ORBIT-OnlineRepository ofBirkbeckInstitutionalTheses Enabling Open Access to Birkbeck’s Research Degree output Change in the fourteenth-century inquisition seen through Bernard Gui’s and Nicholas Eymerich’s in- quisitors’ manuals https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/40183/ Version: Full Version Citation: Hill, Derek Arthur (2016) Change in the fourteenth-century in- quisition seen through Bernard Gui’s and Nicholas Eymerich’s inquisi- tors’ manuals. [Thesis] (Unpublished) c 2020 The Author(s) All material available through ORBIT is protected by intellectual property law, including copy- right law. Any use made of the contents should comply with the relevant law. Deposit Guide Contact: email Change in the Fourteenth-Century Inquisition seen through Bernard Gui’s and Nicholas Eymerich’s Inquisitors’ Manuals Ph.D. Thesis by Derek Arthur Hill MA (UCL), MA (Oxon), Birkbeck College, University of London. 1 I certify that this thesis is all my own work. D A Hill 19 October 2015 2 Abstract This thesis examines how the inquisitio hereticæ pravitatis (the ‘inquisition’) changed in the 14th century. It does so through a comparison of Gui’s Practica inquisitionis heretice pravitatis, and Eymerich’s Directorium inquisitorum, which are the fullest accounts of inquisitorial practice in the fourteenth century. It therefore concentrates on the Languedoc and Aragon, although wider evidence is used where possible. It points out several areas of change between these two points in the evolution of the inquisition: a) Gui’s Practica was a conservative response to a changing heresy threat, which adapted the existing methods of the successful Languedoc inquisition to meet new threats like the Beguins, Pseudo-Apostles and magicians. Eymerich, who came some 50 years later, was a systematizer and an innovator. He defined the inquisition in such a way that any heterodox thinking could be found to be heresy by an inquisitor. He also innovated in seeing the inquisition’s jurisdiction as extending over Jews (not just Jews converted to Christianity and their helpers), blasphemers and magicians. In this he was following secular trends where magicians were increasingly perceived as a problem and blasphemy was considered a serious offence; and in Aragon there had long been efforts amongst Dominicans to get more jurisdiction over Jews. b) Gui worked closely with the secular power and was cautious in his approach to the business of inquisition. Eymerich was more distant from the secular power and envisaged a more autonomous inquisition. c) Although Gui used torture on occasions, Eymerich made torture the default mechanism for resolving nearly all suspected cases of heresy. d) Gui’s inquisition was still a temporary expedient for defined heresies. Eymerich saw the inquisition as a permanent and institutional part of the Church, which would protect it against all doctrinal assault. In this he saw diabolic influences as playing an important role. 3 Table of Contents Page Chapter Title 5 I Introduction and Historiography 31 II The Interpretation of Gui’s Practica and Eymerich’s Directorium 60 III Inquisitors’ Companions and Relationships with the Secular Arm and with the Rest of the Church 96 IV The Theatre of Inquisition 121 V Changes in Thinking on Inquisition and Heresy 165 VI Detection, Interrogation and the Inquisitor’s Relationship with Suspects 221 VII Conclusions and Consequences 239 Annex Super illius Specula A 241 Bibliography 4 Chapter I: Introduction and Historiography Aim of Thesis This thesis explores how the inquisitio hereticæ pravitatis (the ’inquisition’) developed in Western Europe in the 14th century.1 That is, how the body of laws, procedures and practices which constituted the inquisition, and the thinking that underlay them, changed. There was not the rapid transformation seen in the 13th century, when the inquisition was invented and given nearly all its full canon law powers. But 14th century changes were still significant, and have been less studied than those of the previous century. They consisted not so much of amendments to canon law but of changes in procedures and developments in the idea of what heresy was and the place of the inquisition in combatting it. They were important for the early modern Inquisition in the 16th century, when Nicholas Eymerich’s Directorium Inquisitorum, which is one of the principal focuses of this thesis, became an influential inquisitorial text-book.2 Methodology The clearest view of how the inquisition actually worked comes from inquisitorial manuals, because they treat the whole inquisitorial process in a systematic and linear way. For that reason this thesis maps the development of the 14th century inquisition primarily through a comparison of Bernard Gui’s Practica Inquisitionis Heretice Pravitatis, and Eymerich’s Directorium, which are the two most complete accounts of inquisitorial practice in the 14th century.3 Conclusions have been checked as far as possible against other surviving sources, notably two other 14th century Italian inquisitors’ manuals as well as various inquisitors’ registers and other inquisitorial records and Gui’s Sentences. But the concentration on Gui and Eymerich means that the focus of this thesis is on the Languedoc and Aragon. It does not reach conclusions about other jurisdictions such as Italy or Germany. 1 Literally ‘the inquiry into heretical depravity’, the medieval title of what was referred in early modern times as the ‘Inquisition’ or ‘Holy Office’. 2 Nicholas Eymerich, Directorium inquisitorum, (Rome: 1578), ‘Directorium’. 3 Bernardus Guidonis, Practica Inquisitionis Heretice Pravitatis, ed. by Célestin Douais, (Paris: Picard, 1886), ‘Practica’. 5 There are concomitant risks in this approach through inquisitorial manuals. First there is the nature of the manuals themselves. They are not objective descriptions of how the inquisition worked but are in practice be influenced by assumptions, prejudices and wider aims shared by inquisitors, issues which are discussed in Chapter II. Other surviving inquisitorial records of interrogations or sentences are perhaps more likely to reflect the reality of inquisition business, but they tend to shine a spotlight on only a part of the inquisitorial process and raise their own interpretational difficulties. Second, Gui and Eymerich both had to some extent individual views on the inquisitorial process and Eymerich in particular promoted a particular view of what the inquisition should be. Their views were not necessarily representative of all inquisitors at their time. Nor was the development of the inquisition necessarily linear. For example, the use of torture may have been rather less with Gui than some of his predecessors (e.g. Bernard de Castanet).4 It therefore cannot be assumed that all change between Gui and Eymerich represented change in inquisitorial practice more widely. Using other sources will, it is hoped, mitigate this risk and produce a clearer picture. Nevertheless, despite these risks, on balance the most productive and practicable way of examining change in the 14th century inquisition is through Gui’s and Eymerich’s manuals. This thesis endeavours to cover all aspects of inquisitorial activity in the 14th century in order to explore change; but how far one can drill down in particular areas is determined by the sources that have survived. Some areas can be studied relatively well; in others thinner evidence has to be built on as far as is possible. For example little is known about the conduct of relations between the secular power and the inquisition, except where these reached crisis point. One can study formal requests for help in (e.g.) Bernard Gui’s Practica, but the relationship must have consisted of more than sending formal requests back and forward. Nor is there a comprehensive view of how the inquisition was perceived by the population in those places where it operated, in particular of the popular feeling generated by inquisitorial action outside the limited field of heretics and their supporters and families. Similarly little is known about even the most substantial public inquisitorial events the sermones generales other than the inquisitors’ sentences and their directions about how they 4 See Alan Friedlander, The Hammer of Inquisitors. Brother Bernard Délicieux and the Struggle Against the Inquisition in Fourteenth-Century France (Leiden: Brill, 2000). 6 should be managed.5 It would be helpful to know how they were seen by those involved and their physical appearance. The sources for the 14th century are also uneven over time. For the first thirty years there are some relatively rich sources: (e.g.) the trial of the Templars, material on Agnes Porète, Fournier’s and d’Ablis’ inquisitors’ registers of interrogations, Gui’s Sentences and Practica and material on Beguin trials in the Doat collection.6 The latter part of the century is less well served, with relatively sparser trial and sentencing material, and Eymerich’s Directorium stands out as much the most comprehensive work. Historiography The historiography of the inquisition in the 14th century is considerable, but not for the most part focussed on the subject of this thesis, change in the 14th century inquisition. In so far as inquisitorial change in this century has been addressed by historians, it has been in relation to topics such as the rising importance of magic or individual cases such as the Templars or Raymond Llull. This historiography nevertheless provides valuable insights, which this thesis uses and this section gives a short