treatises. Among
these involuntary persecutors, was Fray Dominic de Roxas, his near
relation, and advantage was taken of a former denunciation of his
_Treatise on Christian Works_, which he composed while he was known as
the Duke of Gandia.
This book, the discourse of Melchior Cano, and the Dominicans, caused
him to be accused as favouring the heresy of the _Illuminati_. Neither
his merit, nor his near relationship to the king, would have saved him
from the prisons of Valladolid, if he had not hastened to Rome the
moment he was informed that his trial had commenced, and that his
enemies would endeavour to secure his person. He escaped from the
Inquisition, but he had the mortification of seeing his work twice
placed in the Index, in 1559 and in 1583.
Juan de Ribera was a natural son of Don Pedro Afan de Ribera, Duke of
Alcala, and Viceroy of Naples and Catalonia. In 1568, he passed from the
bishopric of Badajoz to the archbishopric of Valencia. His life was
irreproachable; but his great charity and ardent zeal, in endeavouring
to reform the clergy, made him many enemies.
In 1570 Philip II. commanded him to visit the University of Valencia,
and reform some of its rules. The archbishop began to fulfil his
commission, but offended some of the doctors, who conspired against
him. They circulated defamatory libels concerning him, during a whole
year, and the affair was carried so far that a monk prayed for his
conversion publicly in the church of Valencia. Ribera was denounced to
the Inquisition, as a heretic, fanatic, and one of the _Illuminati_.
St. Juan de Ribera would not demand the punishment of his slanderers;
but the procurator-fiscal being informed that Onuphrius Gacet, a member
of the college, was the principal author of the intrigue, denounced him
to the provisor and vicar-general of the archbishop. Gacet being
convicted, was imprisoned. The archbishop did not think it proper that a
judge belonging to his own household should take cognizance of offences
which concerned him personally; and in order to remove all suspicion of
partiality, he wished that the trial should be transferred to the
Inquisition of Valencia, as some of the libels and texts of Scripture
were employed in so scandalous a manner, that they came under the
jurisdiction of the tribunal.
St. Juan de Ribera communicated his design to the Cardinal Espinosa,
inquisitor-general, who commanded the inquisitors of Valencia to
continue the trial. The inquisitors had already begun the preparatory
instruction against the archbishop according to the denunciations;
witnesses were found to support them, which is not surprising, since
every accuser caused the men devoted to his party to sign his deposition
as witnesses. The trial, however, took a sudden turn; instead of
proceeding in the usual forms, the inquisitor caused a decree to be read
in all the churches of Valencia, enjoining every individual to denounce
all those who employed passages of the Holy Scriptures in a scandalous
manner, on pain of excommunication. The informations began, and the
inquisitors arrested both priests and laymen. The affair was carried on
as a matter of faith; some of the accused were already condemned, and
others on the point of being so, when the procurator of the holy office
declared that doubts existed of the competence of the inquisitors, and
advised that the affair should be referred to the Pope, who would
appease the scruples.
The tribunal approved of the proposition, and in 1572, Gregory XIII.
expedited a brief, which contained all that has been here related, and
authorized the inquisitor-general, and the provincial inquisitors, to
decide in similar cases, and at the same time sanctioned all that had
been done. The inquisitors then condemned several persons, some to
corporal punishments, others to pecuniary penalties, declaring that they
should have been more severe, but from consideration for the archbishop,
who had solicited the pardon of the criminals, that no person might
suffer from an injury done to him.
St. Theresa de Jesus, one of the most celebrated women in Spain for her
talents, was accused before the Inquisition of Seville. She was not
imprisoned, because the trial was suspended after the preparatory
instructions. She was born at Avila, in 1515.
St. Juan de la Crux, who united with St. Theresa in reforming the
Convents of Carmelites, was born at Ontiveros in the diocese of Avila,
in 1542. He was prosecuted by the Inquisitions of Seville, Toledo, and
Valladolid. He was denounced as a fanatic, and of the _Illuminati_: the
proceedings did not go farther than the preparatory instruction. St.
Juan de la Crux died at Ubeda, in 1591. He composed several works on
mental orisons.
St. Joseph de Calasanz, founder of the institute of regular clerks of
the Christian schools. He was imprisoned in the dungeons of the holy
office as a fanatic, and of the _Illuminati_; but he justified himself
and was acquitted. He died some time after, at the age of ninety-two. He
was born in 1556.
_Venerables._
The venerable Fray Louis de Grenada, born in 1504, was the disciple of
Juan d'Avila; he was of the order of St. Dominic, and left several works
on religion. He was implicated in the trial of the Lutherans at
Valladolid; Fray Dominic de Roxas defended his opinions, by saying that
they were the same as those of Fray Louis de Grenada, Carranza, and
other good Catholics. The procurator-fiscal made Fray Dominic renew his
declaration, with the intention of producing him as a witness in the
trial of Fray Louis: Fray Dominic was burnt five days after. A sentence
condemning some of his works was also brought against Fray Louis.
He was denounced a third time as one of the _Illuminati_, but was
acquitted. Fray Louis died in 1588. His works are well known: it is
singular that the Index in which his condemnation was published, was
afterwards prohibited by the inquisitor-general Quiroga.
The venerable Don Juan de Palafox y Mendoza, the natural son of Don
James Palafox, afterwards Marquis de Hariza and of Donna Maria de
Mendoza (who soon after became a Carmelite); he was born in 1600. He was
made Bishop de la Puebla de los Angelos, in America, in 1639; afterwards
Archbishop and Viceroy of Mexico; and lastly, Bishop of Osma, in Spain,
in 1653. He died in 1659, leaving several works on history, devotion,
and mysticity, and with so great a reputation of sanctity, that his
canonization is pending at Rome.
Don Juan had great disputes with the Jesuits in America, on account of
the privileges of his rank, of which the Fathers wished to deprive him.
The most important of his writings, is his letter to Pope Innocent X.,
who terminated their disputes, to a certain degree, by a brief, in 1648.
The Jesuits did not consider themselves vanquished; they denounced the
archbishop as one of the _Illuminati_ and a false devotee, at Rome, at
Madrid, and at Mexico. The provincial inquisitors of the last city
applied to the Supreme Council, and the venerable Palafox suffered
everything from them which they could inflict, except imprisonment.
They condemned and prohibited the writings which the archbishop had
published in his defence, and circulated those of his adversaries, and
some libels which they had framed to ruin Don Antonio Gabiola,
procurator-fiscal to the Inquisition, who openly disapproved of the
conduct of the Jesuits.
This officer wrote to Palafox in 1647, exhorting him to make every
effort, that the trials before the Inquisition of Mexico should proceed
in a regular manner, according to the spirit of the institution, and
encouraging him to oppose his formidable enemies.
The Jesuits, by their intrigues, succeeded in causing some of the works
of Palafox to be placed in the Index, but the congregation of cardinals
having afterwards declared that they contained nothing reprehensible, or
which could impede his beatification, the inquisitors were obliged to
efface them from the catalogue.
CHAPTER XXXI.
OF THE CELEBRATED TRIAL OF DON CARLOS, PRINCE OF THE ASTURIAS.
All Europe has believed that Philip II. caused the Inquisition to
proceed against Don Carlos his only son; that the inquisitors condemned
the prince to death, and that they only differed on the manner in which
the sentence was to be executed. Some writers have gone so far as to
record the conversations which took place, on this occasion, between
Philip and the inquisitor-general, Don Carlos and other persons, with as
much confidence as if they had been present at them, and have even
quoted part of the sentence as if they had read it.
As it has been my principal aim to ascertain the truth, I have examined
the archives of the Council of the Inquisition and others, and I, in
consequence, affirm, that Don Carlos was never tried or condemned by the
Inquisition; an opinion only was given against the prince by the
councillors of state, whose president was the Cardinal Espinosa, who at
that time was the king's favourite. The circumstance of the cardinal
being inquisitor-general may have been the cause of the mistake; the
deaths of the Count de Egmont and other noblemen, and the intention of
establishing the Inquisition in the Low Countries, may have tended to
confirm the general opinion.
Don Carlos lost his life in consequence of a verbal sentence approved by
his father, and the holy office was not concerned in it. As I wrote only
the history of the Inquisition, this fact renders it unnecessary to say
more on the subject; but as almost all the historians of Europe have
said that the inquisitors condemned Don Carlos, the beat way of
disproving it is to relate the facts as they occurred.
Don Carlos was born at Valladolid, on the 8th of July in 1545, and lost
his mother, Maria of Portugal, four days after his birth. Charles V.
scarcely ever saw him until the year 1557, when he abdicated and retired
to the monastery of St. Juste in Estremadura. He visited his grandson in
passing through Valladolid. It is not true that Charles V. educated Don
Carlos, and formed his mind; but during his various journeys he gave him
good preceptors. The young prince was nine years old, and his father was
on the point of embarking for England, when the emperor wrote a letter
from Germany, dated the 3rd of July, 1554, in which he speaks (among
other tutors intended for his grandson) of Don Honorato Juanez, one of
the greatest humanists of his age, and afterwards Bishop of Osma[34]. It
is evident that Don Carlos was not fond of learning, by a letter from
his father, dated Brussels, 15th of March, 1558, in which he thanks the
preceptor for the trouble he took to give his pupil a taste for reading
and to inculcate moral principles; he desires him to pursue the same
plan, adding, that "though Don Carlos may not profit by it so much as he
ought, it will not be entirely useless. I have also written to Don
Garcia to pay particular attention in selecting those who see and visit
the prince; it will be better to put a taste for study into his head
than many other things[35]." Philip had imbibed a very disadvantageous
opinion of his son's character; he had been informed that the prince
amused himself with cutting the throats of the young rabbits which were
brought to him, and that he appeared to take pleasure in seeing them
expire. Fabian Estrada relates that the same thing was remarked by a
Venetian ambassador[36].
War had been declared between France and Spain, and the two powers were
on the point of giving battle in August, 1558, but at the same time were
negotiating a peace in the secret conference held at the Abbey of
Corpans. One of the articles states that Don Carlos, when he arrived at
a proper age, should marry Isabella, daughter to Henry II., King of
France: the prince was thirteen years of age, and the princess twelve.
This circumstance, and the custom observed at that period, of keeping
the preliminaries of a peace secret till its conclusion, entirely
disproves all that has been said of the love of the young princess,
which is the more improbable, as she had never even seen the prince's
picture, and very unfavourable accounts of his education had been
received. Charles V., after his retirement, had been heard to say, that
he thought his grandson showed a very vicious disposition. This may be
attributed to the education given him by his uncle and aunt, Maximilian,
King of Bohemia, afterwards Emperor, and Jane of Austria. They paid the
greatest attention to the health of Don Carlos, but neglected to repress
his violent inclinations, and confided the care of forming his character
to his governor, his master, and his principal chaplain.
The secret preliminaries only preceded the definitive treaty of peace,
which was concluded at Cambray on the 8th of April, 1559. Mary, Queen of
England, died during the interval, and Philip II., being then a widower,
and only thirty-two years of age, while Don Carlos was scarcely
fourteen, Henry II. thought it better to marry his daughter to the king.
The marriage of Isabella to Philip was therefore agreed upon in the
twenty-seventh article, and the secret article in the preliminaries was
not mentioned.
The marriage was celebrated at Toledo, on the 2nd of February, 1560. The
general Cortes of the kingdom was then held: the members took the oaths
of fidelity to Don Carlos, and acknowledged him as the successor to the
crown, on the 22nd of the same month. The young queen could not attend
this ceremony, as she was attacked by the small pox a few days after her
marriage. Don Carlos had also fallen sick of the quartan fever, some
time before the arrival of the queen in Spain. Although this disorder
did not prevent him from riding on horseback, and attending at the
assembly of the Cortes, it appears, from contemporary writers, that it
rendered him thin, weak, and pale. This circumstance makes it improbable
that he was handsome, and renders the journey which Mercier pretends
that he made to meet the queen at Alcala extremely doubtful.
When she became convalescent, Isabella must certainly have been made
acquainted with the neglected education of Don Carlos, his bad
principles, and his insupportable pride. She could not be ignorant how
ill he treated his attendants; that when he was angry he broke anything
he could seize; and she was probably informed of his behaviour to the
Duke of Alva, at the assembly of the Cortes. The duke had the entire
regulation of everything relating to the ceremonies, and was so much
occupied, that he forgot to attend Don Carlos when he ought to have
taken the oath of fidelity. He was sought for, and found, but the young
prince was furious, and insulted him so grossly, that he almost made him
forget the respect which was due to him. The king compelled Don Carlos
to make an apology to the duke; but it was too late, they hated each
other mortally all their lives.
I have not found in the MSS. I have examined, anything which might lead
to the supposition that Don Carlos was in love with the queen; the
opinion must have been founded on the article in the secret
preliminaries, which, there is reason to suppose, the prince was never
acquainted with. He had scarcely recovered, and the queen was still in a
state of convalescence, when the king sent him to Alcala de Henares. He
was accompanied by Don John of Austria, his uncle, and by Alexander
Farnese, the hereditary Prince of Parma, his cousin; his governor,
master, and almoner, also attended him, with other domestics. The king
expected that this journey would restore the health of his son, and also
wished that he should apply himself to his studies, for he did not yet
understand Latin. Don Honorato Juanez perceived his dislike to learning
foreign languages, and therefore gave him his lessons in Spanish.
On the 9th of May, 1552, Don Carlos, who was then seventeen years of
age, fell down the staircase of his palace, and received several wounds,
principally in the spine and head, some of which appeared to be mortal.
As soon as the king was informed of the accident, he set off for the
palace, that he might give him every assistance, and ordered all the
archbishops, and other superior ecclesiastics of the kingdom, to offer
up prayers for the recovery of his son. The king, supposing him to be
already at the point of death, sent for the body of the blessed Diego, a
lay Franciscan, by which it was said that many miracles had been
performed. This body was laid upon that of Don Carlos, and as he began
to recover from that time, it was attributed to the protection of St.
Diego, who was canonized a short time after, at the request of Philip
II. It must be observed, that the prince was attended by the celebrated
Don Andrea Basilio, the king's physician, who opened his skull, freed it
from a considerable quantity of water which had accumulated, and thus
saved his life; but he never entirely recovered, and was subject to
pains and weakness in the head, which prevented him from studying, and
by producing a disorder in his ideas, rendered his character still more
insupportable.
Don Carlos returned to court in 1564, emancipated from his masters:
Philip recompensed Don Honorato Juanez, by making him bishop of Osma.
The solid piety and amiableness of this prelate had inspired Don Carlos
with an affection which their separation did not interrupt: this is
proved by his letters, which do not give a very advantageous idea of his
capacity or information. He often left sentences imperfect, and a
different meaning might be inferred from them from what he wished to
express. The following is a letter addressed to the prelate:--
"To my master the bishop.--My master: I have received your letter in the
wood: I am well. God knows how much I should have been delighted to go
to see you with the queen[37]: let me know how you were, and if there
was much expense. I went from Alameda to Buitrago, which appeared to me
very well. I went to the wood in two days; I returned here in two days,
where I have been from Wednesday till to day. I am well; I finish. From
the country, June 2nd. My best friend in this world. I will do every
thing that you wish: I, the Prince." He finishes another letter dated on
St. John's day, in the same terms.
Don Carlos was so much attached to the bishop, that he obtained a brief
from the Pope, granting him permission to reside half the year in
Madrid, that he might enjoy his society; but the infirmities of Don
Honorato prevented him from making use of the permission, and soon
caused his death. This prelate availed himself of the attachment of Don
Carlos to give him good advice: the prince appears to have received it
as he ought, but his conduct was not improved by it. He gave himself up
without restraint to the impetuosity of his passions. Some instances may
undeceive those who approve the pompous eulogium bestowed on the talents
and generosity of Don Carlos, by St. Real, Mercier, and others.
One day, when the prince was hunting in the wood of Aceca, he was in
such a passion with his governor, Don Garcia de Toledo, that he rode
after him to beat him. Don Garcia, fearing that he should be forced to
forget the respect due to his prince, took flight, and did not stop till
he reached Madrid, where Philip II. bestowed several favours on him to
induce him to forget the insult he had received: he, however, requested
to be dismissed, and the king appointed in his place Ruy Gomez de Sylva,
Prince of Evoli. This nobleman was also subjected to the most
disagreeable scenes from the violent fits of rage to which Don Carlos
gave way[38].
Don Diego Espinosa (afterwards a cardinal, and Bishop of Siguenza,
Inquisitor-general and Councillor of State) was the president of the
Council of Castile, and banished from Madrid a comedian named
_Cisneros_, at the time when he was about to perform in a comedy in the
apartment of Don Carlos. The prince desired the president to suspend the
sentence until after the representation; but receiving an unfavourable
answer, he ran after him in the palace with a poniard in his hand. In a
transport of rage he insulted him publicly, saying to him, "What, little
priest, do you dare to oppose me, and prevent Cisneros from doing as I
wish? By the life of my father, I will kill you!" He would have done so,
if some grandees who were present had not interposed, and if the
president had not retired[39].
Don Antonio de Cordova, brother of the Marquis de las Navas, and the
prince's chamberlain, slept in his apartment. It once happened that he
did not wake soon enough to attend the prince when he rung his bell; Don
Carlos quitted his bed in a fury, and attempted to throw him out at the
window. Don Alphonso, fearing to fail in respect to the prince in
resisting him, cried out, and the servants immediately came in; he then
repaired to the king's apartment, who, on being informed of what had
passed, took him into his own service[40].
He often struck his servants. His boot-maker having unfortunately
brought him a pair of boots which were too small, he had them cut to
pieces and cooked, and forced the man to eat them, which made him so ill
that he nearly lost his life. He persisted in going out of the palace at
night contrary to all advice, and in a short time his conduct became
extremely scandalous and irregular. It is scarcely possible that the
queen could be ignorant of all these occurrences; and if she was
acquainted with them, it cannot be reasonably supposed that she could
have any inclination for Don Carlos.
In 1565, Don Carlos attempted to go secretly to Flanders, contrary to
the will of his father; he was assisted in this enterprise by the Count
de Gelbes and the Marquis de Tabera, his chamberlain. The prince
intended to take his governor, the Prince d'Evoli, with him (not
considering that he was in the confidence of the king); he thought his
presence would make it supposed that he travelled with the king's
consent. His flatterers procured fifty thousand crowns for him, and four
habits to disguise themselves when they left Madrid: they were
persuaded that if the Prince d'Evoli began the journey, he would be
obliged to go on, or that they might get rid of him; but that able
politician baffled this scheme in the manner related by Cabrera in his
Life of Philip II.
The Bishop of Osma being informed of the irregular conduct of Don
Carlos, and having also received private orders from the king, wrote a
long letter to him[41], directing him how to behave to the king's
ministers, and demonstrating the incalculable evils that would arise
from a different line of conduct. He took particular pains to avoid an
insinuation that the prince stood in need of these admonitions. Don
Carlos received the letter with the respect he always showed for the
worthy prelate, but he did not follow his advice, and had given himself
up to the greatest excesses, when he learnt that his father had bestowed
the government of Flanders on the Duke of Alva. The duke went to take
leave of the prince, who told him that the government was more suitable
to the heir of the crown. The duke replied, that doubtless the king did
not wish to expose him to the dangers which he would incur in the Low
Countries from the quarrels which had arisen between the principal
noblemen. This reply, instead of appeasing Don Carlos, irritated him
still more; he drew his dagger, and endeavoured to stab the duke,
crying, _I will soon prevent you from going to Flanders, for I will stab
you to the heart before you shall go_. The duke avoided the blow by
stepping back; the prince continued the attack, and the duke had no
means of escaping but by seizing Don Carlos in his arms, and although
their strength was very unequal, he succeeded in arresting the blows of
this madman. As Don Carlos still struggled, the duke made a noise in the
apartment, and the chamberlains entered; the prince then made his
escape, and retired to his cabinet to await the result of this scene,
which could not but be disagreeable if the king was informed of it[42].
The vices of Don Carlos could not destroy the affection of the Emperor
of Germany, his uncle, or that of the Empress Maria, his aunt. These
sovereigns wished to marry him to Anne of Austria, their daughter: this
princess had been known to Don Carlos from her earliest years, as she
was born at Cigales in Spain in 1549. Philip consented to this marriage;
but fearing, perhaps, to make his niece miserable if the character and
morals of Don Carlos did not change, he proceeded in the affair with his
usual tardiness. On the contrary, as soon as the prince was informed of
what was in contemplation, he wished to marry his cousin immediately;
and for that purpose resolved to go to Germany without the consent of
his father, hoping that his presence at Vienna would induce the emperor
to overcome all difficulties. Full of this idea, he employed himself in
the execution of his design, and was assisted by the Prince of Orange,
the Marquis de Berg, the Counts Horn and Egmont, and by the Baron de
Montigny, the chiefs of the conspiracy in Flanders. Don Carlos must be
also included among the victims of this conspiracy[43].
The Marquis de Berg and the Baron de Montigny were sent to Madrid as the
deputies of the provinces of Flanders, with the consent of Margaret of
Austria, then governess of the Low Countries, to arrange some points
relative to the establishment of the Inquisition, and other
circumstances which had caused disturbances. These deputies discovered
the prince's intention; they endeavoured to confirm him in his
resolution, and offered to assist him: it was necessary to make use of
an intermediate person in this affair, and they had recourse to M. de
Vendome, the king's chamberlain. They promised Don Carlos to declare him
chief governor of the Low Countries, if he would allow liberty of
opinion in religion. Gregorio Leti speaks of a letter from Don Carlos to
the Count d'Egmont, which was found among the papers of the Duke of
Alva, and was the cause of the execution of the Counts Egmont and Horn:
the Prince of Orange made his escape. At the same time the government
was preparing (though by indirect means) the punishment of the deputies
in Spain.
The prince did not accept the money offered by these noblemen for his
journey, and the steps he took to obtain it himself, occasioned the
discovery of the conspiracy. He wrote to almost all the grandees of
Spain, to request their assistance in an enterprise which he had
planned. He received favourable answers; but most of them contained the
condition, _that the enterprise should not be directed against the
king_. The Admiral of Castile was not satisfied with this precaution.
The mysterious silence in which this scheme was wrapped, and his
knowledge of the small share of understanding possessed by Don Carlos,
made him suspect that the enterprise was criminal.
In order to prevent the danger, the admiral remitted the prince's letter
to the king, who had already been informed of the affair by Don John of
Austria, to whom Don Carlos had communicated it. Some persons suspected
that the assassination of the king formed part of the conspiracy, but
the letters only prove the attempt to obtain money. Don Carlos had taken
into his confidence Garci Alvarez Osorio, his valet-de-chambre, and
commissioned him to give explanations of the design alluded to in the
letters which he carried. This confidant made several journeys to
Valladolid, Burgos, and other cities in Castile, in pursuance of his
master's plan.
The prince did not obtain as much money as he required, and on the 1st
of December, 1567, wrote to Osorio from Madrid; the letter was
countersigned by his secretary, Martin de Gaztalu. He says that he had
only received six thousand ducats on all the promises and letters of
change which had been negotiated in Castile, and that he wanted six
hundred thousand for the plan in question. In order to procure this sum
he sent him twelve blank letters, signed by himself, and with the same
date, that he might fill them up with the names and surnames of the
persons to whom they were remitted: he also ordered him to go to
Seville, and make use of these letters[44].
As the hopes of succeeding in his plan increased, Don Carlos gave way to
more criminal thoughts, and before Christmas in the same year he had
formed the design of murdering his father. He acted without any plan or
discretion, and by the little pains he took to conceal his secret and
secure himself from danger, proved that his resolution was that of a
madman, rather than of a villain and a conspirator.
Philip II. was at the Escurial, and all the royal family at Madrid; they
were to confess and take the sacrament on Sunday the 28th of December,
which was Innocents' Day. This was a custom established at the Court of
Madrid, to obtain a jubilee granted to the kings of Spain by the Popes.
Don Carlos confessed on the 27th to his confessor in ordinary, Fray
Diego de Chaves (afterwards confessor to the king). The prince soon
after told several persons, that having declared his intention of
killing a man of very high rank, his confessor had refused to give him
absolution, because he would not promise to renounce his intention. Don
Carlos sent for other priests, but received the same refusal from them
all. He then endeavoured to exact a promise from Fray Juan de Tobar,
prior of the Convent of the Dominicans of _Atocha_, to give him an
unconsecrated wafer at the sacrament; he wished to make it appear that
he could approach the altar as well as Don John of Austria, Alexander
Farnese, and the rest of the royal family. The prior perceived that the
prince was a madman, and in that persuasion he asked who the person was
that he wished to assassinate, adding, if he was made acquainted with
his rank it might induce him not to require the renunciation of his
design. This was a bold proposition, but the prior only wished to make
Don Carlos name the individual, and he succeeded. The unfortunate Don
Carlos did not hesitate to name the king, and afterwards made the same
declaration to his uncle, Don John. One of the prince's ushers, who
witnessed all that passed, has given a faithful relation of it. As it is
of great importance, and has never been printed, a copy of it is
inserted in the account of the arrest of Don Carlos, at which he was
also present.
Garcia Alvarez Osorio soon procured a sufficient sum of money at
Seville, and Don Carlos prepared to commence his journey towards the
middle of January, 1568. He requested his uncle, Don John, to accompany
him according to a promise he had made when informed of his design. Don
Carlos made many promises to his uncle, who replied that he was ready to
do whatever he thought proper, but that he feared the journey could not
take place, on account of the danger they would incur. Don John informed
the king, who was at the Escurial, of this circumstance; Philip
consulted several theologians and jurisconsults to ascertain if he could
conscientiously continue to feign ignorance, in order to cause his son
to perform his journey. Martin d'Alpizcueta (so celebrated under the
title of the Doctor Navarro) was one of the persons consulted; he
advised the king not to allow Don Carlos to depart, urging that it was
the duty of a sovereign to avoid civil wars, which were likely to be the
result of such a journey, as the loyal subjects of Flanders might go to
war with the rebels. Cabrera says that Melchior Cano was likewise
consulted in this affair[45], but Fray Melchior died in 1560.
The prince communicated his intentions to Fray Diego de Chaves, who
endeavoured to dissuade him, but without success. Don Carlos went to
make a visit to the wife of Don Diego de Cordova, the king's master of
the horse. This lady discovered, from some expressions which dropped
from Don Carlos, that he was prepared to depart, and immediately
informed her husband, who was at the Escurial with the king, and who
gave the letter to his majesty. At last, on the 17th January, 1568, Don
Carlos sent an order to Don Ramon de Tasis, director-general of the
posts, to have eight horses ready for him on the following night. Tasis,
fearing that this order covered some mystery, and knowing the prince's
character, replied that all the post-horses were engaged, and gained
sufficient time to inform the king. Don Carlos sent a more peremptory
order, and Tasis, who dreaded his violence, sent all the post-horses out
of Madrid, and repaired to the Escurial. The king went to the Pardo (a
castle about two leagues from Madrid), where Don John joined him. Don
Carlos, who was ignorant of his father's removal, wished to have a
conference with his uncle, and went as far as _Retamar_[46], whence he
sent for him to come to him. The prince recounted all the arrangements
for his journey. Don John replied that he was ready to set out with him,
but as soon as he left him, he returned to the king to tell him all that
he had heard. The king immediately went to Madrid, where he arrived a
few minutes after Don Carlos[47].
The arrival of the king altered the measures of Don Carlos, and
prevented him from insisting upon having horses that night. Louis
Cabrera has given some details of the circumstances of his arrest, but I
prefer inserting the account of the affair, which was written by the
usher a few days after.
"The prince, my master," says he, "had been for some days unable to
take a moment's rest; he was continually repeating that he wished to
kill a man whom he hated. He informed Don John of Austria of his design,
but concealed the name of the person. The king went to the Escurial, and
sent for Don John. The subject of their conversation is not known; it
was supposed to be concerning the prince's sinister designs. Don John,
doubtless, revealed all he knew. The king soon after sent post for the
Doctor Velasco; he spoke to him of his plans, and the works at the
Escurial, gave his orders, and added that he should not return
immediately. At this time happened the day of jubilee, which the court
was in the habit of gaining at Christmas; the prince went on the
Saturday evening to the Convent of St. Jerome[48]. I was in attendance
about his person. His royal highness confessed at the convent, but could
not obtain absolution, on account of his evil intentions. He applied to
another confessor, who also refused. The prince said to him, '_Decide
more quickly_.' The monk replied, '_Let your highness cause this case to
be discussed by learned men_.' It was eight o'clock in the evening; the
prince sent his carriage for the theologians of the convent of
_Atocha_[49]. Fourteen came, two and two; he sent us to Madrid to fetch
the monks Albarado, one an Augustine, the other a Maturin; he disputed
with them all, and obstinately persisted in desiring to be absolved,
always repeating that he hated a man until he had killed him. All these
monks declaring that it was impossible to comply with the prince's
request, he then wished that they should give him an unconsecrated
wafer, that the court might believe that he had fulfilled the same
duties as the rest of the royal family. This proposal threw the monks
into the greatest consternation. Many other delicate points were
discussed in this conference, which I am not permitted to repeat.
Everything went wrong; the prior of the Convent of _Atocha_ took the
prince aside, and endeavoured to learn the quality of the person he
wished to kill. He replied that he was a man of very high rank, and said
no more. At last the prior deceived him, saying, '_My Lord, tell me what
man it is; it may, perhaps, be possible to give you absolution according
to the degree of satisfaction your highness wishes to take._' The prince
then declared that it was the king, his father, whom he hated, and that
he would have his life. The prior then said, calmly, '_Does your
highness intend to kill the king yourself, or to employ some person to
do it?_' The prince persisted so firmly in his resolution, that he could
not obtain absolution, and lost the jubilee. This scene lasted until two
hours after midnight; all the monks retired overwhelmed with sorrow,
particularly the prince's confessor. The next day I accompanied the
prince on his return to the palace, and information was sent to the king
of all that had passed.
"The monarch repaired to Madrid on Saturday[50]; the next day he went to
hear mass in public, accompanied by his brother and the princes[51]. Don
John, who was ill with vexation, went to visit Don Carlos on that day,
who ordered the doors to be shut, and asked him what had been the
subject of his conversation with the king. Don John replied that it was
about the galleys[52]. The prince asked him many questions to find out
something more, and when he found that his uncle would not be more
explicit, he drew his sword. Don John retreated to the door; finding it
shut, he stood on his defence, and said, '_Hold, your highness_.' Those
who were outside having heard him, opened the doors, and Don John
retired to his hotel. The prince, feeling indisposed, went to bed,
where he remained till six in the evening; he then rose and put on a
dressing-gown. As he was still fasting at eight o'clock, he sent for a
boiled capon; at half-past nine he again retired to bed. I was on duty
on that day also, and I supped in the palace.
"At eleven o'clock I saw the king descending the stairs; he was
accompanied by the Duke de Feria, the grand prior[53], the
lieutenant-general of the guards, and twelve of his men: the king wore
arms over his garments, and had a helmet on; he walked towards the door
where I was; I was ordered to shut it, and not to open it to any person
whatever. These persons were already in the prince's chamber, when he
cried '_Who is there?_' The officers went to the head of his bed, and
seized his sword and dagger. The Duke de Feria took an arquebuse loaded
with two balls[54]. The prince, having uttered cries and menaces, was
told, '_The Council of State is present_.' He endeavoured to seize his
arms, and to make use of them; he had already jumped out of bed when the
king entered. His son then said to him, '_What does your majesty want
with me?_' '_You will soon know_,' replied the king. The door and
windows were fastened; the king told Don Carlos to remain quietly in
that apartment until he received further orders; he then called the Duke
de Feria, and said, '_I give the prince into your care, that you may
guard him and take care of him_:' then addressing Louis Quijada, the
Count de Lerma, and Don Rodrigo de Mendoza[55], he said to them, '_I
commission you to serve and amuse the prince; do not do anything he
commands you without first informing me. I order you all to guard him
faithfully, on pain of being declared traitors._' At these words the
prince began to utter loud cries, and said, '_You had much better kill
me, than keep me a prisoner; it is a great scandal to the kingdom: if
you do not do it, I shall know how to kill myself._' The king replied,
'_that he must take care not to do so, because such acts were only
committed by madmen_.' The prince said, '_Your majesty treats me so ill,
that you will force me to come to that extremity, either from madness or
desperation_.' Some other conversation passed between them, but nothing
was decided on, because neither the time nor place permitted it.
"The king retired; the duke took the keys of the doors, and sent away
the valets and other servants of the prince. He placed guards in the
cabinet, four _Monteros d'Espinosa_, four Spanish halberdiers, and four
Germans with their lieutenant. He afterwards came to the door where I
was, and placed there four _Monteros_, and four guards, and told me to
retire. The keys of the prince's escrutoires and trunks were then taken
to the king; the beds of the valets were taken away. The Duke de Feria,
the Count de Lerma, and Don Rodrigo, watched by his highness that night;
he was afterwards watched by two chamberlains, who were relieved every
six hours. The persons appointed by the king for this service, were the
Duke de Feria, the Prince of Evoli, the prior, Don Antonio de Toledo,
Louis Quijada, the Count de Lerma, Don Fadrique Enriquez, and Don Juan
de Valesco[56]; they did not wear arms for this service. The guards did
not allow us to approach either night or day. Two chamberlains prepared
the table; the major-domo came to fetch the dinner in the court. No
knives were allowed, the meat was taken in already cut up. Mass was not
said in the prince's apartment, and he has not heard it since he was
imprisoned[57].
"On Monday[58] the king assembled in his apartment all the councillors
and their presidents; he made to each council a report of the arrest of
his son; he said that it had taken place for things which concerned the
service of God and the kingdom. Eye-witnesses have assured me that his
majesty shed tears in making this recital. On Tuesday, his majesty
convoked in his apartment the members of the Council of State; they
remained there from one o'clock till nine in the evening. It is not
known what they were occupied with. The king made an inquest; Hoyos was
the secretary[59]. The king was present at the declarations of each
witness; they were written down, and formed a pile six inches in height.
He gave to the council the privileges of the _Majorats_[60], as well as
those of the king and prince of Castile, that they might take cognizance
of them.
"The queen and the princess were in tears[61]. Don Juan went to the
palace every evening; he went once plainly dressed and in mourning; the
king reproached him, and told him to dress himself as usual. On the
Monday above-mentioned his majesty gave orders that all the prince's
valets-de-chambre should retire to their respective homes, promising to
provide for them. He caused Don Fadrique, the admiral's brother, and the
prince's major-domo, and Don Juan de Valesco to enter into the service
of the queen." _Here finishes the relation of the usher._
Philip II. saw very plainly that an event of this nature could not long
remain concealed, and would not fail to excite the curiosity of the
public. He therefore thought it necessary to give notice of it to all
the civil and ecclesiastical authorities, to the Pope, the Emperor of
Germany, to several sovereigns of Europe, to Catherine of Austria, Queen
of Portugal, widow of John III., sister of Charles V., aunt and
mother-in-law of Philip II., grandmother of the unfortunate prisoner,
and aunt and grandmother of Anne of Austria, to whom he was to have been
married. This relationship is the reason why Philip calls her in his
letter _the mother and mistress of all the family_. Louisa Cabrera says,
that this letter was addressed to the Empress of Germany, his sister, to
whom he also wrote; but the Queen of Portugal was the only one to whom
the title could be applied.
In the letter addressed to the Pope, and dated from Madrid on the 20th
of January, the king says, that though he is afflicted, he has the
consolation of knowing that he had done his utmost to procure a good
education for his son, and had shut his eyes to all that might arise
from his physical organization; but that the service of God and his duty
to his subjects would no longer permit him to tolerate his conduct. He
finishes by promising to inform his holiness further of the affair, and
asks his prayers for a happy result. On the same day Philip wrote
another letter to Queen Catherine, his aunt, in which he imparts all his
paternal grief. He reminds her that he had already informed her of some
preceding circumstances which caused fears for the future, and tells her
that the arrest would not be followed by any other punishment, but that
it had been decided on to put a stop to his irregularities: the letter
to the empress is in much the same terms.
In that which the king addressed to the cities, he said, that if he only
had been a father, he should never have decided upon such a
determination, but that as a king he could not to do otherwise, and
that it was only in acting thus that he could prevent the evils which
his clemency would have occasioned. Don Diego Colmenares has inserted,
in his history of Segovia, the letter sent by the king to that city. All
the other cities and the different authorities received similar letters,
which were inclosed in others to the corregidors. In that to the
corregidor of Madrid, Philip commands him to prevent the municipality
from making representations in favour of his son, since it was not
necessary that a father should be solicited to grant a pardon. He also
commands that, in the reply, no detail of the affair should be entered
into. On the address from Murcia, the king (who had read them all) wrote
the following note: "_This letter is written with prudence and
reserve_." As it has never been published, and will show the style
approved by Philip on this occasion, it is here inserted.
"Sacred, Catholic, and Royal Majesty:--The municipality of Murcia has
received your majesty's letter containing your determination relating to
the imprisonment of our prince. The municipality kisses your majesty's
feet a thousand times for the distinguished favour shown them in
informing them of this event; it is fully persuaded that the reasons and
motives which have guided your majesty were so important, and so
conducive to the public good, that you could not do otherwise. Your
majesty has governed your kingdom so well, maintained your subjects in
such a state of peace, and caused religion to prosper so much, that it
is natural to conclude, that in an affair which concerns you so nearly,
your majesty has only resolved on it for the service of God, and the
general welfare of your people. Nevertheless, this city cannot help
experiencing unfeigned sorrow, for the important causes which have given
fresh grief to your majesty; it cannot consider without emotion, that it
possesses a sovereign sufficiently just and attached to the good of his
kingdom to prefer it before everything, and to make him forget his
tender affection for his own son. So great a proof of love must compel
your majesty's subjects to testify their gratitude by their submission
and fidelity. This city, which has always been distinguished for its
zeal, will, at this time, give a greater proof of it in immediately
obeying your majesty's commands. God preserve the royal and Catholic
person of your majesty! In the municipal council of Murcia, February
16th, 1568."
Pius V., and all the other persons to whom Philip had written, replied,
by interceding for his son. They said it might be hoped that so striking
an event would be a check to the prince, and induce him to alter his
conduct. No one made more earnest intercessions than Maximilian II.; it
is true that he was more interested on account of the marriage intended
for his daughter. He was not satisfied with writing, but sent the
Archduke Charles to Madrid, for the purpose of interfering. The journey
which the archduke was obliged to make into Flanders and France, was the
ostensible motive for that to Madrid. Philip was inflexible; he not only
detained the prince as a prisoner, but proved, by the following
ordinance, that he intended to keep him so. It was confirmed by the
Secretary Pedro del Hoyo, and the execution of it confided to the Prince
of Evoli, who was appointed his lieutenant-general in everything
relating to the prince. It was as follows:--
"The Prince of Evoli is the chief of all the persons employed in the
service of the prince, in guarding, supplying him with food, and in his
health, and other ways. He shall cause the door to be fastened by a
latch, and not locked, either night or day, and he shall not allow the
prince to come out. His majesty appoints to guard, serve, and keep the
prince company, the Count de Lerma, Don Francis Manrique, Don Rodrigo de
Benavides, Don Juan de Borgia, Don Juan de Mendoza, and Don Gonzalo
Chacon. No other individual (except the physician, the barber, and the
_montero_[62], who has the care of the prince's person) shall be allowed
to enter the apartment, without the king's permission. The Count de
Lerma shall sleep in the chamber of Don Carlos. If he cannot do this,
one of his colleagues must take his place; one of them shall watch all
night: this duty they may fulfil in turns. During the day they shall
endeavour to be all together in the apartment, that Don Carlos may be
diverted and enlivened by their company; and they shall not dispense
with this duty, unless they are compelled by business. These noblemen
shall converse on indifferent topics with the prince; they shall take
care to avoid conversing on anything relating to his affair, and as much
as possible all that concerns the government; they shall obey all the
orders which he gives for his service or satisfaction, but they shall
not take charge of any commission from him to people without. If Don
Carlos happens to speak of his imprisonment, they shall not answer him;
and they shall relate all that passes to the Prince d'Evoli. The king
particularly recommends to them (if they would not fail in the fidelity
and obedience they have sworn), never to report elsewhere anything that
has been said or done in the interior, without first obtaining his
consent; if any of them hear the affair spoken of, in the city, or in
particular houses, he or they must report it to the king. Mass shall be
said in the chapel, and the prince shall hear it from his chamber, in
the presence of two of the noblemen who have the care of him. The
breviary, hours, rosary, and any other books which he asks for, shall be
given him, provided they treat of nothing but devotion. The six
_monteros_ who guard and serve the prince shall take the food for his
table into the first saloon, to be served to his highness by the
noblemen: a _montero_ shall take the dishes in the second chamber. The
_monteros_ shall be employed, and serve night and day, according to the
regulations of Rui Gomez de Sylva. Two halberdiers shall be placed in
the porch of the hall, leading to the court; they shall not allow any
person to enter, without the permission of the Prince d'Evoli. In his
absence, they shall ask it of the Count de Lerma, or of any one of the
others, who is appointed to act as chief in their absence. Rui Gomez de
Sylva is commissioned to command, in the name of the king, the
lieutenant-captains of the Spanish and German guards, to place eight or
ten halberdiers outside the porch. These men shall also mount guard at
the doors of the infantas; two shall be placed in the apartment of Rui
Gomez, from the time when the great gate of the palace is opened, until
midnight, when the prince's chamber shall be closed, and the _monteros_
commence their service. Each nobleman is permitted to have a servant for
his own use; he shall select from his people the one he has most
confidence in. All these persons shall make oath, before the Prince
d'Evoli, to execute faithfully the regulations contained in this
ordinance. Rui Gomez, and the noblemen under his orders, shall inform
the king of any negligence in this respect. The said Rui Gomez is
commanded to supply all that shall be considered necessary in the
service, and which has not been stated in this ordinance. As all the
responsibility rests upon him, his orders must be executed by the people
under him."
The secretary Hoyo read this ordinance to all the persons employed, and
to each in particular; they all took the oath required.
It has been shown by the recital of the usher, that Philip gave orders
for the trial of his son. The king having proceeded to the interrogation
of the witnesses, by means of the secretary Hoyo, created a special
commission to examine into the affair. It was composed of Cardinal
Espinosa, the inquisitor-general, the Prince of Evoli, and Don Diego
Bribiesca de Munatones, a counsellor of Castile: the king presided.
Munatones was charged with the instruction of the process. Philip, who
wished to give this affair the air of a proceeding for a crime of
_lese-majeste_, caused to be brought from the royal archives of
Barcelona, the writings of a trial instituted by his great-great
grandfather, John II., King of Aragon and Navarre, against Charles, his
eldest son, Prince of Biana and Girone, who had already been
acknowledged as the successor to the throne.
The ordinance concerning the imprisonment of Don Carlos was so strictly
observed, that the queen and the princess Jane, who wished to see and
console him, were refused permission to do so by the king. Philip was so
suspicious of every one, that he lived in a kind of captivity, and did
not make his accustomed excursions to Aranjuez, the Pardo, and the
Escurial. He kept himself shut up in his apartment; the least noise in
the street drew him to the window, such was his dread of some tumult. He
had always suspected the Flemings, or other persons, of being the
prince's partisans, or at least to affect it.
The unhappy Don Carlos, who was not accustomed to conquer his passions,
could never make use of any means to palliate his misfortune. He gave
himself up to the greatest impatience, and refused to confess, to enable
himself to fulfil the duty always performed by the royal family on Palm
Sunday. His old master, the Bishop of Osma, had died in 1566. The king
commanded the Doctor Suarez de Toledo, his first almoner, to visit him,
and try to persuade him: his efforts were unavailing, though Don Carlos
always treated him with great respect. On Easter-day, Suarez wrote a
long and touching letter to him, in which he proved by unanswerable
arguments, that his highness did not take the proper means of
terminating the affair favourably. He represented that his highness had
no longer either friends or partisans, and reminded him of several
scandalous scenes which had increased the number of his enemies; he
finishes his letter in the following terms: "Your highness may easily
imagine all that will be said when it is known that you do not confess,
and when many other terrible things are discovered; some are so much so,
that if it concerned any other person than your highness, _the holy
office would be entitled to inquire if you are really a Christian_. I
declare to your highness, with all truth and fidelity, that you only
expose yourself to lose your rank, and (what is worse) your soul. I am
obliged to say, in the grief and bitterness of my heart, that there is
no remedy, and the only advice I can give you, is to return towards God
and your father, who is his representative on earth. If your highness
will follow my advice, you will apply to the president, and other
virtuous persons, who will not fail to tell you the truth, and conduct
you in the right way." This letter had no more success than any of the
other attempts; the prince still refused to confess.
The despair which Don Carlos soon felt, made him neglect all regularity
in taking food and rest. He became so heated by the rage which preyed on
him, that iced water (which he used continually) had no effect on him.
He caused a great quantity of ice to be put into his bed, to temper the
dryness of his skin, which was become insupportable. He walked about
naked, and without shoes or stockings, on the pavement, and remained
whole nights in this state. In the month of June, he refused all
nourishment but iced water, for eleven days, and became so weak that it
was supposed he had not long to live. The king being informed, went to
visit him, and addressed some words of consolation to him, the result of
which was to induce the prince to eat more than was proper for him in
his weak state, and this excess brought on a malignant fever,
accompanied by a dangerous dysentery. The prince was attended by Doctor
Olivares, chief physician to the king; he went in alone to the patient,
and when he returned, held a consultation with the other physicians of
the king, in the presence of the Prince d'Evoli.
The preliminary case, drawn by Don Diego Bribiesca de Munatones, was
sufficiently advanced in the month of July, to allow of a final
sentence, without examining the criminal, or to appoint a procurator for
the king, who in quality of fiscal accused the prince of the crimes
stated in the _preparatory instruction_. No judicial notice was sent to
the prince; they had only the declarations of the witnesses, letters,
and other papers.
These writings proved that, according to the laws of the kingdom, Don
Carlos must be condemned to death, for high treason, on two counts:
first, for having attempted parricide; and secondly, for having framed a
plan to usurp the sovereignty of Flanders, by means of a civil war.
Munatones made a report of this, and the punishments established for
such crimes, to the king; he added, that particular circumstances, and
the rank of the criminal, might authorize his majesty to declare, that
general laws could not affect the eldest sons of kings, because they
were subject to laws of a higher nature, those which related to policy,
and the welfare of the state; lastly, that the monarch might, for the
good of his subjects, commute the punishment.
Cardinal Espinosa and the Prince of Evoli were of the opinion of
Munatones; Philip then said, that his heart inclined him to follow their
advice, but that his conscience would not permit him to do so: that he
thought it would be far from being a benefit to Spain; that, on the
contrary, he thought it would be the greatest misfortune that could
happen to his kingdom, to be governed by a king devoid of knowledge,
talents, judgment, or virtue, full of vices and passions, and, above
all, furious, ferocious and sanguinary; that these considerations
compelled him, notwithstanding his attachment to his son, and his
anguish at so terrible a sacrifice, to suffer the laws to take their
course; but considering that the health of Don Carlos was in such a
state that there was no hope of prolonging his life, he thought it would
be better to suffer him to satisfy himself in his inclinations in eating
and drinking, since, from the disorder of his ideas, he would not fail
to commit some excess, which would lead him to the tomb: that the only
thing which concerned him, was the necessity of persuading his son that
his death was inevitable, and that in consequence he must confess
himself to ensure salvation; that this was the greatest proof of
affection which he could show to his son and the Spanish nation.
This decision of the king is not mentioned in the writings of the trial.
There was no sentence written or signed; but the secretary Hoyo, in a
note, says, _that at this period of the trial the prince died of his
malady, and this was the reason why no sentence was pronounced_. The
proof of the fact exists in other papers, in which the curious anecdotes
of the time have been related. Although these documents are not
authentic, they merit attention, as they were written by persons
employed in the king's palace, and accord with what some writers have
insinuated. It is true that they did think proper not to speak plainly
on such delicate subjects, but they have said enough to lead to the
truth.
Cardinal Espinosa and the Prince of Evoli thought that they should
fulfil the intentions of Philip in hastening the death of Don Carlos;
they agreed that the physician should inform the prince of his
condition, without saying anything of the king's displeasure or of the
trial, and that he should prepare him to receive the exhortations which
would be made for the benefit of his soul: by these means they hoped to
induce him to confess and prepare himself for death, which would put an
end to his misfortunes.
The Prince of Evoli held a conference with the Doctor Olivares. He spoke
to him in that mysterious and important manner which persons versed in
the politics of courts know so well how to employ, when it is necessary
to further the views of their sovereign, or their own designs. Rui Gomez
de Sylva was perfect in this art, according to the opinion of his friend
Antonio Perez, the first secretary of state, who was well acquainted
with all that passed. In one of his letters he says, _that after the
death of the Prince of Evoli, there would be no one but himself
initiated in these mysteries_.
Olivares perfectly understood that he was expected to execute the
sentence of death pronounced by the king; and that it was to be done in
such a manner, that the prince's honour should not be affected; in
short, that his death was to appear natural. He therefore endeavoured to
express himself, so as to inform the prince of Evoli that he
comprehended him, and considered it as an order from the king.
On the 20th of July, Olivares ordered a medicine which Don Carlos took.
Louis Cabrera, who was employed in the palace at that time, and who
often saw Rui Gomez, says in his history of Philip II., that "_this
medicine did not produce any beneficial effect; and the malady appearing
to be mortal_, the physician informed the patient, that he must prepare
to die like a good Christian, and receive the sacraments."
The histories published by Cabrera, Wander-Hamen, Opmero and Estrada,
all agree with the secret memoirs of the times which I have read. It is
not surprising, then, that the Prince of Orange, in his manifesto
against Philip II., should impute to him the death of his son[63]; that
James Augustus de Thou, a French contemporary historian, has done the
same, from the accounts given him by Louis de Foix, a French architect,
employed in building the Escurial, and Pedro Justiniani, a Venetian
nobleman, who resided some time in Spain; although he was mistaken in
making the holy office interfere in this affair; in supposing that the
prince died, in a few hours, from poison; and in advancing some other
errors on the authority of his two informants[64]. It is not more
surprising that the authors cited by Gregorio Leti have stated things
which appear to be written by the pen of a novelist or romance writer,
because the death of the prince being occasioned by a mysterious
medicine, administered according to a private order, no one doubted that
it was caused by violence, and endeavoured to conjecture how it was
done.
But the truth is always discovered sooner or later, and after a century
and a half, we find so many isolated facts and accounts of this event,
that they produce conviction, and show that the death of Don Carlos had
the external appearances of a natural death, and that he himself
considered it to be so. The accounts of some foreign historians, of the
result of the medicine, have been refuted by authentic documents: those
of the writers, who have composed romances under the names of histories,
are equally disproved. I shall therefore proceed to relate the facts as
they occurred.
Don Carlos, on being informed by Olivares that death was approaching,
desired that Fray Diego de Chaves, his confessor, might be sent for: his
orders were executed on the 21st of July. The prince commissioned the
monk to ask pardon of his father, in his name; the king sent to tell
him, that he granted it with all his heart, as well as his blessing, and
that he hoped his repentance would obtain pardon from God. On the same
day he received the sacraments of the Eucharist and Extreme Unction with
great devotion. He also, with the king's consent, made a will, which was
written by Martin de Gatzelu, his secretary. On the 22nd and 23rd he was
in a dying state, and tranquilly listened to the exhortations of his
confessor and Doctor Suarez de Toledo. The ministers proposed to the
king that he should see his son, and give him his blessing in person, as
it would be a consolation to him on his death-bed. Philip asked the
opinion of the two ecclesiastics above-mentioned. They said that Don
Carlos was well-disposed, and it might be feared that the sight of his
father would occasion some disturbance in his mind. This motive
restrained him for the present; but being informed, on the night of the
23rd, that his son was at the point of death, he went to his apartment,
and extending his arms between the Prince of Evoli and the grand prior,
he gave him his blessing a second time, without being perceived. He then
retired weeping, and Don Carlos expired soon after, at four o'clock in
the morning of the 24th of July, which was the day before the festival
of St. James, the patron Saint of Spain.
The death of Don Carlos was not kept secret. He was interred, with all
the pomp due to his rank, in the church of the Convent of the Nuns of
St. Dominic _el Real_, at Madrid, but there was no funeral oration.
Philip II. announced the death of Don Carlos to all the authorities who
had been informed of his imprisonment. The city of Madrid also
celebrated solemn obsequies on the 14th of August. The sermon was
preached by Fray Juan de Tobar, the same monk who had deceived the
prince, to make him confess who he wished to kill. In the same year a
long account of the sickness, death, and funeral of Don Carlos was
printed. The municipality of Madrid had ordered it to be written by Juan
Lopez del Hoyo, professor of Latin in that capital.