Heresy Proceedings in Languedoc, 1500-1560 Author(S): Raymond A

Home , Agenais, Armagnac (province), Capitoul, Castelnaudary, Count of Foix, Forez

Heresy Proceedings in Languedoc, 1500-1560 Author(s): Raymond A. Mentzer, Jr. Source: Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, Vol. 74, No. 5 (1984), pp. 1-183 Published by: American Philosophical Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1006391 . Accessed: 17/12/2013 10:14

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

American Philosophical Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions of the American Philosophical Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TRANSACTIONS ofthe AmericanPhilosophical Society Held at Philadelphiafor Promoting Useful Knowledge

VOLUME 74, Part 5, 1984

Heresy Proceedingsin Languedoc, 1500-1560

RAYMOND A. MENTZER,JR. Associate Professorof History, Montana State University

THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY

Independence Square, Philadelphia

1984

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Copyright? 1984 by The AmericanPhilosophical Society

Libraryof Congress Catalog Card Number 83-73280 IntemationalStandard Book Number 0-87169-745-9 US ISSN 0065-9746

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions CONTENTS

Page Introduction...... 1 Part 1. JudicialInstitutions ...... 13 I. The Inquisition...... 15 II. The Crisis of the Inquisition ...... 25 III. The Episcopacy ...... 35 IV. The Royal Tribunals ...... 44 V. Municipal Justice ...... 57 Part 2. CriminalProcedure ...... 65 VI. Preliminariesof the Trial ...... 67 VII. The Interrogationand Confrontation...... 81 VIII. Defense and Torture ...... 93 IX. A ppeals ...... 104 X. Punishment ...... 112 Part 3. The Law and Its Application ...... 129 XI. Heresy Statutes ...... 131 XII. The Geographyof the Accused ...... 142 XIII. Social and Occupational Status of the Accused ...... 151 Conclusion ...... 159 Appendices ...... 167 Glossaryof Terms ...... 171 Bibliography ...... 172 Index ...... 182

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions GRAPHS AND MAPS

Page Fig. 1. Registersof the CriminalChamber of the Parlementof Toulouse ...... 5 Fig. 2. Area Administeredby the Parlementof Toulouse ...... 6 Fig. 3. Distributionof Accused Hereticsby Departement ...... 145 Fig. 4. PrincipalTowns at which HereticsWere Sought ...... 147 Fig. 5. ReformedChurches in SouthernFrance (Sixteenth Century) ...... 149 Fig. 6. Number of Accused HereticsCalculated by Decade ..... 164 Fig. 7. Number of Accused HereticsCalculated by Year ...... 165

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ABBREVIATIONS

A.D. ArchivesDepartementales A.D.H.G. ArchivesDepartementales, Haute-Garonne A.M. ArchivesMunicipales A.N. ArchivesNationales Annales:E.S.C Annales:e'conomies, societes, civilisations ARG Archivfur Reform ationsgeschichte BHR Bibliothequed'Humanisme et Renaissance B.N. BibliothequeNationale BSHPF Bulletinde la Societe'de l'histoiredu protestantisme fran(ais reg. register RHD Revuehistorique de droitfrantais et etranger

NOTE REGARDING DATES Unless noted specificallyas old style (o.s.), all dates have been changed to reflectthe modernpractice of beginningthe year on 1 January.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This monographbegan as a doctoral dissertationat the Universityof Wisconsinand a generous fellowshipfrom the universitymade possible the initialresearch in the Frencharchives and libraries.A laterfellowship fromthe AmericanCouncil of Learned Societies permittedmy returnto France for revisionand refinementof my manuscript.A summerat the Universityof California,Berkeley, under the auspices of the National Endowmentfor the Humanities Summer Seminar programgave me the opportunityto utilize the collectionof the Instituteof Medieval Canon Law. The NewberryLibrary was gracious and helpfulas I consulted the Inquisitorialmanuals which are a part of its holdings. Finally,Montana State Universityhas assisted at everyturn and in everyway. Edward Gargan and Domenico Sella read and commentedupon the earliestand rawestversion of the manuscript.Its presentform owes much to the thoroughand extensivecriticism of JohnTedeschi. Edward Barry, David Buisseretand GeoffreyParker offered valuable insightsin the final stages. A special note of gratitudeto RobertM. Kingdon who supported and guided this study frombeginning to end. ChaptersII, XI and XIII were initiallypublished in somewhat different formas "The Inquisitoras Heretic: the Pre-Reformationat Toulouse," Wascana Review,9 (1974): 156-165; "The Legal Response to Heresy in Languedoc, 1500-1560," SixteenthCentury Journal, 4 (1973): 19-30; and "Heresy Suspectsin Languedoc priorto 1560: Observationson theirSocial and OccupationalStatus," Bibliotheque d'Humanisme et Renaissance,39 (1977): 561-568. I thank the editorsfor giving permission to incorporate major portionsof those articles.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Introduction

n earlyNovember 1560, the countof Villarspresented to the Parlement of Toulouseroyal letters-patent that commissioned a presidentand two counsellorsof the court to investigatethe activitiesof religious agitators(rebelles et esmotionnaires)in the towns situatedalong the littoral plain of Languedoc.The threejudges, along withthe royal attorney general, leftToulouse on 22 November.They visitedCastelnaudary, Carcassonne, Narbonne,Beziers, Saint-Thibery, Montpellier, Nimes and Beaucaire.Upon gatheringsufficient evidence and testimonyfor formalindictments, the magistratesconcluded theirinvestigation on 30 January1561.1 Yet the commissionfrom the crown had come too late. Officialreports of armed Protestantassemblies to the east at Annonay and Nimes, as well as to the west at Lombez, had reached Toulouse as early as April and May 1560. The Parlement,in each instance,ordered several of itsmembers to conduct an inquiry,adding thatthe investigatingjudges should assemble an armed escortif necessary.2Despite ferventand continuedefforts, the judiciary had not suppressed heresyin Languedoc. Rather,the reformedreligion prospered and grew far beyond the limits of the courts' effectiveness. Catholic and Protestantplunged into open, armed conflict. The onset of the Wars of Religion marked a temporarydisruption of thejudicial system, at least in thoseaspects pertaining to westernEuropean Christianityand its practice.Religious customs and the relevantlegal statutes affirmedvalues no longeracceptable to the entirecommunity causing frequentand unmistakablediscord. The courtsfound it increasingly difficult to enforcethe standardsof beliefand practiceto which theywere officially committed.The judiciaryfailed, too, in the discharge of another of its basic functions,the minimizationof conflictwithin society. That the quarrel reached such violentproportions is a reflectionof the fundamentalplace accorded religionwithin the lives of sixteenth-centurymen and women. The experienceof religiousconflict, violent and non-violent,and the temporaryparalysis of the judicial systemwere not unique to Languedoc. Devoted but unsuccessfulattempts to curbthe Reformationfrom the magistrate'sbench were common throughoutFrance. The failureto maintain unityand preventstrife cannot be ascribed to a lack of effort.By far the

A.D.H.G., 51 B 66, Registrede Monsieurle Procureurgeneral du roy pour le voiage par luyfaict au bas pays de Languedoc.The documentis examinedby GabrielLoirette, "Catholiques et Protestantsen Languedoc a la veilledes guerresciviles (1560), d'apres un documentinedit," 503-525. 2. . . assemblergens en armes en tel nombreque la forceen demeureau roi et a justice . . . A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 74 (19 avril 1560) and (20 mai 1560). 1

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC most notoriousof these judicial undertakingsinvolved the creationof a special criminalchamber within the Parlementof Paris. During the early years of the reign of Henry II, the chambre ardente specialized in the adjudicationof heresy,seeking to prosecuteover fivehundred suspected hereticsbetween May 1547 and March 1550. This enthusiasm,moreover, was not totallynew; examinationof final judgments rendered by the Parisian Parlementin criminalcases fromthe mid-1530s and mid-1540s suggests that nearly one-sixthdealt with heresy.3Already in the final decade of Francis I's rule, the parlementairesregarded heterodoxywith utmostseverity. Judicialconcern with the preservationof traditionalreligious order was no less obvious in the provinces.The membershipof the Parlementof Bordeauxapplied itselfdiligently to the repressionof misbeliefduring the several decades priorto the Wars of Religion. Between 1541 and 1559, thetribunal issued morethan 450 decreestouching upon mattersof heresy. In addition to judgmentsagainst hereticsthemselves, it authorizedroyal commissionsfor the investigationof religiousdisturbances and policed religiousactivities through directives in supportof fastsand abstinences, along withprohibitions against suspect books and seditiouspreaching. At Rouen in northernFrance, the parlementaireswere willingagents of royal policyin theprosecution of Protestants.During the 1540s, theycondemned nearly one-fourthof the heresy defendantsto capital punishment.Like theircounterparts at Toulouse, Paris,and Bordeaux,the magistratesof the Parlementof Rouen vigorouslyupheld the established religiousbeliefs and behavior.4 A salientfeature in the initialFrench response to Protestantismwas the dominantrole assigned to royal, and thus secular judges. Ecclesiastical justicegenerally declined in the face of the accretionof royalpower char- acteristicof Renaissance France. The crown restrictedthe powers of the bishop's court or officialite',to include severe limitationson the heresy jurisdictionwhich the diocesan tribunaltraditionally exercised. In accordance with this policy,the Frenchmonarchy also refusedto permitthe introductionof any new ecclesiasticalcourt specificallytailored to meet the Reformationchallenge. It wished to avoid an Inquisitionon the Roman or Spanish model. The Inquisitiondid exist in France and had seats in Dauphine and Languedoc. Yet it was not the vigorousand independent judicial body which thrivedin Italy and Spain. The inquisitorswho sat

3 BernardSchnapper, "La justicecriminelle rendue par le Parlementde Paris sous le regne de Francoisler," 252-284. NathanaelWeiss, La chambreardente. Etude sur la liberte'de conscience en Francesous FranqoisIer et HenriII (1540-1550). 4Robert Boutrucheet al., Bordeauxde 1453 d 1715, 237-238. JonathanDewald, "The 'PerfectMagistrate:' Parlementaires and Crimein Sixteenth-CenturyRouen," 297-299, and The Formationof a ProvincialNobility: The Magistratesand theParlement of Rouen, 1499-1610, 318. Henri Patry,ed. Les debutsde la reformeprotestante en Guyenne,1523-1559. Arrits du Parlement.For a generaldiscussion of the religioussituation at Rouen, see: Philip Benedict, Rouenduring the Warsof Religion.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INTRODUCTION 3 at Carcassonneand Toulouse,for example, traced their lineage to a medieval Inquisitionwhich was now subordinateto royal power and controlledby the Parlement.The inquisitorhimself was practicallyan officerof the crown.5Finally, with the advent of Protestantism,the royal lay judges became increasinglyinvolved in heresyproceedings. The processwas part of the gradual extensionof monarchialauthority which broughtan end to the feudal society.It meant,in this particularinstance, the state's as- sumptionof a portionof the judicial powers formerlyattributed to the Church. Thus threedifferent court systems-episcopal, Inquisitorialand royal-possessed varyingdegrees of competencein mattersof unorthodox belief.The resultantsituation, accompanied by confusionand conffictin and among the differenttribunals, has been poorlyunderstood and largely ignored. The classicstudy of criminaljustice accorded Protestant heretics in France prior to the Wars of Religion is Nathanael Weiss's examinationof the chambreardente.6 Weiss, of course,confined his treatmentto the Parlement of Paris. The six provincialparlements, Toulouse included,were also active in the prosecutionof heresy,but theynever possessed separate chambers forthat purpose. From an organizationalstandpoint, the infamous Parisian chambrewas exceptional.And when it was finallydisbanded in late 1549, thenew judicialprocedure for the trialof hereticsat Paris closelyresembled that employed at Toulouse since 1543. Weiss imposed ratherstrict chro- nologicalperimeters too. His choice of the period 1540-1550 lends a basic cohesion in termsof the study's focal point, the chambre ardente,but neglectsboth priorand subsequentjudicial developmentsof considerable import.The isolationof any one stagein the evolutionof thelegal response to heterodoxyin sixteenth-centuryFrance tends to distortthe relationship between secular and ecclesiasticaljuridical institutions. Early in this century,Lucien Febvre's work on the operation of the Inquisitionin theFranche-Comte demonstrated the value of regionalstudies and the importanceof provincialarchival resourcesfor a betterunder- standingof Protestantism and themagistrate's reaction to it.7Febvre thought of this pioneeringessay as "notes et documents"and meant it to be, in part,a preliminarydiscussion of the problem.The extraordinarynumber of documentswhose publicationfilled one-half of the volume was ample suggestionof the researchpotential. The near simultaneousappearance

5 The remarkof Pierre Pithou, Les libertezde l'eglisegallicane, 10 is instructive:"Un inquisiteur de la foyn'a captureou arresten ce royaume,sinon par l'aide et authoritedu bras seculier." The place of the Inquisitionin early modem Dauphine is brieflydescribed by Jean Marx, L'Inquisitionen Dauphine,237-238. The incursionof civil courtsinto the realm of heresy prosecutionalso occurredin the Low Countries.Cf. AlastairDuke, "Salvation by Coercion: the ControversySurrounding the 'Inquisition'in the Low Countrieson theEve of the Revolt," in ReformationPrinciple and Practice.Essays in Honor ofA. G. Dickens,ed. Peter N. Brooks, esp. pp. 145-147. 6 To his historicalstudy, La chambreardente (1889), Weiss appended over 350 arretsof the Parisian Parlement. 7 Lucien Febvre,Notes et documentssur la reformeet l'Inquisitionen Franche-Comte.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 4 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC of some 450 arrets,all dealingwith heresy, from the Parlement of Bordeaux underlinedFebvre's comments.The editor,Henri Patry,correctly viewed them as a principalsource in detailingthe beginningsof FrenchProtes- tantism.8Yet untilrecently, few scholarshave been willingto extendthese initialexplorations. The criminalarchives of the Parlementof Toulouse are perhaps the richestcollection of thistype outside Paris, but even today remainlargely uncataloged and virtuallyunused in any intensiveor sys- tematicmanner. Louise Guiraud did utilizethese recordsfor her studyof reformedactivity at Montpellier.She limitedherself, however, to cases involvingresidents of that community.Gabriel Loirette,former archivist ofthe Archives departementales de la Haute-Garonne,examined the criminal registersof theToulousan Parlementfor the period 1542-1547. His concern was thecriminal procedure which the courtfollowed in the trialof heretics. He presentedthe findingsto the Societe'arche'ologique du Midi de la France in 1922, but the address was apparentlynever published.9 The archivalcollections of southernFrance possess a wealth of docu- mentationpertinent to the reformmovement in general and heresypro- ceedingsin particular.The registersof the Parlementof Toulouse housed at theArchives de'partementales de la Haute-Garonneconstitute the largest single deposit. The materialincludes several volumes of royal acts, the long seriescontaining the decreesand appointmentsof the Grand'Chambre and, above all, the seventy-sevenregisters of criminaldecrees which form the nucleus of the presentstudy. Beginning in 1539, the criminalchamber (Tournelle)of the Parlementof Toulouse was the principaladjudicator of heresyin Languedoc. The striatedareas in Figure1 indicateby monththe sessions of the Parlementfor which the pertinentcriminal registers are available. Between 1539 and 1560, the only appreciable lacunae occur in 1540-1541 and 1544-1545. Smaller gaps in the recordsexist for 1548- 1549, 1553 and 1558. While documentationfrom the Parlementis neither perfectnor complete,it is nonethelesssolid. The holdings in various other departmentalarchives stretchingfrom the Pyrenees to the Rhone contain valuable supplementalinformation, especially of an ecclesiasticalnature. The deliberationsof town councils foundin themunicipal archives at Albi,Anduze, Montauban,Montpellier, Nimes,Pamiers, and Toulouse are no less critical.And relevantmanuscripts are depositedin theArchives nationales as well as the Bibliothe'quenationale at Paris.In short,a considerableefforthas been made to locate and examine all recordsand documentsbearing upon heresy trialsduring the period

8 In addition to the publicationof the Bordeaux arretsin 1912, Patryanalyzed some of his archivaldiscoveries in "Les debutsde la reformeprotestante a Bordeauxet dans le ressort du Parlementde Guienne," 291-321. 9 Louise Guiraud, Etudessur la reformed Montpellier.Gabriel Loirette,"Le Parlementde Toulouse et la reformeen Languedoc a la findu regne de FrancoisIer (1542-1547)," 484- 485. The best modem examinationof southernFrench Protestantismis JanineGarrisson- Estebe,Protestants du Midi, 1559-1598.Its focus,however, is clearlythe period of the Wars of Religion.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INTRODUCTION 5

158JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NV |EC

15201 _ E

53 g 5, .,. ~ .. ~Registers

1530 -~

1535

1540> bX 31 75 Registers 1545'

11550:

1555 '*,'i.*'

1560 Open spaces indicateregister missing FIG. 1. Registersof the criminalchamber of the Parlementof Toulouse.

under consideration.The materials,taken together,yield a total of 1,074 heresysuspects for the sixty-oddyears priorto the Wars of Religion. A brief,but necessary caution concerns the somewhatskewed natureof these cases. The Parlementof Toulouse lodged the bulk of the accusationsand

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 6 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC did so principallyduring the 1540s and 1550s. These two features,the dominantrole of the Parlementand the concentrationof accusations in the generationimmediately preceding the eruptionof extensiveviolence, relatedirectly to the growthand prosecutionof heresyin southernFrance. They do not representa bias in the evidence, but serve as a preliminary indicationof those issues upon which this studywill concentrate. Althoughthe presentanalysis of the juridicalresponse to heterodoxy confinesitself to Languedoc, the geographicscope is actuallya bit larger than the area commonlythought to comprisethe province.The traditional boundaries have been enlarged to include all the territoryadministered by the Parlementof Toulouse (Figure 2). Thus, the counties of Bigorre, Commingesand Foix, along with the seneschalsiesof Armagnac,Quercy and Rouergue have been included, despite the factthat they were tech- nicallynot a part of Languedoc. The province,one of the largestand richestof France duringthe ancien regime,derived its name fromthe language of its inhabitants-those who spoke the langued'oc (patrialingue occitane)-oc being theirword for"yes" insteadof thenorthern French oi'l. The language,however, was not limited to theprovince and throughoutsouthern France most people used Occitan. The northernfrontier of this linguisticregion was roughlythe valley of the Dordogne River. Only the nobles and bourgeois spoke French,an importationand, after1539, the officiallanguage of justice and administration.Occitan was associated withthe popular classes whose members appear to have been less literatethan their counterparts in northernFrance.

IePuy

BORDEU . - ende9

~~t-' ~ Montauba

AuchTULOSE Montpellier 4 Beziers je ~ 4 Trbes Carcassonne* I Pamiers Narbonne Foix

FIG. 2. Area administeredby the Parlementof Toulouse.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INTRODUCTION 7

It remainedthen largely a spoken tongue,with French practically the only writtenlanguage. Occitan, and the culturewhich surroundedit, served not simplyto divide the kingdomsouth fromnorth, but also separated an illiterateagricultural proletariat from the more educated social elite. Languedoc in a territorialsense dated only fromthe thirteenthcentury and the termwas essentiallyan administrativeand linguisticexpression. The provinceoffered little geographical or geological cohesion. Bounded on the east by the Rhone River which separated it fromDauphine and Provence,it stretchedwestward and southwardalong the Gulf of Lion to Roussillon and Foix. Gascony and Guienne marked its westernborder, whileAuvergne and Forezlimited its northern reach. Within these confines, threemajor regionsare discernible:a coastal plain with its distinctivedry Mediterraneanclimate, the arid but colder mountainous reaches of the Massif Central behind the coastlands and, in the west, a portionof the greatbasin of Aquitaine with its damper Atlanticclime. Low limestoneplateaux and alluvial plains extendingfrom the Rhone corridorand delta to the Pyrenees constitutedthe area known as Lower Languedoc. The cultivationof cereal cropspredominated there in a system of subsistenceagriculture typical of early modernFrance. The mild Med- iterraneanweather also permittedthe raising of some vines and olive trees. Inland beyond the littoralplain rose the Cevennes, the southernextremity of the crystallineuplands of theMassif Central. Though tending to desolate wastelandat thehigher elevations, the lower slopes weregenerally forested. The southernexposures gave way to the garrigues,a broken countryside covered with Mediterraneanoak. And, of course, there were the well- known chestnutforests. Farther north toward Auvergnelay the volcanic mountains,the "puys" and "domes," and the flowsof basaltic lava that formedthe extensiveplateau of Velay surroundingthe basin of Le Puy. Finally,on the southwesternflank, the Lot,Aveyron and Tarnrivers flowed in deep gorges, often with precipitouswalls, and broke the limestone plateau of the Causses into isolated blocks. The land was poor and con- sequentlylimited to the pasturingof sheep and cultivationof rye. The plain of Aquitaine dominatedthe westernsegment of Languedoc. The light,sandy and easily tilled,if not always rich,soils in the valley of the Garonne Riverand its tributariesprovided meadows and parcels for marketgardens. The interfluviallimestone platforms, especially the Al- bigeois and the Lauragais, possessed compact, clayey soils suitable for wheat and, in the sixteenthcentury, pastel. The latterwas one of the few commercialcrops of the region.It was processedat Toulouse and the blue dye exportedfor use in the textileindustry throughout Europe. Originallya part of the Roman province of Gallia Narbonensis,Lan- guedoc was ruled by the Visigothsduring the fifthcentury. Visigothic rule gave way, in turn,to the Franks. Beginningin the late ninth century, however, the kings of France were increasinglyincapable of exercising much influenceover Languedoc. The essentialpolitical fact was the pro- gressiveformation of a semi-independentCounty of Toulouse. The region

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 8 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC developed a prosperousindividual culture. It was a precociouscivilization characterizedby the literatureof the troubadours,magnificent Romanesque architecture,and therapid growth of citiesand commerce.Yet thiscreation, advanced and distinctfrom France of thenorth, sufferedbecause of religious turmoil. Bythe mid-twelfth century, the Cathari had spread theirdualistic heresy to Languedoc, where theirstrength in the vicinityof Albi earned them the name Albigenses.Pope InnocentIII responded with the proclamation of a crusade and an armyfrom northern France overran the land in 1209. Afteryears of warfare,Count Raymond VII of Toulouse in 1229 ceded to Louis IX of France much of his eastern territoryand betrothedhis daughterand heiressJeanne to the king'sbrother Alphonse. When Jeanne died childlessa few days afterAlphonse in 1271, King Philip III annexed the County of Toulouse and the remnant of its dependencies to the Frenchcrown. The demographiccatastrophes of the fourteenthcentury did not spare theprovince and itshuman numbersdeclined by approximatelyone-third. Languedoc only recoveredfrom the recurrentplagues and faminesin the mid-sixteenthcentury when its populationstood at about 1.5 million.The populationof the entireFrench kingdom approached sixteenmillion. Tou- louse, an administrativecenter, was the largest city in the south with between 40,000 and 50,000 inhabitants.While not the rival of Paris or even Rouen and Lyon,it did comparefavorably with Tours and Marseille. A secondary level of towns whose sixteenth-centurypopulations were one-fourthto one-fifththat of Toulouse included Nimes, Montpellierand Narbonne on the littoral,along with Montauban and Albi immediately northand east of Toulouse. Therewas some industry,particularly textile production, in these urban agglomerations,but the vast majorityof the people were engaged in agriculture.Throughout France, between 80 and 90 percentof the population were peasants. Those of the Midi cultivatedfields of irregularshape and typicallyallowed them to lie fallow in alternateyears, unlike the classic triennialsystem which prevailed in the north. Pressured by a growing population in the sixteenthcentury, the peasant tenuressuffered considerable fragmentation.There existeda proliferationof smallerand smaller landholdingsat theexpense of themiddling peasant owners.The condition of agriculturalworkers was markedby a failureof economicdevelopment. In summary,Languedoc on the eve of the French Reformationat once participatedclosely in the lifeof the kingdomand retainedits own unique character. Fullyaware of the difficultyin assigninga specificdate to thebeginnings of religiousreform in France,101500 has been selected as the departure

10The basic frameworkfor discussion of this question is Lucien Febvre, "Une question malposee: les originesde la reformefransaise et le problemedes causes de la reforme,"in Au coeurreligieux du XVIe siecle,3-70.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INTRODUCTION 9 point forthis study.The choice is chronologicallyconvenient and would appear sufficientlyearly so as to embracepossible forerunnersof themovement.The terminaldate of 1560 representsthe approximate moment when the legal orderdisintegrated and religiouswarfare commenced. While the massacre at Vassy and the first"Religious War" did not eruptuntil 1562, Catholics and Protestantsof southernFrance had resortedto arms by the autumn of 1560. One furtherlimitation turns on the notionof heresyitself. The analysis confinesitself to causes specificallyinvolving the crime of heresy-cas d'exce'set crimed'he're'sie according to the prevailingformula. Heretical blasphemyand sorceryentailing heresy are subsumed under this rubric. Cases of simple or ordinaryblasphemy, however, have been excluded. Alreadyduring the Middle Ages, inquisitorsdistinguished between simple and hereticalblasphemy. Later French juristselaborated upon the dis- tinctionto the obvious benefitof royal justice. By the reignof Louis XII, blasphemywas viewed as a crimedifferent and separatefrom heresy. The notionpermitted the draftsmenof the ordinanceof 1510 to enlargesecular jurisdictionover blasphemy.Royal encroachmentupon ecclesiasticalpre- rogativesrelating to blasphemycame sooner and was more completethan forthe crimeof heresy.At the same time,the competenttribunals as well as certaindetails of judicial procedure differedfrom those employed in the adjudicationof heresy.And unlikeheresy, the penaltiesfor blasphemy were rigorouslyand minutelycataloged in royalstatute.1" To regardheresy and blasphemyas two aspects of the same offense,varying only in their severity,would be a misunderstandingof an importantand practicaldis- tinction. What then is heresy?Building upon St. Augustine'scomment that "not all erroris heresy,"medieval inquisitorsand theirsuccessors stressed that "all heresyis error."The offenderwas necessarilya baptized Christian. Jews and pagans, for example, were excluded ipso facto.And he erred withrespect to the truthsrevealed by God and authenticallypronounced as such by the Church. Heresy was an intellectualcrime (error intellectus) which depended upon volitionand comprehension.The criticalelement was intent.Unintentional opposition to the Church's doctrinesdid not constituteheresy. The definitionruled out errorarising from ignorance. A furtheringredient was intractability.The individualmust have persisted in his denial or doubt regardingthe Faith. Pertinacitythen distinguished heresy frominculpable error.The hereticadopted a willfullyobdurate position.12

" Nicolas Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum . . . cum commentariisFrancisci Peginae, 332- 334. PierreGuenois, La conferencedes ordonnancesroyaux, 769. Francois A. Isambertet al., eds. Recueilgeneral des ancienneslois franqaisesdepuis l'an 420 jusqu'd la revolutionde 1789, 11: 569-572. Bernardde La Roche-Flavin,Arrests notables du Parlementde Toulouse,37-40. 12 Augustine,De haeresibusad Quodvultdeum,in PatrologiaLatina, ed. J.P. Migne, 42: 23. The constituentelements of heresy are thoroughlytreated in most Inquisitorialmanuals. Representativeexamples are: the seventeenth-centurywork by an officialof the Inquisition

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 10 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Frenchcommentators of the Renaissanceemphasized yet another aspect of the crime,that it was lese majestedivine. Heretics were guiltyof sedition: theythreatened the public weal and disruptedthe political and social order of the state.Pierre-Franfois Muyart de Vouglans,writing in the eighteenth century,but reflectingan opinion widespread in the sixteenth,drew at- tentionto the Church under the Roman Empire. Heresy stemmedfrom eitherambition or debaucheryand was always accompanied by scandal and illicitassemblies. The Christianprince, formerlyRoman and now French,ought not delay in cleansing society of this dangerous crime.13 The Frenchmonarchy naturally encouraged the view forit neatlycoincided with royal policy in the extensionof its own power. Heresy, as a result, came to assume a farmore secular characterin the course of the sixteenth century. The considerationof heresyproceedings prior to the religiouswars is chieflya study of the laicization of the criminaloffense termed heresy. Laicizationmay be describedas the process wherebyprimary control and leadershipwithin society pass fromchurch to state. The lay government makesthe essentialdecisions regarding social objectives.The publicpowers and duties of the church are noticeablyreduced. Basic allegiances are secularrather than ecclesiastical.14The developmentis evidenton several levels as justice in France answered the Reformation. A crucialfeature of theattempt to repressheresy through the instrument oflaw was the expanded jurisdictionattributed to royaljustice. The episcopal tribunalsthroughout France continued to be activein thetrial of heretics and, in Languedoc, the Inquisitionalso regularlysat in judgment.Yet the sphere of competencewas dramaticallyreduced for these church courts and they became subject to close supervisionby crown officials.At the same time,the number and proportionof heresy cases handled by the royal courtsspiraled, with the bulk of this increasedcase-load passing to the parlements. at Cremona,Cesare Carena, Tractatusde OfficioSanctissimae Inquisitionis . . . Hac novissima additafuit Praxis Inquisitorum Francisci Pegnae, 43-46; the influentialmanual composed by the fourteenth-centuryInquisitor of Aragon, Nicolas Eymeric,and edited with extensive commentaryby Francesco Pegna (d. 1612) in the sixteenthcentury, Eymeric, Directorium Inquisitorum,236 and 319; and finally,the handbook authored by the Spanish Bishop of Zamora, Diego Simancas (d. 1583), De CatholicisInstitutionibus, in TractatusIllustrium . . . De Iudiciis CriminalibusS. Inquisitionis,ed. F. Pegna, in Tractatusuniversi iuris, et auspice GregorioXII, t. XI, pt. II, 151-151v? and 156v?-161v?. A recentand helpful piece on this questionis Marie-DominiqueChenue, "Orthodoxieet heresie,le pointde vue du theologien," Heresieset societesdans l'Europepre-industrielle, lle-18e siecles,ed. JacquesLe Goff,9-17. 13 The Toulousanparlementaire and officialof thelater fifteenth and earlysixteenth centuries, EtienneAufreri, Decisiones capellae Tholosanae,60, plainlyequates heresyand lese majeste. Guenois, Conferencedes ordonnances,98-102. Pierre-Fran:oisMuyart de Vouglans,Institutes au droitcriminel, ou principesgeneraux sur ces matieres,suivant le droitcivil, canonique, et la jurisprudencedu royaume(Paris, 1768), p. 311. The political ramificationsof heresy were emphasized elsewhere in Europe. For the situationat Venice, see: Nicolas Davidson, "I1 Sant'Uffizioe la tutela del culto a Venezia nel '500," Studi veneziani(forthcoming); and in the Low Countries:Duke, "Salvation by Coercion," in ReformationPrinciple, 137-156. 14 JosephStrayer, "The Laicizationof Frenchand EnglishSociety in theThirteenth Century," 76-86, applies the notion of laicizationto an earlier,medieval period.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INTRODUCTION 11

A second aspect of the laical shiftin the meaning of heresy touches upon the domain of judicial process. The major Continentallegal systems generallyadopted the Roman-canon inquisitorialmodel of criminalprocedure by the sixteenthcentury. Charles V promulgatedthe Constitutio CriminalisCarolina for the Holy Roman Empire in 1532; the ordonnance criminelleappeared in theSpanish Netherlandsduring 1570; and theFrench monarchyissued theordinance of Villers-Cotteretsin 1539. The traditional accusatorialsystem, in which themode of initiationwas privatecomplaint, fellinto disuse. Ratherthan have the injuredparty pursue his rights,the stateprosecuted crime. A representativeof the stateinvestigated and gathered the evidence necessaryfor reasoned judgment.'5 The fullreception of the inquisitorialprocess in Francehad a substantial impacton the trialof heresy.The adoption allowed the royalgovernment to standardize criminalprocedure and it forcedupon all courts,secular and ecclesiastical,the practicesand rules which had evolved in its own tribunals.The accused heretic,in whicheverforum he appeared-officialite, Inquisitionor parlement,found his case adjudicated according to trial proceduresdeveloped by royalmagistrates in royalcourts. The monarchy, in addition,imposed changes on the"purer" Inquisitorial forms as practiced, forinstance, at Rome.Royal legal practicedeliberately precluded the defense attorneyand a defense based on a leisurelyexamination of the written transcriptof the proceedings.Instead, the accused receivednothing more than an oral readingof the chargesand was requiredto raise his defense immediatelyand withoutbenefit of counsel.16 One last area where the laicizationprocess occurredwas thatof statute law and its interpretation.The edictsand ordinancesissued by the crown and theactions of the magistrates who enforcedthem increasingly suggested a more secularized conceptionof heresy.The crimeimplied seditionand the disruptionof public order as well as opposition to the established doctrinesof the Church. Our purpose is to considereach of these subjects with express referenceto Languedoc before 1560 and to evaluate the abilityand capacityof the judicial systemfor the controland elimination of that which it labeled heresy.

15 JohnH. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime in theRenaissance: England, Germany, France, 129- 139, provides a general discussion of the Continentalreception of Roman-canon Inquisi- tionsprozess. 16 These differencesareaccurately pointed up by JohnTedeschi, "Preliminary Observations on Writinga Historyof the Roman Inquisition,"Continuity and Discontinuityin ChurchHistory, eds. F. F. Church and T. George, 242-243.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Part 1.

Judicial Institutions

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions I. The Inquisition T he Inquisition,the sole tribunalconcerned exclusively with religious heresy, firstappeared in Languedoc during the early thirteenth century,its seats at Toulouse and Carcassonne occurringshortly afterthe formationof the Order of Preachers by Saint Dominic. Both institutionsarose in responseto the Albigensiancrisis and were supported by Pope GregoryIX fromthe start.His two bulls of 1233, oftenregarded as the initialformal constitution of the Inquisitionof Languedoc, confided charge over the court to the Dominican friars.1Thus, Pierre Cella and Guillaume Arnaud,companions of the order'sfounder, served as the first inquisitorsat Toulouse. Pierre de Letha, also a Dominican, assumed the officeat Carcassonne.The successorsto thesemen continuedto be members of the Dominican Order until the final dissolutionof the Inquisitionof Carcassonne in 1703 and that of Toulouse at about the same time.2 The power of the inquisitortheoretically emanated fromthe Holy See whichoriginally exercised considerable control over the choice of inquisitor. However, this prerogativewas soon delegated to the provincialprior of the Dominicans in southernFrance. And by the sixteenthcentury, appointmentto the officehad become a complex matter.3 The vicargeneral of the Congregationof France,a superstructureuniting the recentlyreformed observant monasteries for the Dominican provinces of Toulouse and Provence, claimed exclusive authorityto nominate the inquisitorsfor Languedoc. Yet the Congregation'sclaim did not go un- challenged.In 1530, froma slate of two or threecandidates, the Dominican provincialof Toulouse selectedArnaud de Badet as inquisitor.The Domini- cans were alreadydivided overthe issue of monasticreform and de Badet's appointmentby theprovincial led to a bitterlegal battlewhich only subsided with the death or resignationof all the involved parties.4 On theother hand, thecontroversy surrounding the de Badetnomination was exceptional.The selectionprocess was usually much smoother.The

1 19 and 25 April 1233. B.N., Collection Doat, vol. 31, fo. 19-20 and 27-28. Register pontificumRomanorum, inde ab anno post Christumnatum 1198 ad annum1304, ed. Auguste Potthast,II, 783-785. The majorsurvey of the founding of the Inquisition is HenriMaisonneuve, Etudessur les originesde l'Inquisition. 2 The last inquisitorat Carcassonne died on 21 October 1703. Yves Dossat, Les crisesde l'Inquisitiontoulousaine au XIIIe sie'cle(1233-1273), 32. The finalmention of an inquisitorat Toulouse was in April 1693. A.D.H.G., 112 H 6. 3 Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 536. Marx,Inquisition en Dauphine,53-54. Louis Tanon, Histoiredes tribunauxde l'Inquisitionen France,184-185. 'A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 54v?-55v?. The followingchapter examines the entireaffair at length. 15

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 16 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC incumbentinquisitor often succeeded in havinghis personalchoice installed as successor. De Badet resignedin favor of Louis de Rochettesand, in 1547, Vidal de Becanis and EspritRotier drafted a legal agreementtrans- ferringthe office at Toulouse to thelatter.6 These transfersof theinquisitorial officemay well have involved some typeof monetarypayment, although it is not specificallymentioned in the records.Yet the transactionbetween de Becanis and Rotierdid give rise to a charge of simony which they quicklydenied.7 Afterthe Congregation,or province,decided upon a candidate, the Parisianheadquarters of the FrenchDominicans seconded thenomination. In 1540, HenriGervaise, prior of the Dominicansat Paris,approved Joseph Corrigieto replace the deceased Raymond d'Abbatis as inquisitorat Car- cassonne. The priorat Paris similarlyissued lettersof provisionnaming EspritRotier inquisitor at Toulouse seven years later.8The candidate was then presentedto the crown forfinal approbation. A distinctivefeature of the Inquisitionin sixteenth-centuryLanguedoc was its close dependencyupon the royal government.As early as 1332, the Parlementof Paris had declared the Inquisitionto be a royal courtfor certainlegal purposes.9 While the fourteenth-centuryruling dealt only with a specificcase and did not constitutea general pronouncement,it did hintat futuredevelopments. The religioussettlement effected through the PragmaticSanction of Bourgesand the Concordatof Bologna strengthened themonarch's prerogatives, especially in the realmof appointments.10 By the sixteenthcentury, an inquisitor-designatecould not assume office withoutroyal confirmationin the formof letters-patent.One such letter issued by FrancisI on 11 March 1536 illustratesthe procedure. We makeknown that, for the good accountwhich has been madeto us of the personof our dear and well-belovedfriar Vidal de Becanis. . . to whom,for thesereasons . . . we have,upon thenomination of our dear and well-beloved Generalof the said order,given and granted. . . by these presentletters, the officeof InquisitorGeneral of the Faithin our kingdomat the seat of Toulouse.. . .11

5 A.N., J 966, fo. 33-38. FrancoisGenin, ed., Lettresde Marguerited'Angouleme, soeur de FrancoisIer, reinede Navarre,1: 356. PierreJourda, ed., Correspondancede Marguerited'An- gouleme,duchesse d'Alencon, reine de Navarre(1492-1549), 144. 6 A.D.H.G., 3 E 4322, fo. 197v?. 7Ibid., B 40, fo. 572v?-573. 8 Ibid., B 40, fo. 572v? and B 1902, fo. 168v?. The papacy had delegated its powers of nominationto the Dominican provincialsalready in the mid-thirteenthcentury. Carena, Tractatus,15. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 536. 9 ". . . inquisitorfidei appellavit ad parlementemParisiis, et per arrestumpronunciatum 17 die maii anni 1331 omne, quod commissariusattentaverat fuit cassatum, et declaratum, quod curiainquisitionis fidei erat curia regalis, non ecclesiastica. . ." Chroniquede Guillaume Bardin,in Dom Claude de Vic and Dom J.Vaissete, Histoire generale de Languedoc,ed. Auguste Molinier,10: 37. Marx, Inquisitionen Dauphine,78-79. Charles Molinier,L'Inquisition dans le Midi de la France,316-318. ' Among the morehelpful introductions to the Gallican tradition,the PragmaticSanction and the Concordat,in generaland withspecial reference to the Midi,are Jean-LouisGazzaniga, L'eglisedu Midi d la findu regnede CharlesVII (1444-1461);Victor Martin, Les originesdu gallicanisme;Jules Thomas, Le concordatde 1516, ses origines,son histoireau XVIe siecle. B.N., ims. fr.,5124, fo. 162. Emile de Freville,"Un index du XVIe siecle," 358.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE INQUISITION 17

The events which followed the appointmentof Vidal de Becanis indicate the full extentof royal discretion. Withinsix months,on 24 August 1536, Marguerited'Angouleme, the king's sister,charged that de Becanis's exerciseof the officeviolated both her wishes and those of the previous inquisitor.The crown acceded to the demand and Marguerite'scandidate became the inquisitor.Moreover, this was not the firstinstance in which the royal governmentremoved and replaced an inquisitor.Letters-patent of 1531 exiled the inquisitor Raymond Gosin fromFrance and directedthe Seneschal of Toulouse to install Arnaud de Badet in his stead.12 The two incidents,to which we shall returnlater, provide ample demonstrationof royal power in the choice of inquisitor. This selectionprocess stands in contrastto thatemployed for the Roman and Spanish Inquisitions.These lattertribunals superseded the medieval inquisitionwhich in France continuedto function.The differencein the appointmentof inquisitorsinvolved more the role of the papacy than that of the secular magistrates.In Italy, the Roman pontiffexercised careful supervisionthrough the Congregationof the Holy Officeand the Cardinal InquisitorGeneral who made the selections.This was true even in areas such as Venice where the Inquisitioncooperated closely with the temporal authorities.And while the Spanish monarchyhad considerable control over the naming of inquisitorsin its realm, they were apostolic judges. The InquisitorGeneral, for instance, though selected by the monarch,had to be approvedby the papacy.13 Papal involvementwas minimalin France where the Dominicans nominatedinquisitors, subject to confirmationby the crown. Anothercharacteristic of the Inquisitionof Languedoc which reinforced the view thatit was a royal,though not a secular court,was its financial dependencyupon the crown. The inquisitorenjoyed a fixedsalary, commonly drawn fromthe domainal resourcesof the seneschalsy.Vidal de Becanis attestedto having received "wages, revenues and emoluments" amountingto 150 livrestournois from the receveurordinaire of the royal domain in the Seneschalsy of Toulouse. The sum was forthe termwhich began on All Saints' Day (1 November) 1540 and ended on the feast of St. Johnthe Baptist(24 June)1541. The state'spayment of the inquisitor's salary was not dissimilarfrom the arrangementin Italy and Spain."4 At Toulouse, moreover,the monarchyprovided housing, for the building

12 A.N., J966, fo. 33-38. Genin, Lettres,1: 356. Jourda,Correspondance, 144. B.N., ms. fr., quittanceset pieces diverses,vol. 134, no. 1754. Georges Bourgeois,"Documents ineditset originaux.Les inquisiteursde la foiet les proces d'heresiesous FrancoisIer," 546-547. Ioanne Iacobo Percin,Monumenta Conventus Tolosani ordinis FF. Praedicatorumprimi et vestustissimus manuscriptisoriginalibus transcripta, 110. 13 Carena, Tractatus,15. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 536. Simancas, De Catholicis Institutionibus,fo. 163v?-164. For the Spanish and Italian situation,see: GeoffreyParker, "Some RecentWork on the Inquisitionin Spain and Italy," 519-532. 14 A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 169. B.N., ms. fr.,quittances et pieces diverses,vol. 136, no. 2049. Bourgeois,"Documents inedits," 108. Gustave Dupont-Ferrier,Les officiersroyaux des bailliages et seneschauseeset les institutionsmonarchiques locales en Franced la findu moyendge, 577. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 650-651.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 18 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC which the Inquisitionoccupied was stateproperty. And when, in the late 1520s,Raymond Gosin had portionsof the structure repaired, the Parlement of Toulouse ruled thatthe receveurordinaire of the Seneschalsymust pay thecosts. The crown,rather than the Dominican Order,had to compensate the carpentersand masons.15 The inquisitorhimself was normallya nativeof Languedocand a member of the Dominicanprovince of Toulouse priorto installation.Joseph Corrigie came fromthe order'shouse at Rodez. Raymond Gosin was born at Foix and Arnaud de Badet at eitherLimoux or Montauban. Gaillard de Petra was native-bornand Esprit Rotier,although born at Aix-en-Provence, came to Toulouse at a veryearly age."6 These men werepresumably familiar with the region'scustoms and traditions,its religiousproblems, and most importantly,its language-Occitan. Inquisitorswere generallytrained in eithertheology or law, canon and civil.Sometimes they studied both. The inquisitorsof Languedoc,like their Italian counterparts,were primarilytheologians. Corrigie studied at Paris duringthe 1530s and was a doctorregent of thatcity's Dominican house beforegoing to Carcassonne. Gaillard de Petra also journeyedto Paris for his theologicaltraining, while de Badet and Rotierreceived their advanced schooling at the Universityof Toulouse. Raymond Gosin, who took in- structionat Toulouse and Bologna, was the only inquisitorof this era known to have studied outside France.17 Several of these men were prominentwithin the Dominican Order in otherways. While a studentin Italy,Gosin became closelyassociated with the reformingobservant movement within the Dominicans. Upon return to Toulouse, he assumed the positionof Regentof Studies forthe school of the Basilica of Saint Sernin. Withinsix years,in 1499, he emerged as priorof the Dominicans at Toulouse. Meanwhile, the mastergeneral of the order had united the reformedhouses of the provincesof Toulouse and Provence into the Congregationof France. And Gosin succeeded RaymondSermenti as vicargeneral of the Congregationin 1504. Inspired by his experiencein Italy,one of the firstacts of the new vicar general was to obtain the renunciationof conventual propertiesby his fellow Dominicans of Toulouse.18

'5 A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 23v?. A.D.H.G., B 22, fo. 624. 16 A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 18v? and 49v?. Gabriel Loirette,"Amaud Badet," Dictionnaire d'histoireet de geographieecclesiastique, ed. AlfredBaudrillart et al., 6: 140-141. Monumenta ordinisfratrum Praedicatorum historica, 9: 234-235. E. Mortier,Histoire des maitresgeneraux de l'ordredes freresPrecheurs, 5: 100. JacquesQuetif and JacquesEchard, ScriptoresOrdinis Praedicatorum,2: 32, 92, 96 and 188. Esprit Rotier,Responsio ad Epistolamcivium novae Babylonis,Gebennae scilicet, 75. 17 A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 168v?. Carena, Tractatus,16. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 535. Monumentaordinis fratrum Praedicatorum, 8: 401 and IX, 144, 204, 231, 234-235 and 280. Mortier,Histoire des maitresgeneraux, 5: 100. Quetif and Echard, Scriptores,2: 32, 92 and 188. Rotier,Responsio ad Epistolam,76. 18 Mortier,Histoire des maitresgeneraux, 5: 99-101. Percin,Monumenta Conventus Tolosani, 104-106. Quetifand Echard,Scriptores, 2: 92.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE INQUISITION 19

EspritRotier, an apparent protege of Gosin, had a similarcareer. By 1522 he was a regentof theUniversity of Toulouse and subsequentlydean of the Facultyof Theology.He was priorat Toulouse twice,being elected in 1522 and again in 1531 and he served as vicar general of the Congre- gation of France for a shorttime beginningin 1524.19Rotier also wrote and publisheda fairnumber of treatisesdealing withvarious errors which he, as inquisitor,believed threatenedthe true Church. Two early works, De non vertendascriptura sacra in vulgaremlinguam20 and Parergi,sive tabellaetres similitudiuum, quibus suis coloribus haeretici, vera Ecclesia, vulgaresquesacrae scripturae traductiones describuntur21 expressed, as their titlessuggest, opposition to the translationof Scriptureinto the vernacular. The firstof these two publicationswas particularlywell-known and received favorablemention from Richard Simon, the seventeenth-centuryexegete.22 Rotier'sProtestant contemporaries proved less sympathetic. A Dominicanfriar who had convertedto Protestantism,and wroteunder the name of Paschal Murneruschallenged Rotierin 1549 with his Ad R. P. F.Spiritum Ruterum, Aquitanicum fidei inquisitorem, epistola congratulatoria, simulet commonefactoria.23Rotier replied to Murnerus'scaustic parody in the same year withthe Responsioad epistolamcivium novae Babylonis, Gebennaescilicet.24 The inquisitorbolstered his original contentionsre- gardingScriptural translations and opened a new attackon the Calvinist doctrineof the Eucharist.He continuedand expanded this latterfocus in an appendix to a 1552 defense of the observance of Lent and in a more extendedtract published in 1562.25Rotier's only otherspecific assault on

19 Mortier,Histoire des maitresgeneraux, 5: 550. Percin,Monumenta Conventus Tolosani, 107-109. Quetifand Echard, Scriptores,2: 188. 20 Printedat Toulouse in 1548 by Jean Dembat and Jean Chasot. Listed by Antoine du Verdierand FrancoisGrude, sieur de La Croix du Maine, Les bibliotheques francoises de La Croixdu Maine et du Verdier,sieur de Vauprivas,ed. Rigoleyde Juvigny,4: 491 and by Quetif and Echard,Scriptores, 2: 189. Copy at Bibliothequemunicipale, Toulouse. JacquesMegret, "Guyon Boudeville,imprimeur toulousain (1541-1562)," 254-255. 21 Printedat Toulouse in 1549 by Guyon de Boudeville. Copy at Bibliothequenationale, Paris. Boudeville,who printedthree of Rotier'sworks, was executed for Protestantismin 1562. Tibulle Desbarreaux-Bemard,"Guyon de Boudeville, imprimeura Toulouse, 1541- 1562," 147 and 156-161. Du Verdier,Bibliotheques, 4: 491. Megret,"Boudeville," 217-218 and 257-258. Quetifand Echard, Scriptores,2: 189. 22 RichardSimon, Nouvellesobservations sur le texteet les versionsdu Nouveau Testament, 491-492. 23 The treatiselists neitherpublisher nor place of publication.Catalogue of BooksPrinted on theContinent of Europe,1501-1600 in CambridgeLibraries, ed. H. M. Adams, 1: 764. 24 Printedat Toulouse in 1549 by Boudeville.Copy at Bibliothequemunicipale, Toulouse. Desbarreaux-Bemard,"Boudeville," 159. Du Verdier,Bibliotheques, 4: 491. Megret,"Boude- ville," 258. Quetifand Echard, Scriptores,2: 189. 25 Praeconiumac defensioQuadragesimae, cui pluribusrequirentibus adjunctus est Sermode rationeinstitutionis divinissimi Eucharistiae Sacrementi (Toulouse, 1552). Copy in Bibliotheque municipale,Toulouse. Responceaux blasphemateursde la SaincteMesse, avec la confutationde la vaine et ridiculeCene des Calvinistes. . . L'istoirede Berengarius,son erreuret penitence (Toulouse, 1562). Copy at Bibliothequenationale, Paris. Desbarreaux-Bemard,"Boudeville," 159. Du Verdier,Bibliotheques, 4: 491. Quetif and Echard, Scriptores,2: 189.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 20 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Calvinist practices was a treatiseon iconoclasm with referenceto the crucifixas an importantand appropriatecommemoration of man's re- demption.26 Throughoutthese works,Rotier wrote as a theologianrather than as a jurist.Unlike his famous medieval predecessorBernard Gui who drew fromyears of service on the bench when composing a manual for inquisitors,Rotier rarely used examples fromhis experienceas a guardian of religiousorthodoxy. He turned instead to Scriptureand the Church Fathersfor support in developing his arguments.A work on the dangers of astrologyand divinationissued in 1555 discussed the views of Basil, JohnChrysostom, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine and Gregoryin addition to those of the scholasticsand such ancients as Ptolemy,Aristotle and Cicero.27Finally, he demonstrateda workingknowledge of ChurchHistory. In a lengthytract, he answers the Calvinist denial of transubstantiation by way of analogy to the eucharistic heresy attributedto Berengar of Tours.28 No otherinquisitor of the period matched the prolificoutput of Esprit Rotier.Raymond Gosin is thoughtto have authoredseveral pieces, including a treatiseagainst the magical arts and a poem honoringFoix, his birthplace.29 However,none appears to have been printedand ifthey circulated, it was in manuscriptform. Arnaud de Badet, on the otherhand, did publish a few works, but they were of an entirelydifferent genre. The humanist tractentitled Margarita virorum illustrium de futuratemporis dispositione praenoscendaappeared in 1529. The treatisearoused considerablecontro- versy and even some of de Badet's fellow Dominicans alleged that it containedanti-trinitarian errors. The Margaritasacrae scripturae, a discussion of the Pauline Epistles,followed shortlythereafter.30 Both works suggest

26Adversus crucimastiges. De magnagloria quam Christus ex crucesibi comparavit, ad solidandam fidemopus accommodatissimum(Toulouse, 1560). Copy at Bibliothequenationale, Paris. Du Verdier,Bibliotheques, 4: 491. Quetifand Echard, Scriptores,2: 189. Pages 1 through210 were printedin 1560 by the secretProtestant de Boudeville.The introductionand pages 211 through286 were done at a laterdate by the Catholicprinter Jacques Colomies who purchased the de Boudeville presses afterthe latter'scondemnation for heresy. A.M., Toulouse, CC 766, fo. 34. Megret,"Boudeville," 217-218 and 295. For the careerof Colomies,see: Maurice Caillet,"L'oeuvre des imprimeurstoulousains aux XVIe et XVIIe siecles,"32-48, and Raymond Corraze,Jacques Colomies, maitre imprimeur toulousain (1490-1570). 27 In praefatoresprognostiquosque futurorum eventuum divinatricemque astrologiam libri duo (Toulouse, 1555). Copy at Bibliothequenationale, Paris. Quetif and Echard, Scriptores,2: 189. Du Verdier,Bibliotheques, 4: 491, lists the work as ContraAstrologos et divinatricem Astrologiam.On BernardGui, see his Manuel de l'inquisiteur,ed. and trans. Guy Mollat, especiallythe introductoryremarks, 1: v-lxvii. 28 Rotier,Responce aux blasphemateurs,66-127. Additional works attributedto Rotierby Du Verdier,Bibliotheques, 4: 491 and Quetif and Echard, Scriptores,2: 189 are Confutatio errorisasserentium Christum esse advocatummostrum in coelo per intercessionem,et nihilab eo sed per ipsumpetendum more scholastico agitata (Toulouse, n.d.) and Antidoteou contrepoison, et regimecontre la pested'heresie et erreursportant infection d la sainteet entie*efoi catholique (Toulouse, 1557). Neitherwork appears to be extant. 29 Quetifand Echard, Scriptores,2: 92. 30 A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 18 and 59-61. Du Verdier,Bibliotheques, 6: 27. Loirette,"Badet," Dictionnaired'histoire et de geographieecclesiastique, 6: 140-141. Quetifand Echard,Scriptores,

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE INQUISITION 21 de Badet's connectionswith Marguerited'Angouleme (to be discussed shortly)and indicatehumanist interests very different from those of Gosin and Rotier. The inquisitorwas the chiefjudge of the court of the Inquisitionand he presided at its principal workingsessions which took place twice a week, on Wednesday and Saturdayafternoons. He also directedthe bulk of the preparatoryactivity, especially the preliminaryinquiries or infor- mations,which was conductedoutside the fullconvocation. The inquisitor or the juge des encours,a secular juristwho sat on the court,could also convene special sessions if necessary.31 Besides the inquisitor,the personnelassociated with the courtincluded a lieutenantinquisitor, a juge des encours,a procureurdes encours,a notary and clerk,and a sergeant.An episcopal representativeand several secular magistratesusually assistedthese permanentmembers of the courtin final sentencingand the various interlocutorydecrees of an actual trial.The vicargeneral of the diocese in whichthe accused was arrested,or a suitable episcopal delegate, had to concur in decisions to imprison,torture, and sentence. The Inquisitionin Languedoc was attended by secular judges as well. Two membersof the Parlementnormally performed this function at Toulouse, while at Carcassonne the task fell to the judicial officersof the seneschal. The lieutenantor vicar to the inquisitorwas, as the titlesuggests, his principalassistant. Invariably a Dominican and a doctor of theology,he was selectedby the inquisitorand presidedin his absence. He could order inquiries,issue citations,imprison suspects, undertake trials, and generally act as would the inquisitor.The lieutenantJehan de Landes, forexample, conducted a number of trialsin 1532. Anthoine Richardi continued to takedepositions at Agen duringApril 1538 afterthe inquisitor de Rochette was obliged to returnto Toulouse. De Landes served as the inquisitor's representativein a hearingbefore the municipalcouncillors, the capitouls, of Toulouse in 1535. And on several differentoccasions, the lieutenants Jehande Frapino,Jehan Effredi and JehanGerlandy argued cases in the Parlementon behalf of the Inquisition.32 The juge des encours, on the other hand, was essentiallya secular magistrate.The officeat Toulouse customarilywent to thejuge d'appeaux, a superiorjudge of the Seneschalsy of Toulouse. In 1547, for instance,

2: 96. PierrePansier, Histoire du livreet de l'imprimeried Avignondu XIVe au XVIe siecle, 1: 193 ascribes two additional tractsto Arnaud de Badet. They are Breviariumde mirabilibus mundiejusque compositione secundum triplicem viam theologorum, astrologorum et philosophorum (Avignon,1499) and Destructoriumhaeresum a R. P. inquisitoreTolosano F. Arnaldode Badeto S.T.P. novissimeconstructum (Paris, 1532). Neitherappears to be extant. 31 B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. 31, fo. 13-13v?. 32 A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 70-78. A.D.H.G., B 92 1, fo. 190; B 2025, fo. 197; B, Toumelle, reg. 8 (10 avril 1540); 3 E 4320, fo. 128. A.D., Lot-et-Garonne,G 29. A.M., Toulouse, BB 76, fo. 223. M. 0. Fallieresand Chanoine Durengues,"Enquete sur les commencementsdu protestantismeen Agenois," 215-216.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 22 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

FrancisI appointedGermain de Cassanea to succeed thedeceased Raymond de Morilhonin both capacities.33Because theInquisition, as an ecclesiastical tribunal,did not possess the authorityto impose the death penalty,this dual secularofficial served as an obvious complement.Thus theInquisition released PierreSerre into the custodyof the secular officialsfollowing his condemnationfor heresy in March 1553. Serre then appeared beforethe juge d'appeaux who sentencedhim to burn at the stake. Withinthe court of the Inquisition,the power of the juge des encours was in many ways equal to that of the inquisitor.He could convene special sessions, swear in witnesses,commission investigations and releaseprisoners in the absence of the inquisitoror his lieutenant.Last and of no less significancewas his completeaccess to therecords of the Inquisition.These documentsincluded the registersof finesand confiscationswhich held great interestfor the crown.34The juge des encours served then as a permanentsecular and royal magistrateon the Inquisitionand possessed power and authority nearlyidentical to that of the inquisitor. A second and closelyrelated royal official was the procureurdu roipour la foi au tribunalde l'Inquisitionor simplythe procureurdes encours.The positionrequired a knowledgeablejurisconsult such as Pierre Godefroy, long theprocureur des encoursfor the Inquisition at Carcassonne.Godefroy graduatedfrom the universitylaw facultyand authoredseveral scholarly worksincluding Annotamenta in tractatusprimi libri Justiniani Codicis.35 Though his function,in the broadest sense, was to safeguard the rights of thecrown and assureproper administration of justice,the specificduties of the procureurwere financial.He supervised the collection and dis- bursementof revenues resultingfrom fines and propertyconfiscations. The court sequestered and enumerateda suspect's goods and property upon arrest.They could be used to supportthe suspect during imprisonment or to defraythe courtcosts. If a suspect was found guiltyand fined,the amountcould be assessed againsthis goods and in the most serious cases theycould be confiscatedin toto.The procureurdes encourswas responsible

33 ". ..ses predecesseursn'avoient jamais joy dud. officede juge des encourssinon comme juges d'appeaux et n'en avoient en ce obtenu lettresde don separerement. ." A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 95. 34 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 45 (21 mars 1553). B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. 31, fo. 13v?- 17v?. JeanCrespin, Histoire des martyrspersecutez et mis d mortpour la veritede l'Evangile, depuisle tempsdes Apostres jusques d present(1619), ed. Daniel Benoit,2: 30-31. The prohibition againstthe invocation of blood sanctions(death or maiming)by ecclesiasticaltribunals predated the Inquisition.The state's involvementin the Inquisition'sfinancial affairs existed from the court'sinception. Eymeric, Directorium Inquisitorum, 510-514, 654 and 663-664. Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 127v?.Roger Grand, "La prisonet la notiond'emprisonnement dans l'ancien droit,"63. FredericGodefroy, Dictionnaire de l'anciennelangue fran,aise, 3: 120 definesencours as revenuesdes biensconfisques pour crimed'heresie. 35Printed at Parisin 1555. Additionalpublications by Godefroyinclude Dialogus de Amoribus, tribuslibris distinctus (Lyon, 1552) and ProverbiorumLiber (Paris, 1553). M. Mahul, Cartulaire et archivesdes communesde l'anciendiocese et de l'arrondissementadministratif de Carcassonne, 6, pt. 2, 187.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE INQUISITION 23 forthe propermanagement of these matters.Thus the Parlementof Tou- louse addresseditself to theprocureur Godefroy when itordered the return of propertyconfiscated from Raymond Forcade by the Inquisitionat Car- cassonne. The procureurcontrolled expenditures as well. It was Godefroy once again whom the inquisitorof Carcassonne addressed in requesting the paymentof costs forthe executionof a relapsed hereticin 1538. The procureurkept a recordof all financialmatters-confiscations, impositions, and expenses-and submittedan annual report,countersigned by the inquisitor,to the Chambre des comptes at Paris. An indicationthat the Inquisitionrecognized the procureur'sfundamental role in its operation is the factthat both he and the notarywere subject to a fineof one livre toumoisif absent without a substitutefrom the tribunal'sregular sessions.36 Anotherfunctional necessity for the Inquisitionwas the combinedoffice of clerk and notary.The clerk (greffier)registered the various acts and decisionsand maintainedthe court'sown particulararchives. As its chief notary,he recordedthe pleadings and deliberationsin theLivre des conseils. A second, identicalbook contained a list of the fines and confiscations. Both were kept in a locked chest for which there were threekeys. The inquisitorand juge des encoursshared one. The othertwo keys belonged to the procureurdes encours and notaryrespectively. The courtpaid the notaryaccording to the amount and nature of the work he performed. For a simple letterhe received twentydeniers tournois; five sols tournois for decrees involvingfinal sentences, acquittals or arrests;and two sols, sixdeniers for each deposition,plus expensesif he traveledoutside Toulouse or Carcassonne.37 Gerauld Pagesi was the clerkand notaryfor the Inquisitionat Toulouse fromthe late 1520s well into the 1550s, thoughnot withoutincident. On 24 June1542, theParlement of Toulouse orderedthat Pagesi be questioned in connectionwith a false accusation of heresyagainst Michel Pascal. By August he was imprisonedin the Tour des Hauts-Murats38and charged with corruption(malversation). The Parlement then yielded jurisdiction over the case to the inquisitor.The affairdragged on fornearly two years beforereturning to the Parlementon appeal. The high court eventually directedthe reinstatementof Pagesi as notaryand clerkof the Inquisition. This was in May 1544. Though he regained possession of his office,a subsequentprotest by the inquisitorprompted the Parlementto finePagesi one hundred sols tournois.The mattervery likely ended at this point, despite Pagesi's unexplained and temporaryabsence fromoffice in 1550.

36 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 51 (19 janvier 1555). B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. 31, fo. 14 and 17v?; ms. fr.,quittances et pieces diverses,vol. 134, no. 1754, vol. 135, no. 1914, and vol. 140, no. 38. Bourgeois,"Documents inedits,"24 (1875): 546-547 and 25 (1876): 20-21 and 106-107. Carena, Tractatus,31-34. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 649-661. Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 127v?. 3 B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. 31, fo. 15v?-17. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 550. 38 The Tour des Hauts-Murats,the episcopalprison of Toulouse,was used by the Inquisition as earlyas the fourteenthcentury. Jules Chalande, Histoiredes ruesde Toulouse,1: 159-160.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 24 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Guillaumede Labarde acted as an interimreplacement.39 The case suggests a mixtureof criminalfault on the partof Pagesi and a zealous prosecutor. There is unfortunatelyno sure measure of theirrespective weight. At the same time,it is indicativeof the problemswhich plagued the Inquisition duringthe sixteenth century and the extentto which theParlement policed the operation. A finalofficer of the courtwas the sergeant.He performedminor yet necessarytasks such as guardingthe door to insurethat the deliberations remainedsecret and closed to outsiders.He also maintainedorder within the chamber and executed the various decisions handed down by the court.40 In additionto the permanentmembers of the Inquisition,a numberof legal and theologicalexperts occasionally participated in its operation.The Inquisitionstipulated that they had to be universitygraduates, for they were far more than expertwitnesses. The court solicitedtheir opinions, advice, and assistance in the deliberationof criticalissues such as the invocationof torture.At othertimes, these individuals acted as emissaries. In 1545, for example, the court designatedPierre Bertrandiand Jacques Alberti,both Dominicans and doctorsof theology,as procureursge'ne'raux et spe'ciauxfor the purpose of presentingcertain requests to the royal governmentat Paris.41 The structureof the Inquisitionin Languedoc constituteda pragmatic blend of ecclesiasticaland secular elements.The court functionedas an activereligious tribunal. The inquisitorwas essentiallya clericalfigure. In theoryhe was a delegate of the Holy See and derived his authorityfrom the Church.At the same timethe Inquisitionwas heavilydependent upon thesecular authority. The monarchyhad a decisivevoice in theappointment of its principaljurist, regulated its finances,and named its own creatures to supervise certain crucial aspects of its operation. The religious and temporalforces surrounding the courtwere not necessarilyin opposition. Althoughthe royal government,as we shall see, would modifythe In- quisition'sjurisdiction and obligeit to followroyal trial procedures, it never soughtto eliminatethe courtcompletely. The crowneffectively controlled the tribunaland as such appeared contentwith its continuedexistence.

39A.D.H.G., B 38, fo. 635; B 39, fo. 167; B, Toumelle, reg. 11 (24 juin 1542), reg. 12 (26 aouit1542): 3 E 4325, fo. 115. 40 B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. 31, fo. 14-14v?. 41 Ibid., fo. 14v?-15. A.D.H.G., 3 E 4320, fo. 128.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions II. The Crisis of the Inquisition T he Inquisitionat Toulouseexperienced a majorinternal crisis at the verymoment when the Reformationemerged in southernFrance. The affaircentered on the officeof inquisitorand the manner of appointmentto thatoffice. It dramaticallyweakened the court and prompted the royalgovernment to use its own secular tribunalsfor the adjudication of heresy.The eventsspanned nearlya decade and can roughlybe divided into.two phases, correspondingto the termsof officeof two inquisitors, Arnaud de Badet and Louis de Rochette.Both men were associated with the humanistcommunity and therebygenerated strong opposition from more conservativequarters, especially the observant wing within their own Dominican Order.In the end, each was accused of heresyand served only brieflyas inquisitor. The episode began when RaymondGosin, an observantDominican and thepresiding inquisitor, journeyed to Rome,probably in 1529. His purpose was to enlistpapal assistanceagainst secret neo-Christian Judaizers whose monetarypower, accordingto Gosin, insured theirimmunity from prosecution. Clement VII received him warmlybut was in no position to in- tervene.Disappointed, Gosin hinted that several Roman cardinals were equally subject to the influencesof Jewishmoney.' RaymondGosin did not in all probabilityhave a particularincident in mind when he complained of pseudo-Christianactivity. He claimed to recognizea pervasive,enduring problem which would requireconsiderable commitmentfor its solution. The available sources confirmGosin's as- sessmentto the extentthat theyindicate a tense religiousatmosphere in southernFrance duringthe firstseveral decades of the sixteenthcentury. The conflictoriginally existed independent of the Protestantmovement and derived in part fromthe strongcultural and economic ties between Languedoc and the Iberian peninsula. The universityat Toulouse had a large contingentof Spanish students and numerous merchantfamilies, particularlythose engaged in the pastel trade,were of Spanish, even Mar- rano origin.These bonds assumed new significancewith the expulsionof the Jews fromSpain in 1492. Languedoc served as a natural refugefor theimmigrants who were usually obligedto pose as New Christians.Their plightwas not given officialrecognition until royal letters-patentof 1550 allowed them to settleat Bordeaux.2

l Mortier,Histoire des maftresgineraux, 5: 417. Quetifand Echard,Scriptores, 2: 92. Rotier, Responsioad Epistolam,83-85. 2 BartolomeBennassar and BrunoTollon, "Le siecle d'or (1463-1560)," Histoirede Toulouse, ed. Philippe Wolff,223-270. JohnC. Dawson, Toulousein theRenaissance, 89-106. Francois 25

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 26 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Evidence of what Gosin termedclandestine Judaism is abundant. Ger- main de Lafaille,a Toulousan chroniclerof the seventeenth-century,notes the arrestof a group of Marranos on 20 December 1519. The incident would appear to coincidewith a reportto the Parlementon 30 April 1520 regardingthe apprehensionof severalCatalan students.Though suspected of wrongdoingsconcerning the Faith, the students had been released throughthe interventionof certainwell-placed merchants.A second and equally revealingset of circumstancescenters on the heresytrials staged at Toulouse duringthe early 1530s. The suspectswere primarilyChristian humanistreformers. Yet therewere accusationsagainst persons of Spanish and Marranobackground. They includedJehan Berard, a fugitivemerchant fromValencia; a residentof Limoux called the MoronBlanc; and several Spanish students,among themMichael Servetus.These individualswere accused of heresyin 1532, but many had been under suspicion forsome time.The allegationsagainst Jehande Sancto Amano, the procureurdes encoursfor the Inquisitionat Toulouse, amplyillustrate the problemfrom Gosin's perspective.The lieutenantinquisitor Jehan de Landes claimed thatde Sancto Amano was an ally of the Marranosthrough marriage. The procureur'swife was thegranddaughter of Gondysalvide Molina,a medical doctorof Catalonian originwho had been posthumouslyburned in 1511 fordefiling a consecratedhost.3 The situationwas grave, but the Roman curia refusedto act. On the otherhand, Gosin's failureat Rome was minorin comparisonto the dif- ficultieswhich arose at Toulouse duringhis absence. In brief,he found himselfreplaced as inquisitor.The royalgovernment banished Gosin who, already in his eighties,never returnedto Toulouse. He died at Rome in 1534 or 1535.4 The selectionof a new inquisitortouched off a prolongedpower struggle among the Dominicans of the Toulousan province.Almost two yearsafter Gosin's departurefor Rome, Vidal de Becanis,provincial of Toulouse and himselfa futureinquisitor, assembled the prominent members of theprovince at the monasteryof Prouille.They nominateda new inquisitorfrom a slate of three candidates. The selection of Arnaud de Badet aroused immediateand vehementopposition. The observantDominicans, united around the Congregationof France, supported Gosin's continuance in

Secret,"Juifs et marranesau miroirde troismedicins de la Renaissance," 130 (1971): 183- 190. Zosa Szajkowski, "Population Problems of Marranos and Sephardim in France from the 16th to the 20th Centuries,"83-87. General studies of the role of Jews in sixteenth- centuryFrance include Salo W. Baron,A Social and ReligiousHistory of theJews, vol. 10, On the Empire'sPeriphery and BernhardBlumenkranz, Histoire des Juifsen France.The best examinationof the familiesinvolved in the pastel trade is Gilles Caster, Le commercedu pastelet de l'epiceried Toulouse,1450-1561. 'A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 8v?, 52-52v?, 61 and 78v?-79. A.D.H.G., B 18, fo. 184-184v? and 234. A.M., Toulouse, BB 76, fo. 227. Germainde Lafaille,Annales de la ville de Toulouse depuisla reunionde la comtide Touloused la couronne,2: 23. 4A.M., Toulouse, BB 76, fo. 197. Mortier,Histoire des mattresgeneraux, 5: 417-418. Quetif and Echard,Scriptores, 2: 92.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE CRISIS OF THE INQUISITION 27 officeor at least a successorchosen by him. They protestedthe nomination of de Badet and even accused him of being a "Lutheran."5 The Congregationof France at once transmittedthe news of the event to Gosin who again soughtredress from the Holy See. He contendedthat the provincialde Becanis did not possess the authorityto nominate the inquisitor.Such power residedexclusively with the Congregationaccording to Gosin. Rome responded with a rescriptauthorizing the Archbishopof Toulouse to investigate.The archbishopin turndelegated Jean de Basilhac, abbot of Chaise-Dieu and a counsellorof the Parlement,to conduct the inquiry.The investigationwas cutshort, however, when de Badet produced letters-patentfrom the king establishinghis legal claim to the office.The seneschal of Toulouse formallyinstalled Arnaud de Badet as inquisitoron 12 April 1531.6 The syndic of the Congregationof France objected to the seneschal's action. A mixed "ecclesiastical" commission,composed of two members of the Parlement,Etienne Sacaley and JeanBarthelemy, and two archiepiscopal officials,Jean d'Illiers and VincentMaignan, heard the appeal. The nature of the commissionand the course of subsequent events indicate that the syndic broughttwo principalcharges against de Badet: he had illegallyobtained the officeof inquisitor;and he was a heretic.The four- man commissionappears to have reached no firmdecision regardingthe latterimputation, but it did annul the seneschal's installationof de Badet. It then orderedthe reinstatementof Gosin or his legitimatesuccessor.7 De Badet's opportunityto lodge an appeal now came. He petitioned the GrandConseil,8 sittingin the Louvre,to affirmhis rightfulclaim to the officeof inquisitor.He had been duly nominatedby the Dominicans of Toulouse, approved by the crown,and installedby the seneschal of Tou- louse, a royal agent. The Congregationof France counteredthat this procedure violated establishedpractice. It based the contentionon two documents:a brieffrom Pope AlexanderVI which declared thatthe inquisitor could not be deposed by eitherthe general or any othermember of the DominicanOrder, including the provincial of Toulouse,without the consent of the Congregation;and a letterof the formerDominican GeneralVincent Bandelli which established the jurisdictionof the vicar general of the Congregationof Franceover the Dominicansof the Inquisitionat Toulouse.

5Testimonyof friarJehan de Severino. A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 54v?-55v?. 6 Ibid., fo. 3-3v?. Percin,Monumenta Conventus Tolosani, 110. 7A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 1-4. 8 During this time,the GrandConseil could claim competencein causes of interestto the monarchy.It was active in ecclesiasticalaffairs, especially those relatingto benefices,and occasionallyextended its concernto venal offices.Emile Chenon, Histoiregenerale du droit francaispublic et privedes originsd 1815 2: 531-532. Paul Dognon, Les institutionspolitiques et administrativesdu pays de Languedocdu XIIIe siecle aux guerresde religion,429-431. Roger Doucet, Les institutionsde la Franceau XVIe siecle 1: 203-204. Jean-PaulLaurent, "Grand Conseil," in Michel Antoine et al., Guide des recherchesdans les fondsjudiciaires de l'ancien regime,29-60.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 28 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

The Congregationfurther pointed out that King Charles VIII had agreed to these privileges.9 Beforethe case could be decided, Arnaud de Badet disappeared. His absence fromToulouse coincided with the repressionof 1532 in which more than fiftypersons, mostlyhumanists, were charged with heresy. Ominously,Jean de Caturce, a lifelongfriend of de Badet, died at the stake on 23 June 1532. When de Badet finallyreappeared in late 1533, he was armed with a rescriptfrom the apostolic legate to France. The papal letterabsolved him of all suspicion of heresy. He presentedit to thefour members of the"ecclesiastical" commission who in earlyDecember agreed to reexaminethe matter.On 5 February1534, the commissioners gave de Badet permissionto produce some twentywitnesses to attestto his orthodoxy.Not unexpectedly,the syndicof the Congregationof France, joined by the royal attorneygeneral (procureurge'ne'ral du roi) for the Parlement,challenged the commission'sdecision. They maintained that the action constitutedan abuse of judicial procedure and requested the Parlementof Toulouse to entertaintheir appeal. The high courtconsented and on 24 April 1534 the formalpleadings commenced.'0 Attorneysfor the Congregation of France outlined the two chargesagainst de Badet. The firstwas a simple restatementof the previous accusation thathe had illegallyobtained the office of inquisitor.Second, they presented a detailed heresy indictment.The primaryevidence was his friendship withjean de Caturce,a convictedand unrepentantheretic. They endeavored to substantiatethe alleged criminalrelationship with correspondencebe- tweende Caturceand de Badet and excerptsof testimonyfrom de Caturce's trial.In a letteraddressed to de Badet and dated 2 August 1531, de Caturce wrote,"Exopto te ad hanc dignitatem(of inquisitor)preferi, ut per te fides deffendipossit."The wordfides supposedly referred to de Caturce'sheretical sect. De Badet was familiarwith this sect and several witnessestestified to having seen him meetwith de Caturce and attendthe sect's gatherings. And had not de Badet himselfadmitted to the "ecclesiastical"commission thathe knew de Caturce was in error? The nextstage in the Congregation'sattack was a thoroughexamination of the defendant'spublished works. These tractsand treatisesostensibly contained statementscontrary to established doctrine.De Badet denied free will and praised the opinions of Cicero, Plato, Ptolemy and other pagans, while neglectingthe Doctors of the Church. The spokesmen for the Congregationconcluded theirpleading by askingthe courtto note the abuse of justice upon the part of the "ecclesiastical" commission.The commission,they argued, had been lax in investigationof the heresy

I A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 1-3 and 29-30. A.D.H.G., 112 H 6, Inventayredes pieces que envoye le scindic de la congregationpour deffendreson droytqu'il a en la mayson de l'inquisitionde Tholoze. 10A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 1, 19v?-21v? and 67v-70. Richard C. Christie,Etienne Dolet, theMartyr of the Renaissance,75, n. 1.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE CRISIS OF THE INQUISITION 29 charge against de Badet. It had refusedthe Congregation'srequest that the defendant'swritings be examined by the Facultyof Theology at the Universityof Toulouse. And even when the commissionagreed to look intothe assertionthat de Badet had preachedheresy at Limoux,it permitted him to control the inquiry.De Badet accompanied the single assigned judge everywhere.He dined with him and even slept in the same room as the notary.This clear abuse of judicial procedure required that the entirecase be returnedto the firstapostolic judge, Jeande Basilhac, or to the apostolic legate." Jean d'Olive, assistant to the royal attorneygeneral, spoke next. He dividedhis argumentinto three principal considerations. The firsttouched upon the quality(qualitas) of a defendantwho not only toleratedheresy, but was himselfa heretic.He too stressedthe associationwith de Caturce, adding that the condemned heretichad refused final confessionunless the confessorwere to be Arnaud de Badet. D'Olive expressedwillingness to accept de Badet's statementthat he had earnestlyasked de Caturce to repentupon learningof his misbelief.However, de Badet had notpromptly reportedthe discoveryto the proper authoritiesas requiredby law and therebyincurred automatic excommunication.'2 Seeking to broaden the heresyindictment, d'Olive assertedthat two of de Badet's works,Margarita virorumillustrium de futura temporis dispositione praenoscenda and Consid- erationessuper Paulum, not only dealt favorablywith astrology,but contained anti-trinitarianerrors. De Badet supposedly announced the Divine Son as the cause of the Holy Spirit.The accused was also said to have resurrectedcertain sexual excesses popularlyascribed to the Beguine and Beghardmovement.'3 Primary evidence was the factthat he kepta mistress at Carcassonnein theconvent of La Mercy.He had, in addition,encouraged other women of Carcassonne to commitfornication when in an Easter sermonthere he said, "Do the thingsof the earthin this world,because in the otherone cannot do them."'4 The public scandal which resulted from an inquisitoracting in this mannerwas d'Olive's second point.And ifthis were not enough,de Badet was theillegitimate son of an ecclesiasticof Montauban.He had deliberately concealed this fact when he obtained royal letters-patentfinalizing his

A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. lv?-llv' and 49-58v?. 12 Anyone guiltyof aiding or concealingheretics was himselfsubject to prosecutionas a heretic.Carena, Tractatus,80 and 139-146. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 371-373. The universalobligation to reveal and denounce all knownor suspectedheretics was strengthened by the French crown in the sixteenthcentury. Guenois, Conferencedes ordonnances,99. Isambert,Recueil gdn6ral, 12: 680 and 13: 200-201. Ordonnancesdes roisde France,regne de FranpoisIer, 4: 182. 13The Beghardsand Beguines were religiousbrotherhoods and sisterhoodsorganized in thelate twelfthand earlythirteenth centuries. Some membersof themovement were eventually accused of heresyand sexual immorality.The termsBeghard and Beguine became popular labels forsuch activity.In general,see ErnestW. McDonnell, The Beguinesand Beghardsin MedievalCulture. 14 "Faictes aquo del sol donas en aquesto monde car en l'autre ne s'en faictpoint." A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 17-18v?.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 30 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC appointmentas inquisitor.Third and finally,the "ecclesiastical" commission had proceeded contraryto normal judicial procedure. D'Olive repeated the abuses cited by advocates for the Congregationand appended the commission'sfailure to summonthe royal attorney general whose presence was requiredby law. He consequentlydemanded de Badet's immediate imprisonmentand retrialby a new panel of judges.15 Counsel forde Badet presenteda defensewhich was balanced, straight- forwardand relativelybrief. The attorneydeclined to treatthe issue concerningthe officeof inquisitorbecause of its pending adjudicationbefore the Grand Conseil at Paris. The heresycharge, he explained,was merely the result of hatred and malice upon the part of the Congregationof France. The Parlementof Toulouse as well as several universitieshad examined and approved the writingsof de Badet and respectedpeople (gensde bien)knew him to be of good repute.As forthe alleged abuse of justiceby the "ecclesiastical"commission, the chargehad simplynot been sustained.There had to have been an encroachmenton temporaljustice, a contraventionof the holy decrees and concordats,or a conspicuous absence (fautede presence).None of these conditionshad been shown to apply in the presentaffair. The defenseconcluded in dramaticfashion by summoningde Badet himselfto appear before the bar and protesthis innocence.16 Upon completionof the pleadings the Parlement deliberated and declared thatan abuse of justicehad occurredin theprocedure of the "ecclesiastical" commission.It ordered the commissionto subdelegate four ecclesiastics of Toulouse who, togetherwith the royalattorney general and the parties involved,would examine the matteranew. Meanwhile, Arnaud de Badet remainedat liberty,but was not to leave Toulouse. The precisefinal dispositionof the case is not altogetherclear. De Badet evidentlyrefuted the heresycharge or, at most,incurred a minorpenalty for he continuedhis ministerialactivity after leaving the officeof inquisitor.He preached, for example,the Lenten sermonsof 1539 forthe Church of Notre-Dame des Tables at Montpellier."7The furtherquestion of whetheror not de Badet was the rightfulinquisitor does not appear to have been settled to the completesatisfaction of eitherside. Jehande Sancto Amano, the procureurdes encours forthe Inquisition, informedthe municipal magistrates of Toulouse in January1535 thatneither RaymondGosin nor his lieutenantJehan de Landes possessed jurisdiction over the crimeof heresy.De Landes argued the opposite positionbefore the same groupa week later.He claimed exerciseof the officeof inquisitor in Gosin's absence by authorityof the Parlement.The manifestmoment

" Ibid., fo. 14-29. 16 Ibid., fo. 29-35v0. 17 Ibid., fo. 36-36v?. A.M., Montpellier,CC, commandementde 1539, fo. 3. Guiraud, R6formed Montpellier,1: 82.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE CRISIS OF THE INQUISITION 31 to resolve the uncertaintysurrounding the Inquisitiondid not arise for more than a year. News of Raymond Gosin's death in Rome does not seem to have reached France until early 1536. The crown noted the fact in March. At the same time,Arnaud de Badet had already resignedfrom office.'8Whether he acted of his own accord or was forcedout, the way now appeared open for the selection of an inquisitoracceptable to all parties.Yet the opportunitywas wasted and the underlyingconflict did not end. The circumstancesof the new appointmentare ambiguous. Letters- patentof FrancisI dated 11 March 1536 note the vacancy createdby the death of Gosin and confirmVidal de Becanis,the veryprovincial who has supervisedthe de Badet nomination,as inquisitor.If the choice represented an attemptat compromise,it was shortlived.Marguerite d'Angouleme, the king's sister,complained in late August. She made no mention of Raymond Gosin and referredto the priorinquisitor as Arnaud de Badet. She furtherinsisted that he had resignedin favor of a certainLouis de Rochette,not Vidal de Becanis, "Becanis gave me to understand. . . that it was he in whose name Badet resigned;nevertheless, I know well to the contrary,because he in whose name Badet resignedand whom I desire to be installed is named Rochette. ..."19 The strengthof Marguerite's positionderived from the king'sapparent delegation to her of the exercise of the royal prerogativesin the selection of the Toulousan inquisitor.20 Her protestwas effectiveand by December 1536 friarLouis de Rochette was the inquisitor.21 The new appointee, like his predecessor,had a shorttenure in office. On 27 August 1538, the Parlementof Toulouse heard the reportof a commissiondelegated to investigatede Rochette.The courtsubsequently ordered his imprisonmentin the conciergerie22 and named three of its counsellorsto assist the vicar of the archbishopof Toulouse in the proceedings against de Rochette.The Parlementalso instructedthree other counsellors to examine the books and papers found in the inquisitor's possession. The trialmoved swiftlyto its conclusion and by the second week of Septemberde Rochettewas declared guiltyof heresy.By 6 Sep- tember,the Parlementhad already removed him fromoffice and on 10

18 A.M., Toulouse, BB-76,fo. 197 and 223. B.N., ms. fr.,5124, fo. 162. Freville,'Un index," 1 (1852): 358. Cataloguedes actes de FranqoisIer, 3: 185. 19 Letterof 24 August 1536. A.N., J 966, fo. 33-38. Genin, Lettres,1: 356. Jourda,Cor- respondance,144. 20 ". veuillez fairele vouloir du Roy, qu'est que ledictRocheto, au nom duquel il m'a octroyeledict office,en soit pourveu . . ." Ibid. 21 Ibid. B.N., ms. fr.,5124, fo. 162; quittances et pieces diverses, vol. 134, no. 1745. Bourgeois,"Documents inedits," 14 (1875): 546-547. Catalogue des actes, 3: 185. Freville, "Un index," 1 (1852): 358. 22 The prison of the conciergeriewas attached to and controlledby the Parlement of Toulouse. Chalande, Rues de Toulouse,1: 173-174. Andre Viala, Le Parlementde Toulouseet l'administrationroyale laique, 1420-1525 environ,1: 382.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 32 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Septemberit condemnedhim to death carryingout the sentencethe same day. The Parlementalso arrestedAntoine Richardi, the lieutenant inquisitor, and on 10 May 1539 issued a similarsentence against him.23 The sixteenth-centuryGenevan refugeeJean Crespin reports in his His- toiredes martyrsthat de Rochetteand his lieutenantwere found guiltyof sodomy. He makes no mentionof a heresycharge. Germainde Lafaille, a Toulousan Catholic writingalmost two centurieslater and with access to the municipal archives,disputes the claim. He expresses dismay that the Protestantauthor would have defamed an importantmartyr like de Rochette;the survivingrecords of the Parlementmention only an ac- cusationof heresyagainst him. Yet the courtdid condemn his lieutenant forboth heresy and sodomy.Heresy was sometimesjoined to an accusation of sodomyand the Inquisitiondid have jurisdictionover the latteroffense. This traditionallinkage may explain Crespin's confusion.There is no firm evidence,however, that de Rochettewas condemned forhomosexual activity.24 Followingthe de Rochetteexecution, Vidal de Becanis was again named inquisitorat Toulouse. The Grand Conseil removed all impedimentsto his possession of the officeon 25 September 1538. As a precautionary measure in its desire to see the affairdefinitively concluded, the royal governmentsummoned de Becanis to Fontainebleaufor a personal inter- view shortlythereafter. He servedthe cause of orthodoxyuntil 1547 when by mutual agreementEsprit Rotier,an understudyof Raymond Gosin, succeeded him.25Stability thus returnedto the Inquisitionof Toulouse. Arnaud de Badet and Louis de Rochettewere clearlythe focal points of the prolonged crisis and it must be asked whetherthey were in fact hereticsor merelythe victimsof factionalrivalries. The division among the Dominicans of southernFrance was at least a partial factorin their ruin.An internalstruggle existed from the very beginning of themovement to reformthe order through the instrument of the Congregationof France.26 Once established,the Congregationwas anxious to consolidateand extend its influence.The strongdefense of its rightsand authorityover the office of inquisitorwas in conformitywith this policy. The observantmovement tookroot at Toulouse under the aggressiveleadership of RaymondGosin.

23 A.D.H.G., B 31, fo. 485v?, 510 and 521; B, Toumelle, reg. 5 (10 septembre1538) and reg. 7, fo. 40. A.M., Toulouse, BB 269, fo. 61v?; CC 2397, fo. 16v? and no. 16. 24 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 7, fo. 40. Carena, Tractatus,116. Crespin, Histoiredes martyres,1: 342. Cf. Histoireeccl6siastique des eglisesr6form6es au royaumede France,ed. G. Baum and Ed. Cunitz, 1: 40. Lafaille,Annales de Toulouse,2: 109. For a case of heresyand sodomy at Carcassonne, A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 27 (5 decembre 1547) and (3 mars 1548). Arno Karlen,"The Homosexual Heresy," 44-63 argues the two crimeswere "used interchangeably;sodomites were heretics,heretics were sodomites." See also: E. William Monter,"La sodomie a l'epoque modeme en Suisse romande," 1023-1026. 25A.D.H.G., B 40, fo. 572v?; 3 E 4322, fo. 197v?. A.N., J 962"4, no. 17. B.N., ms. fr., quittanceset pieces diverses,vol. 135, no. 1894. Bourgeois,"Documents inedits,"548. 26 Mortier,Histoire des maftresg6n6raux, 5: 11-12 and 84-105 provides a briefdescription of the early difficulties.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE CRISIS OF THE INQUISITION 33

When he became inquisitor,Gosin proved an equally zealous champion of orthodoxy.He reacted vigorouslywhen the archbishop of Toulouse appeared to trespassupon the Inquisition'sjurisdiction27 and personally petitionedthe papacy when he thoughtthe court to be obstructedin its pursuit of heretics. Gosin and his followers were not inclined to submit calmly to his replacementas inquisitor,especially by a man of humanistbent. In a decade when the humanistcommunity of Toulouse was subject to great suspicion of heresy, de Badet and de Rochette were themselves vulnerable.Neither man seems to have made a formalcommitment to the reformeddoctrines of individualssuch as Lutherand Zwingli.The Protes- tant disclaimerof de Rochettelends weight to this view. Yet they were associated,if only distantly,with the deeply religioushumanist circle of Marguerited'Angouleme. Marguerite,whose estatesat Nerac lay close to Languedoc, appears to have known de Badet. She plainly supported de Rochette'scandidacy forinquisitor and at least one commentatorhas suggestedthat he served as the inspirationfor her moralityplay entitled Inquisiteur.28 The testimonyentered in thecase againstde Badet,in particular,denotes a keen interestin the studia humanitatis.The prosecutionwas anxious to demonstratehis attractionto astrologyand offeredhis Margaritavirorum illustriumde futuratemporis dispositione praenoscenda as primaryevidence. With questionable logic, one witness testifiedthat de Badet was a "Lutheran"because he was an astrologer.29A bookseller,himself accused of heresy,attested to having seen several workson astrologyin de Badet's room. The same man claimed to have sold him two "Lutheran" books, Brenciusin Iohannemand Collectaneatroporum.30 A student of Scripture and authorof a treatiseon the Epistles of Saint Paul, de Badet may well have bought the books. Perhaps the clearest indicationthat de Badet's heresyinvolved his humanistpursuits was the charge that he frequently citedclassical pagan authorssuch as Plato and Ptolemyand neglectedthe holy Doctors of the Church.The attitudewas typicalof the anti-humanist feelingswhich ran high at Toulouse duringthe 1530s. The LatinistsPierre Bunel and Etienne Dolet as well as the juristsMathieu Pac and Jean de Boyssone were among those humanistswho leftLanguedoc pursued by accusationsof heresy.And thoughother inquisitors of thesixteenth century

27 A.D.H.G., 112 H 6. The controve-rsyis discussed at lengthin the followingchapter. 28 Raymond Lebegue, La tragediereligieuse en France,les debuts(1514-1573), 92. A more criticalview is that of PierreJourda, Marguerite d'Angoulime, duchesse d'Alcencon, reine de Navarre(1492-1549) 1: 485. 29. . .estoyt lutheriena cause de sa science, car estoytgrant astrologien." Deposition of friarJehan de Severino. A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 54v?. 30 Brenciussuper Iohannem and Tropiinsigniores according to anotherwitness. Ibid., fo. 53 and 57. They appear to be editionsof JohannesBrenz, In D. IohannisEvangelion (Hagenau, 1527) and Troporumtheologicorum liber (Basel, n.d.).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 34 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC delightedin demonstrationof theircommand of the classics,the opponents of Arnaudde Badetthought it "unbecominga clergymanand theologian."3' Aside fromquestions concerning the natureand accuracyof the heresy charges,the effectof the prolongedcrisis and especiallythe executionof de Rochettewas to discreditthe Inquisitionas an effectiveinstitution for the controlof heresy.Reaction by the royal governmentwas immediate and far-reaching.Addressing the Parlementof Toulouse on 16 December 1538, Francis I urged greaterdiligence by the episcopal and secular ju- diciariesin the apprehensionand trialof heretics.Elaborate and detailed royal edictsfollowed in June1539 and June1540. They limitedthe competence of the Inquisitionto the judgmentof clergymenin instances of heresymerely involving a delitcommun or common misdemeanor,where publicorder remained undisturbed. The trialof laymen and theadjudication of all heresyoffenses accompanied by open scandal or popular unrest,a cas privilegie',came under the jurisdictionof the royal courts.32The In- quisitionwould regain some portionof its formerjurisdiction in the fol- lowingdecades, though it was neveragain thesole tribunalfor the judgment of heresy.After 1539, it shared this power with the secular judiciaryof the Frenchcrown.

3' A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 7v?. A good introductionto the humanists'plight at Toulouse is Bennassarand Tollon, "Siecle d'or," Histoirede Toulouse,264-269; and Christie,Etienne Dolet, 47-139. There were, of course, perfectlyorthodox inquisitors who were steeped in the classics. The Spaniard Diego Simancas relied heavily on such ancient authors as Plato and Cicero. Cf. his De CatholicisInstitutionibus. 32 A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 135-136v? and 139v?-140v?.Isambert, Recueil giniral, 12: 676- 681. Weiss, La chambreardente, xiv. Nathanael Weiss, "Documents inedits pour servira l'histoirede la reformesous FranSoisler; lettresd'abolition de Francoisler, du 31 mars 1536," 73-74 and 240-243.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions III. The Episcopacy

he Inquisitionwas not the sole ecclesiasticalinstitution actively con- Tcerned with the prevention and eradicationof heresy. Equally vital and necessarywas the episcopate, the traditionalguardian of religiousorthodoxy. Prior to the creationof the Inquisition,the bishops acted as ordinaryjudges in heresy cases; they could take cognizance in their own right.The appearance of the inquisitor,a delegatedjudge of the Holy See, did not mean abolition of episcopal jurisdiction.It theoreticallyre- mainedintact, though inferior to thatof theinquisitor. The bishops assisted and supportedthe inquisitorwho, forhis part,could not act withouttheir concurrence.In the absence of the Inquisition,the bishops operated in- dependentlyin the detection,apprehension and prosecutionof heretics. Thus the prelatesof the threearchdioceses and thirtydioceses withinthe geographicjurisdiction of the Parlementof Toulouse not only cooperated with the Inquisition,but functionedon theirown initiativeas well. The sheer size of Languedoc limitedthe directeffectiveness of the courts of the Inquisitionat Toulouse and Carcassonne.' The sole operative and competentecclesiastical tribunal in some regionswas thatof the episcopacy. The officiality,an ecclesiasticalcourt to which the bishop committed the charge of his spiritualjurisdiction, appeared in its modem outlines towardthe end of the twelfthcentury. The official(officialis), who presided over the diocesan tribunal,exercised an episcopal mandate for the administrationof justice. Criminal competence extended to a number of offensesincluding usury, adultery, rape, abortion,homicide, blasphemy and, of course,heresy.2 The officialitiesof Languedoc were active in the pursuitof this last crimethroughout the period under consideration.In- dividualsoccasionally found it convenientto denounce suspectedheretics to theofficial as did thewoman fromthe diocese of Couseranswho reported PierreSerre in 1553. When deemed appropriate,the officialinitiated the criminaltrial process and undertooksecret inquiries. The closed investi-

' The territoryadministered by the Parlementof Toulouse encompassed the archidioceses of Auch, Narbonne and Toulouse and the dioceses of Agde, Albi, Alet, Beziers, Cahors, Carcassonne,Castres, Comminges, Condom, Couserans, Lavaur, Lectoure,Le Puy, Lodeve, Lombez, Maguelonne (transferredto Montpellierin 1536), Mende, Mirepoix,Montauban, Nimes, Pamiers,Rieux, Rodez, Saint-Papoul, Saint-Pons,Tarbes, Uzes, Vabres and Viviers as well as parts of the diocese of Arles. Viala, Parlementde Toulouse,2: 279-304. Carena, Tractatus,11. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 537-539. Marx,Inquisition en Dauphine,69. 2 Doucet, Institutions,2: 725-728 and 780. Paul Foumier,Les officialitesau moyenage, 1- 24. Anne Lefebvre-Teillard,Les officialitesd la veille du Concilede Trente,25-33 and 44-46. Cf. the remarksof the eighteenth-centuryjurist of Aix, PierreT. Durand de Maillane, Dic- tionnairede droitcanonique et de pratiquebeneficiale, 5: 36-71. 35

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 36 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC gations were normallydirected against a particularsuspect or group of suspects. BernardPellicier, official of the archbishop of Auch, recorded testimonyduring May 1532 regardingthe possible heresyof Jeande Ver- dusan and his servant. On other occasions, these inquiries were more generalin theirscope and assumed the characterof a "fishingexpedition." The examinationof a curate at Mende in 1557 was littlemore than an attemptto uncoverany and all clandestineadherents to reformedreligious ideas. The officialappears to have had no particularsuspects in mind.The role of the episcopacy extendedto the arrestand judgmentof hereticsas well. Officersof the bishop of Nimes incarceratedand triedseveral "Lu- therans"in 1537. The officialityof Cahors dispensedjustice in an analogous case duringthe early 1540s. A few years later,the officialfor the diocese of Lectourecondemned a certainDominique Gerierfor the crimeof heresy. And in 1556, agents of the bishop of Albi chargedGuillaume de Lafaurie with heterodoxy.3 If an accused hereticappeared beforethe Inquisition,the bishops still possessed a strongmeasure of participation.Already in the thirteenth century,the papacy had affirmedthe necessityof concurrenceand co- operationbetween the Inquisitionand episcopacy. The two jurisdictions, inquisitorialand episcopal, could independentlysummon, arrest and imprison suspects. They could even proceed to investigateseparately and individually.On the other hand, the inquisitorand bishop necessarily acted jointlyin the transferof a defendantfrom simple custodyto harsh imprisonment,the application of torture,and definitivejudgment. The Inquisitionneeded the concurrenceof the bishop in whose diocese the accused had allegedlycommitted his crimein these threesituations.4 Bythe sixteenth century, the bishop did notusually participate personally in the judicial proceedings.He delegatedthis task to the vicar general,his principalauxiliary for the administrationof the diocese and substitutein his absence. Thus the inquisitorand the vicar for the bishop of Beziers proceeded jointlyagainst AnthoineSaliceti in 1543. PierreFardeau, vicar generalfor the diocese of Mende, assistedat the trialof Georges Sapientis in 1547. The vicarof the archbishopof Toulouse and the inquisitorjoined in the condemnationof Guillaume de Combis a decade later.5Often it was not the vicar general who took part. An assistantor substitutewas frequentlyassigned the task.Unless theproceedings were dividedbetween the diocesan seat and Toulouse or Carcassonne, or the competentvicar

I A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 4 (7 decembre 1537), reg. 16 (17 avril 1545), reg. 60 (12 octobre 1556); 1 G 642. A.D., Lot, F 136, Chronique de l'abbe de Foulhiac, fo. 670. A.D., Lozere, G 3085. Crespin,Histoire des martyrs,2: 30. 4 Carena, Tractatus,11-12. CelestinDouais, Documentspour servir a' I'histoirede l'Inquisition, xxvi, xl, xlvii and lviii. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 577-578. Marx, Inquisitionen Dauphine,69-70. Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 150-151. 5 A.D.H.G., B 31, fo. 36v?; B 40, fo. 230v?; B, Toumelle, reg. 14 (29 octobre1543). Carena, Tractatus,23. Doucet, Institutions,2: 727-728. Durand de Maillane, Dictionnairede droit canonique,6: 627-635. Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 150v?.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE EPISCOPACY 37 general resided near the appropriateseat, he did not himselfappear on the Inquisition'sbench. Administrativeduties, the difficultyand expense of travel,and the royal government'sdesire to have greatercontrol over theproceedings led to theappointment of substituterepresentatives. Several interlocutorydecrees issued by the Parlementof Toulouse attestto the practice.The high courtordered the bishop of Mende to create a special vicar for the trial of several heresy defendantsin 1546. It directedthe archbishopof Auch to do likewisein 1550.6 The Parlementtypically specifiedthat the appointeebe a personageof requiredquality, neither suspect nor favorable.7The courtgave more detailed instructionsat othertimes. It commandedthe bishop of Maguelonne-Montpellierto name the official forthe archdioceseof Toulouse as his vicar in the trialof three accused hereticsaround 1528. Preliminaryto the proceedingsagainst Anthoine de Montejudeo in 1547, the Parlementruled thatthe bishop of Castresselect a substitutevicar fromamong the clerical counsellorsof the high court itself.8The selectionof provisionalvicars general certainlyweakened the voice of the episcopatewithin the Inquisition. At thesame time,the manner of theirappointment strengthened the positionof the royal judiciaryand most particularlythe Parlementof Toulouse. The relationshipbetween the bishops and the Inquisitionwas by no means totallysmooth and ordered.A varietyof issues caused frictionand irritation-respectivecriminal jurisdictionfiguring prominently among them. A squabble of this very nature developed duringthe early 1520s. Jossede Lagarde, vicar for ArchbishopJean d'Orleans at Toulouse, and the inquisitorRaymond Gosin clashed in the trialof Nicolas de Beaumont, a medical doctorcharged with necromancyand sorcery.The officialityof Toulouse and the Inquisitionhad reached an impasse for each claimed exclusiveauthority to dispensejustice in thecase. Disaccordbetween bishop and inquisitorwould in Italy have been referredto the Holy See and in Spain to theConsejo de la Supremay GeneralInquisicio'n. In France,problems of this type were settled by the royal courts. The Concordat of 1516 severely limited appeals to Rome and there was no equivalent to the Spanish Suprema.9The controversyat Toulouse accordinglyreceived a hearingbefore the Parlementin January1523. While admittingthat the bishop and inquisitormust proceed together in instancesof heresy,counsel forthe archbishopof Toulouse argued in

6 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 20 (26 mars 1546), reg. 34 (21 septembre1550). Doucet, Institutions,2: 786. . . .personnaige de qualite requise non suspectne favorable. ." Directiveto bishop ofAgde, A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle,reg. 38 (21 octobre1551); to bishops of Lectoureand Castres, reg. 39 (7 decembre 1551). 8 Ibid., B 22, fo. 239v0; B, Tournelle,reg. 26 (23 juillet 1547). 9Carena, Tractatus,12. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 580-581. Simancas, De Catholicis Institutionibus,fo. 150v'. Thomas,Concordat de 1516,3: 226. Cf. thecomments of theToulousan juristsGabriel de Vedel, Observationssur les arritsdu Parlementde Toulouse,recueillis par MessireJean de Catellan,81 and Jeande Catellan,Arrests remarquables du Parlementde Toulouse, 117-118.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 38 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC favorof a distinctionbetween heresyand sortilege.The formeras defined by canon law involved a transgressionagainst the articlesof the Faith or the sacramentsof the Church.The purportedoffense of sortilegewas not of thisnaturel' and thereforejurisdiction over the de Beaumontcase rested solelywith the archdioceseof Toulouse. The attorneyeven expressedsome doubtthat a crimehad been committed.The spokesmanfor the Inquisition replied that ars magicaultimately effects heresy. The inquisitor'sinvesti- gationsthus far demonstratedthat it was not simplya matterof magic. The defendantde Beaumontwas under "vehementsuspicion"" of having concludeda pact withthe devil. An act of thissort was manifestlyheretical. The Inquisitionrequested the archbishop'svicar to join and assist it in the properadjudication of de Beaumont's heresyand furthersuggested that the vicar's motivationin the present conflictderived, at least partially, fromhis friendshipwith de Beaumont.'2 An assistantto the royal attorneygeneral (procureurgeneral du roi), who representedthe public interestin criminalprosecution, advanced support for the Inquisition'sposition.'3 He outlined the basic evidence against de Beaumont and reasoned that it pointed towards heresy. The authoritieshad discoveredbooks on magicand diabolicalinvocation, small statues of human figuresand pieces of mandrakeroot among the defendant's possessions. And like the attorneyfor the Inquisition,the assistant procureurquestioned the familiaritybetween the archiepiscopalvicar and the accused. The archbishop'slawyer attempted to minimizethese objections by differentiatingbetween adoration of the devil and simple invocation. De Beaumont could only be accused of the latterand it was not a crimejusticiable by the Inquisition.Furthermore, he soughtto controvert the alleged collusionbetween de Beaumontand the vicar generalof Tou- louse. Their priorassociation was described as limitedto the contextof the defendant'sexpertise as a medical practitioner.'4Though the Parle- ment'sfinal ruling is unknown,the affairdoes illustrate an area ofcontinuing conflictbetween the Inquisition and the episcopacy. The jurisdictional problemwould resurfaceat various timesand in differentforms. Odet de Coligny,Cardinal de Chatillon,was archbishop of Toulouse from1533 to 1550 and duringthis time his assistantsdrafted a series of articlesoutlining the Inquisition'sencroachment upon archiepiscopalau-

'OThe citationsfrom canon law used in supportof the argumentwere C.XXIV, q.3 and CXXVI, q.5. CorpusIuris Canonici,ed. Aemilius Friedberg1: 987-1006 and 1027-1036. " The threedegrees of suspicion of heresy were light (levis), vehement(vehemens) and violent(violenta or maxima).Eymeric, Directorium Inquisitorum, 376-380. Guenois, Conference des ordonnances,102. Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 190-190v?. 12 A.D.H.G., 112 H 6, Extraitdes registresdu Parlementdue samedi diXre jour de janvier l'an mil cinq cens et vingtdeux (o.s.), fo. 1-10. 13 In criminalproceedings before the parlement,the royalattorney general acted as public prosecutorand could assume the role of partiejointe. Doucet, Institutions,1: 173. Langbein, ProsecutingCrime, 217. 14 A.D.H.G., 112 H 6, Extraitdes registres,fo. lOv?-24v?.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE EPISCOPACY 39 thority.The inquisitorresponded as expectedwith his own counter-articles. Then AntoineSanguin, Cardinal de Meudon, aftersucceeding to the See of Toulouse in 1550,15directed his officersto restatetheir position. Among the issues which divided the archbishopand inquisitorwas thatof eating meat on and duringthe days and times prohibitedby the Church. The inquisitorinferred that the offenseconstituted heresy. If thislogic prevailed, the archiepiscopalmemorandum countered, then failureto assist at mass when under obligation,adultery, and fornicationwere equally heretical acts.'6 The debate touched upon a difficultproblem. Disciplinaryabuses of this nature were rarelyin themselvesacts of heresy. Yet they could well be preliminaryevidence forexactly that accusation. Newly reformed Christianssometimes scorned, publicly or otherwise,the traditional Lenten fast.A reformedgroup at Privas took exactlythis tack around 1534. When parlementarycounsellors interrogated Jehan Orlhac in 1554, two recurrent questionswere whetherhe had abstained frommeat duringLent and had confessedand received the Eucharistduring the Easter season. Episcopal officialsat Mende even requested a local curate to disclose the names of those parish memberswho had not performedtheir Easter duty.'7 The negligentwere presumablysuspected of Protestantleanings. And while the Inquisitionhad long valued these exteriorsigns and presumptions,the practicewas not withoutinherent dangers.'8 Equally irritatingto the diocesan authoritiesat Toulouse was the In- quisition's procedurewith respect to the publicationof monitories.The device was a letterto the faithfulread at the principalmass and affixed to the church doors and in the public squares. It was an admonition requiringall Christiansto reveal under pain of excommunicationthat which they knew regardingcertain facts contained in the monitory.The issuance of these letterswas a principaland traditionalfeature of Inquis- itorialpractice.'9 Protest and criesof abuse by the bishops appears to have been equallylongstanding. The vicargeneral of the archdioceseof Toulouse questionedseveral priests of the churchof the Dalbade in April 1530. The principalsubject of the investigationwas the Inquisition'sclaim to com-

15 Odet de Coligny permutatedthe archdiocese of Toulouse for the abby of Fleurs with AntoineSanguin in 1550. The agreementstipulated that Colignycould repossess the see in the event of Sanguin's death. This actuallyoccurred in 1559. Vic and Vaissete, Histoirede Languedoc,4: 361. 16 A.D.H.G., 112 H 6, Pour respondreaux additionabaillees par monseigneurl'inquisiteur de la foy contreles articlesde monseigneurle reverendissimecardinal de Chatillon,fo. 1- 1v?. 17 A.D., Ardeche, C 1451, piece no. 59, fo. 4. A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 49 (12 juin 1554). A.D., Lozere, G 3085. 18 Various examples of this type of "evidence" are listed by the Aragonese inquisitor Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 365; theItalian Carena, Tractatus, 219-234; and theSpaniard Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 189-190. 19 Carena, Tractatus,235. Durand de Maillane, Dictionnairede droitcanonique, 4: 626-630. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 407-409. Guy du Rousseaud de La Combe, Recueil de jurisprudencecanonique et beneficiale,2e partie,74.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 40 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC petencyin instancesof usury,sortilege and divination.20At the same time the inquisitormade detailed inquiriesabout a monitorypublished in the parishand signedby theinquisitor. It relatedto the aforementionedoffenses and seemed beyondthe confinesof Inquisitorialjurisdiction.2" The prelates of Languedoc complained to the provincialEstates throughoutthe 1550s of vague all-inclusivemonitories originating with the Inquisition.22And the memorandumissued in the name of the Cardinal de Meudon noted the requirementthat all general monitoriesbe obtained fromthe bishop or his officers.The Council of Vienne (1311-1312) had admittedlyrelaxed theobligation for episcopal countersignature on itemssuch as imprisonment citations.The promulgationof general monitories,however, remained a prerogativeof the bishop. Accordingto the archbishopof Toulouse, the inquisitorwas obliged to obtain his endorsementon all documentsof this nature.23 The articlesof the archbishopof Toulouse concluded in lament of the animositywhich had arisen between his jurisdictionand the Inquisition. Cooperationwas vital,but oftenelusive. A case in point was the recent Inquisitorialjudgment against a priestof the churchof Le Taur. The inquisitorhad condemned the priest to pay a fine in the amount of one hundredsols. Yet he failedto elicitarchiepiscopal concurrence in the sentence.The ironywas inescapable.While the inquisitorcomplained of arch- diocesan obstructionsto the performanceof his task, it was he and not the archbishopwho clearlyabused establishedlegal procedure.24 The zeal withwhich the prelatesguarded theirrights and authoritywas not always consistentwith the dischargeof theirecclesiastical duties. The bishopricsof Languedocwere sometimeslittle more than lucrative benefices distributedby the monarchyand papacy to high aristocraticfamilies. Members of the Briconnetfamily headed the dioceses of Lodeve from 1489 to 1520, Narbonnefrom 1507 to 1514 and Nimes from1496 to 1560. Francois-Guillaumede Castelnau Clermont-Lodeveheld successivelythe sees of Narbonne,Auch, Agde and Saint-Pons.Governmental officers and royal diplomatslike AntoineDuprat, Gabriel de Grammont,Jean de Pins and Francoisde Toumon receivedmeridional bishoprics as favorsbestowed forservice to theirking. Julius II, ClementVII and Paul III were respectively the bishop of Mende, archbishopand bishop of Saint-Pons priorto their election to the papacy. And nephews of Leo X, JuliusIII and Paul IV

20 "Interrogatessi el que parla sap que led. inquisidorde la fe se entremetany prenga cognoissenssasde usuras, sortilecges,doivinations ny de autres cas que non se expectenta sa juridiction."A.D.H.G., 1 G 410, Inquisitiofacta ex officio,fo. 1. 21 Ibid., fo. lvo-2v?. 22 The delegates expressedconcern in 1550, 1554 and 1557. Ibid., C 2279, fo. 203v? and 433v?; C 2280, fo. 199. 23 Ibid.,112 H 6, Pour respondreaux additions,fo. lvo-2v?.Durand de Maillane,Dictionnaire de droitcanonique, 4: 631-649. 24 A.D.H.G., 112 H 6, Pour respondreaux additions,fo. 2v?-3.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE EPISCOPACY 41 receivedtitle to the dioceses of Saint-Papoul,Mirepoix and Comminges.25 The appointeswere typicallynonresident for their obligations to kingand Churchoccupied themelsewhere. Several among themnever visited their dioceses. The patronage system,moreover, placed scant emphasis upon religious qualificationor administrativeability. Jean d'Orleans became archbishopof Toulouse at theage of eleven. Odet de Colignywas seventeen when he succeeded to the same position. Georges de Selve was bishop of Lavaur at the age of eighteen.And thoughnever consecratedin holy orders,Guillaume de Joyeuseheld the see of Alet.26 Five Languedocien prelateseither embraced Protestantism or were for- mally charged with heresyas the Wars of Religion approached. Jean de Lettes-Montpezatsecretly married Armande de Durfortin May 1556 and several monthslater the couple retiredto the Swiss canton of Berne. The Parlementof Paris challengedthe orthodoxyof GuillaumePellicier, bishop of Montpellier,during the followingyear. Paul IV forcedthe resignation of Odet de Coligny as archbishopof Toulouse afterpublic disclosurein 1561 of his conversionto Protestantism.Finally, in 1563 the Roman In- quisitionissued summonsfor Jean de Barbancon,former bishop of Pamiers, and Jeande Saint-Gelis,bishop of Uzes. The Roman authoritiessuspected Saint-Gelisin particularof erroneousnotions concerning the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist and of improper administrationof that sacrament.27 Owing to the widespreadabsenteeism which resulted from the selection process, the bishops usually entrusteddiocesan administrationto their vicars general. These men came froma varietyof backgrounds.A few were jurisconsults,such as Jacquesdu Faur,vicar general at Toulouse from 1533 to 1537. He was a counsellorof the Parlementof Toulouse and later served on the Parlementof Paris. Anothermagistrate of the Toulousan Parlement,Pierre de Saint-Martin,became vicar generalof the diocese of Rieux in 1538. Gerard de Comeillan, who administeredthe see of Saint- Pons forthe Cardinal de Clermontat approximatelythe same time,was also trainedin the law.28Prelates named membersof theirown familyor

25 Chanoine Cantaloube, La riformeen Francevue d'un village civenol, 32-35. Abbe G. Cayre, Histoiredes e've^queset archeve^quesde Toulouse,312. Abbe A. Clergeac, Chronologie des archeve$ques,ive^ques et abbis dans l'ancienneprovince ecclesiastique d'Auch et les dioce'ses de Condomet de Lombez,1300-1801, 4 and 54. FleuryVindry, Les parlementairesfranqais au XVIe siecle, 2, pt. 2: 186-187. Vic and Vaissete,Histoire de Languedoc,4: 256-257, 310, 360- 361, 389, 395, 421, 437, 442 and 445. 26 Cayre,Archeveques de Toulouse,294 and 316. Vic and Vaissete, Histoirede Languedoc, 4: 360-361, 413-414 and 439. 27 B.N., ms. latin,8994, fo. 216-221. Cayre,Archeveques de Toulouse,318. Abbe Camille Daux, Histoirede l'glise de Montauban,1, pt. 9: 51-52. AntoineDegert, Proces de huite've^ques franqaissuspects de calvinisme,2. Louise Guiraud, Le procesde GuillaumePellicier, eveque de Maguelonne-Montpellierde 1527 d 1567, 3. Gaston Serr,Une iglise protestanteau XVIe siecle: Montauban,5-6. Vic and Vaissete,Histoire de Languedoc,4: 361 and 431-432. 28 A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 79v? and 113v?. Vic and Vaissete, Histoirede Languedoc,4: 421. Vindry,Parlementaires francais, 2, pt. 2, 181 and 199.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 42 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC personal retinueto the positionof vicar as well. Michel Briconnetserved his uncle in this capacityat Nimes untilhe himselfsucceeded to the see. And Jeand'Illiers, a nativeof the Orleanais,became vicar generalat Tou- louse afterhis patronJean d'Orleans received the archbishopric.29Local canons, priorsand abbots were common choices too, thoughthe orderof nominationto the two officesmay have been reversedin some instances. Jacques Secondat, vicar of the Cardinal de Meudon at Toulouse, was a canon at the cathedral of Saint-Etienneand prior of the monasteryof Notre-Dame of Madiran. Pierre Fardeau, a cathedral canon of Mende, served as that diocese's vicar general throughoutthe 1530s.3? The Frenchmonarchy recognized the weaknesses withinthe episcopacy of Languedocand, at thesame time,understood its critical role in combatting the reformmovement. The crown specificallyaddressed these bishops in a numberof directives.Exhortations for increased diligence in the pursuit of hereticswere relativelycommon.31 Letters-patentof Henry II dated 20 May 1557 went to the archbishops,bishops and curateswithin the jurisdictionof the Parlementof Toulouse. The proclamationenjoined themto residepersonally in theirdioceses or benefices,to organizepreaching therein and to search out and bring to justice all heretics.32Other royal letters went to individualprelates. Officers of the crownrequested the bishop of Rodez in 1553 to organizepublic prayers and processionsfor the extirpation of heresyin his diocese.33The faithfulhad to be made to appreciatethe seriousnessof the problemand theirrole in its solution.Two yearsearlier, Henry II had ordered Bishop Jean de Lettes-Montpezatto undertakea pastoral visit throughouthis diocese of Montauban. Its purpose was to detectand rectifyerror, abuse and scandal among the local clergy.The effectiveness,however, of thisparticular visit is questionable. The bishop was ill and he entrustedthe taskto FrancoisPonisson, a Benedictinemonk fromNotre-Dame de la Daurade at Toulouse. Inside of a year afterthe visit'scompletion Ponisson was accused of heresy.He finallyleft southern Francein 1554 and registeredas an inhabitantof Geneva the nextspring. The bishop of Montauban himselffled to Switzerlandin 1557.34 The officiality,a spiritual court charged with the exerciseof the bishop's contentiousjurisdiction, functioned actively during the sixteenthcentury.

29Jules Doinel et al., Inventaire-sommairedes archivesdipartementales antirieures d 1790. Aude.Archives eccle'siastiques. Series G et H, 370, n. 1. Vic and Vaissete, Histoirede Languedoc, 4: 283. 30 A.D.H.G., B 31, fo. 35v?; 1 G 410, Lettrede Jacques Secondat. Cayre, Archeve^quesde Toulouse,323. 31 See, for example: Edict of Fontainebleau, 1 June 1540, Isambert,Recueil general,12: 676-681; or Edict of Amboise, 14 April 1541, A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 206-208. 32 A.D.H.G., B 1905, fo. 145v?-146v?.A.D., Herault,G 3938. 33 A.D., Aveyron,G 189, fo. 160-161v?. 34 Ponisson registeredat Geneva on 8 April 1555. A.D.H.G., B 45, fo. 88. A.D., Tam-et- Garonne,G 209, fo. 1-4. Daux, Eglisede Montauban,1, pt. 9, 51-52. Paul-FrangoisGeisendorf, Livredes habitantsde Geneve,1: 48. Serr,Montauban, 3.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE EPISCOPACY 43

Episcopal justice existed and it was competentin criminalmatters such as heresy. The various prelates and theirofficers also jealously guarded theirjudicial power and authority.They voiced strong opposition, for instance,when these prerogativesseemed threatenedby the Inquisition. Yet few among them resembled the great inquisitor-bishopsof the immediate post-Albigensianera, men like Bernardde Castenet, bishop of Albi, or Jacques Foumier,bishop of Pamiers. Most observersrecognized the deep-seated problemsand abuses associated with the Languedocien episcopacy and the ensuinglimitations on its abilityto maintainreligious unity.The circumstancesencouraged the royal government to effecttighter controlover the Gallican Church in the area of heresyproceedings. The episcopal tribunalslike the Inquisition continued to operate, but their competencein thisarea was restrictedand cooperationwith secular judges was mandatorilyexpanded.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions IV. The Royal Tribunals W iththe advanceof the FrenchReformation the royal judiciary soughtan increasinglylarger voice in mattersrelating to heresy. The secularauthorities had always assistedthe Inquisitionand the officialityof each diocese in the executionof certainsentences. This participationexpanded during the fifteenthcentury within the general contextof the extensionof royal power over the Gallican Church. France witnesseda progressivereduction of ecclesiasticalcompetence to the advantage of secular justice.' This process accelerated rapidly after 1500, especiallyin the area of heresyproceedings. The growthof heterodoxy, the shortcomingsof religiousinstitutions and the special interestsof the monarchyled to continualmodification and adjustmentof the respective jurisdictionsof the secular and ecclesiasticalcourts. A bull issued by ClementVII in 1525 at the requestof the Frenchregent Louise de Savoy entrustedcompetence in heresy cases to four deputy judges (uges dilegues), two clerical and two secular. The papal pro- nouncementmerely confirmed an arrangementalready in existencefor Languedoc. As earlyas 1511 Jeand'Auriole and Deode Izam, counsellors of the Parlement,assisted the inquisitorand the vicar generalof the archbishop of Toulouse in the posthumoustrial of Gondysalvide Molina. The Parlementcontinued to appoint its counsellorsto serve on these "ecclesiasticalcommissions" throughout the 1520s and 1530s. The composition of the heresy"commissions" at Carcassonne, on the otherhand, usually included the city'sinquisitor, an episcopal representativeand two secular juristsfrom the courtof the Seneschal of Carcassonne.2 Beginningin 1539, Francis I modifiedthis organizationconsiderably. The modificationsappeared shortlyafter the executionof the inquisitor Louis de Rochettefor heresy. The affairprovided the occasion and at least partialmotivation for the edict of 24 Junewhich conferredcompetence over cases of unorthodoxbelief upon the secular judiciary:"the persons of our sovereigncourts, bailiffs, seneschals or theirlieutenants general may impartiallyand concurrentlyhave competenceover the said matters

l Paul Ourliac and Henri Gilles, La piriodepost-classique (1378-1500); la problematiquede l'epoque;les sources,vol. 13 in Histoiredu droitet des institutionsde l'egliseen occident,dir. GabrielLe Bras, 129-130. Rousseaud de La Combe, Jurisprudencecanonique, lere partie,183. Thomas, Concordatde 1516, 3: 229 and 395. 2 A.D.H.G., B 14, fo. 795v?; B 19, fo. 95 and 179; B 22 fo. 200; B 25, fo. 98, 172, 233 and 298; B 31, fo. 35 and 514; B, Toumelle, reg. 6 (12 decembre1538), reg. 37 (15 juillet 1551). Doucet, Institutions,2: 785. Isambert,Recueil ge'niral, 12: 231-237. 44

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE ROYAL TRIBUNALS 45

(heresy)against all personsof all qualitiesand ranks.. . ."3 The monarchy thus empoweredits courtsto act as tribunalsof firstinstance for the crime of heresy.The Edictof Fontainebleaurestated and qualifiedthe procedure on 1 June 1540. The Inquisition and the appropriateofficialities were grantedjurisdiction over clergywhose heresy involved a delit commun or commonmisdemeanor, where public orderremained undisturbed. Her- esyoffenses accompanied by open scandal or popularunrest, a cas privilegie, came under the jurisdictionof the royal courts.4However, there is no survivingrecord of the registrationof thisedict by the Parlementof Tou- louse. The court published and registeredinstead a royal proclamation issued at Amboise on 14 April 1541. This second directiveelaborated the new judicial formatwith detailed precision. Lay personsand clericsnot constitutedin sacred orderswere to be tried by the courtsof the seneschalsyor bailiwick.The criminalchamber of the parlementpronounced final sentence and it alone could grantpermission forthe applicationof torture.The Grand'Chambreof the parlementheard heresy charges lodged against membersof the nobilityand individuals possessing certainlegal immunities.Ordained clericswhose punishment would entail degradationremained under the jurisdictionof the eccle- siasticaljudge, but only insofaras theircrime was a delit commun.When a clergymanwas accused notmerely of having professed heterodox religious opinions, but of having preached them openly, for example, and thus havingdisturbed public tranquillity,it became a cas privilegie.These latter cases went to the parlement'scriminal chamber with the provisionthat one or two clericalcounsellors (conseillers-clercs), who were normallyex- cluded fromcriminal cases, assist in the judgment.5 Furthermodifications appeared in September1543. The crownrestored to the bishops and inquisitorscompetence to sit in judgmentfor members of boththe clergy and laityfor the delit commun. If theproceedings against any layman or clericrevealed a cas privilegie,jurisdiction reverted to the royalcourts. There were effectivelytwo trialsthen, one beforethe religious tribunalfor a determinationon the delit commun and a second by the secular judiciaryfor the adjudicationof the cas privilegie.The monarchy had addressed a similardeclaration to the Parlementof Paris in July1543, but it was neitherpublished nor observed there.Consequently Henry II's edict of November 1549 abolishingthe chambreardente at Paris was not registeredat Toulouse where the newly institutedParisian procedurehad

3 A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 139. Guenois, Conferencedes ordonnances,99. Weiss, "Documents inedits,"BSHPF, 28: (1889): 241. 4 Doucet, Institutions,2: 784-785. Isambert,Recueil gineral, 12: 680. Rousseaud de La Combe, Jurisprudencecanonique, lere partie,183. Thomas, Concordatde 1516, 3: 259. Weiss, La chambreardente, xiv. 5 A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 206v?-207v?.Despite the label,secular lawyers increasingly occupied the positions of conseillers-clercsin the sixteenthcentury. The older sense of a balance between judges trainedin canon and civil law was lost as the crown assertedits dominance over the Church. J.H.M. Salmon, Societyin Crisis:France in the SixteenthCentury, 71.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 46 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC been observedfor nearly six years.A case beforethe Parlement of Toulouse in 1546 confirmsthis early compliance. The courtreprimanded the inquisitor on this occasion for his failureto observe prescribedjudicial procedure and it made specificreference to the royal edict of 20 September1543.6 The Edict of Chateaubriandfurther repaired the formercompetence of the ecclesiasticaljudges in 1551. Accordingto its terms,they possessed sole jurisdictionover membersof the clergyaccused of heresy.The royal and ecclesiasticaltribunals then divided the prosecutionof lay personson thebasis of thedistinction between the delitcommun and the cas privilegie. This procedureremained virtually unchanged until publication of the edicts of pacificationduring the 1560s.7 The respectivejurisdictions of the religiousand secular courtsnot only changed and evolved throughoutthe period, but theirdetermination at any one timewas clearlya royalprerogative. Whether motivated by religious convictionsor politicalconsiderations, the crown could and did establish and adjust legal proceduresfor the enforcementof religiousunity. As the problemof religiousdivision assumed greatermagnitude, the royal governmentwas understandablyanxious to have a larger and more direct role in its attemptedcontrol. The reduction,both in theoryand practice, of the competenceof ecclesiasticalcourts reflected this desire. Even the distinctionbetween delit commun and cas privilegiewas imprecise,with all differenceof interpretationsettled in favorof royal justice.8Heresy, at least in the contextof the cas privilegie,became a secular crime. A secondmeans by whichthe royal courts could intervenein ecclesiastical justicewas the appel commed'abus. The proceduredeveloped in the latter half of the fifteenthcentury without specific reference to the heresyquestion.Rather, its originsare foundin the generalelaboration of the liberties and privilegesof the Gallican Church.The extraordinaryremedy normally alleged thata judge of the Churchhad exceeded his power and trespassed upon the temporaljurisdiction. He had presumablyruled contraryto the prescriptionsof canon law or the royalordinances. Recourse to the appeal was theoreticallyreciprocal and it could be invokedwhen the ecclesiastical jurisdictionintruded on the secular, or the secular on the ecclesiastical. However,motions of thelatter sort were extremelyrare. Finally, the appeal was lodged withthe parlementwhich could reverseor amend the decision of the religioustribunal.9

6 A.D.H.G., B 1903, fo. 63-63vD; B, Toumelle, reg. 21 (30 avril 1546). AntoineFontanon, Les edictset ordonnancesdes roysde Francedepuis S. Loysjusques a present,4: 1014-1015. Weiss, La chambreardente, cxxix-cxxv. 7A.D.H.G., B. 1904, fo. 87-87v?. Doucet, Institutions,2: 786. Isambert,Recueil ge'neral, 13: 192. 8 Doucet, Institutions,2: 785. 9 Ibid., 2: 786. Durand de Maillane, Dictionnairede droitcanonique, 1: 99-121. Gazzaniga, Eglisedu Midi, 237-249. JeanImbert, La pratiquejudiciaire, tant civile que criminelle,receue et observeepar toutle royaumede France,enrichie . . . par M. PierreGuenois . . . et B. Automne, 469-470. Rousseaud de La Combe, Jurisprudencecanonique, 3eme partie,15-17.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE ROYAL TRIBUNALS 47

Persons tried for heresy by the Inquisitionor officialityoccasionally resortedto the appel comme d'abus beforethe Parlementof Toulouse.'0 The purportedabuses were usually proceduralrather than substantive. The Parlementruled in 1547 that the inquisitorand vicar of the bishop of Lodeve had proceeded incorrectlyin the degradationof a Carmelite friar,Pierre Sapientis. They were orderedto performthe ceremonyanew. The courtreacted to an appeal in 1560 by declaringthat the inquisitor and vicarfor the diocese ofTarbes had illegallysequestered the possessions of a prebendaryof the cathedralat Tarbes. The appel comme d'abus also commonlycontended that the Inquisition had ignored lettersof relief obtainedby the accused. The royal attorneygeneral invoked it more than once against the inquisitorand vicar general or officialwhen protesting theircontravention of royal or papal proclamations.The syndic of the Dominican Congregationof France even sought reliefon these grounds during the controversysurrounding the inquisitor Arnaud de Badet in 1534.1" The body which heard these appeals, the Parlementof Toulouse, was the mostpowerful royal institution in Languedoc. It dispensed justiceand performeda varietyof administrativeduties over an area of some seventy thousand square kilometers.12Though firstestablished in 1420, the court did not begin to assume its distinctiveform until mid-century.The Grand'Chambreand the Chambredes Enquetesonly emergedas separate entitiesin 1451. Charles VII added a criminalchamber, the Tournelle,'3 in 1491, but it did not formallydistinguish itself from the Grand'Chambre foranother eighteen years. The creationof a second Chambredes Enquetes and a Chambredes Requetes in 1543 completedthe basic structure.14 The Grand'Chambrewas, as its titlesuggests, the centralfocus of the Parlement.It adjudicated the most importantcauses, those involvingthe king,the royal officersand the highestaristocrats in firstinstance, and on appeal all civil and criminalcases frominferior royal jurisdictions.It reg-

10 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 8 (10 avril 1540), reg, 9 (30 juin 1541), reg. 21 (15 avril 1546), reg. 25 (3 juin 1547), reg. 30 (29 mars 1549), reg. 39 (17 decembre 1551), reg. 40 (9 fevrier1552), reg. 48 (15 mars 1554), reg. 49 (10 mai 1554) and (30 mai 1554), reg. 51 (15 janvier 1555), reg. 60 (24 octobre 1556), reg. 62 (18 fevrier1557), reg. 71 (23 septembre 1559) and reg. 73 (1 mars 1560). " Ibid., B, Toumelle, reg. 25 (3 juin 1547), reg. 56 (11 decembre 1555), reg. 59 (17 juin 1556) and (29 juillet 1556), reg. 62 (18 fevrier1557), reg. 64 (27 aofit 1557), reg. 71 (23 septembre1559) and reg. 73 (1 mars 1560). A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 1. 12 The territoryincluded the present departements of Ardeche, Ariege, Aude, Aveyron, Gard, Gers, Haute-Garonne,Haute-Loire, Hautes-Pyrenees, Herault, Lot, Lozere, Tarn and Tam-et-Garonne.Eugene Lapierre,Le Parlementde Toulouse, 67. Leon Mirot,Manuel de geographiehistorique de la France,222. A. Molinier,"Sur la geographie de la province de Languedoc au moyen age," in Vic and Vaissete, Histoirede Languedoc,12: 319-320. Viala, Parlementde Toulouse,2: 279-280. 13 The criminalchamber of the Parlementof Paris was called the Tournellebecause it sat in the PetitTour Saint-Louis.The usage was simplytransferred to the provincialparlements. Doucet, Institutions,1: 169, n. 2. 14 Ibid., 1: 211. Dognon, Institutionsde Languedoc,378 bis-379. Lapierre,Parlement de Toulouse,16-17.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 48 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC isteredthe royal edicts, administered the oath of officeto theking's officials includingthe inquisitor,and promulgatedthe decisions of the Chambre des Enqueteswhich, unlike its Parisian counterpart, had onlya preparatory role to thatof the Grand'Chambre.For examinationof the mostimportant affairs,especially those of a politicalcharacter, and formatters of intemal organizationand discipline,the Grand'Chambreunited around itselfall the chambersin the general assembly.15Both bodies exercisedresponsi- bilitieswith respect to the crimeof heresy.The generalassembly of chambers convened forthe nominationof the counsellorswho served on the mixedheresy tribunals which existed prior to 1539.16 The selectionsappear to have come fromeach of the chambers with some attemptat equal distribution.Thus the generalassembly chose threecounsellors, one from each chamber,to assist in the heresytrials of 1532 at Toulouse."7During thissame period,the Grand'Chambre was responsiblefor the condemnation of hereticsconvicted by the ecclesiasticalcourts and entrustedto secular justice forcapital punishment.18 Following the procedural reorganizationsof 1539-1543, the greatest portionof the workload in heresycases passed to the criminalchamber, the Toumelle. The Grand'Chambre continued to act as arbiterin jurisdictionaldisputes as evidenced by its frequentinjunctions permitting the inquisitoror officialto tryan individual.19However, heresywas a criminal offenseand, accordingly,the judgmentof actual cases, mostlyon appeal, and therendering of finalsentence belonged to theToumelle. This criminal chamber was composed exclusivelyof lay counsellors (conseillers-laics). The sole adjustmentwas the addition of one or two clericalcounsellors (conseillers-clercs)for the trialof clergymen. Forreasons not whollyexplained, the Parlementof Toulouse transferred heresyproceedings to the Grand'Chambrebeginning in November 1551. The judgmentsand decreescontinued to be depositedin thesecret archives of the Toumelle along withother criminal decisions, but bore the heading en la Grand'Chambreas opposed to en la chambrecriminelle. The change correspondsto the registrationof the Edict of Chateaubriandat Toulouse in October 1551 and appears to have been a matterfor local discretion. Jean Crespin noted the modificationwhen describingthe martyrdomof

15 Chenon, Histoiredu droitfranqais, 2: 509-511 and 514. Doucet, Institutions,1: 174. Bernardde La Roche-Flavin,Treize livres des parlemensde France,56-58. Viala, Parlementde Toulouse,1:85 and 404-405. 16 A.D.H.G., B 14, fo. 774v? and 795v?; B 19, fo. 179; B 22, fo. 239v?; B 25, fo. 233, 298v? and 311v?; B 26, fo. 42; B 31, fo. 134, 485v? and 514v?. 17 "La court,les chambresassemblees . . . a ordonneet ordonneque troysdes conseillers d'icelle,ung de chacune chambre,que serontchoysiz et advisez par touspresidens, assisteront a fairedes proces . . ." Ibid., B 26, fo. 2v?. 18 Condemnationsof Gondysalve de Molina and Louis de Rochette.Ibid., ms. 132, fo. 239-241 and B 31, fo. 521. 19Ibid., B 34, fo. 55; B 35, fo. 436; B 37, fo. 458, 739 and 757v?; B 38, fo. 458; B 39, fo. 231; B 40, fo. 232; B45, fo. 146v?.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE ROYAL TRIBUNALS 49

Pierre Serre in 1553. Appealing the decision of an inferiorcourt, Serre firstappeared beforethe Tournelle.

Nevertheless,because of a commissiongiven to thefirst president for judgment oftrials concerning the Faith in whichever chamber of the Parlement that he would consider,and that as earlyas thepreceeding year he hadchosen the Grand'Chambre, he pretendedthat the judgment had notbeen givenin thecriminal chamber.20

The Grand'Chambrethen reheardSerre's appeal.2' At a minimum,the proceduralchange reflectedthe royal government'sdesire thatthe parle- mentsassign a high priorityand give wider hearingto mattersof religious conflict.22 The sessions of the Parlementof Toulouse began each year on 12 No- vember,the day afterthe feastof Saint-Martin,and concluded by the first or second week of Septemberin the followingyear. The volume of cases and the need forimmediate action in certaininstances during the interim led to the creationof a Chambredes Vacationsbeginning in 1519. It sat only between the normal sessions and the counsellorswho participated did so voluntarily.23The chamber'scompetence extended to the crimeof heresy which, as in the Tournelle and Grand'Chambre,was judged in closed hearing. Its records relatingto criminalcauses including heresy were placed in the registersof the Toumelle. Yet anotherparlementary body employedin the pursuitof hereticswas the GrandsJours. Originally conceived of as a device to strengthenroyal justice in the provinces (they resembled an irregularassize court),they soon served to disencumberthe parlementsthrough their simplified procedure. The legal process was nearly identical to that observed by the parlementexcept that it was accelerateddue to a reductionof the normal delays for appearances, productionof witnesses and presentationof arguments.Criminal competence was generallyunlimited, both in firstinstance and on appeal. Authorityeven extendedto the investigationof the conduct of local judges.24 Royal letters-patentof convocation specifiedthe site, date and competence of the Grands Jours.The crown orderedthat they meet at Nlmes beginningon 15 September 1541. Geographic jurisdictioncovered the Seneschalsyof Nimes-Beaucaire,the Governmentof Montpellierand the Bailiwicksof Gevaudan, Velay and Vivarais.The Parlementof Toulouse, in turn,named a presidentand twelvecounsellors for the task.The Grands

20 Crespin,Histoire des martyrs,2: 31. 21 The registersof the Parlementindicate that the rehearingtook place on 21 March 1553. A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 45 (21 mars 1553). 2 " . traiteret mettreen avant les matiereset affairesconcemans nostresaincte foy et religion. . ." Edit de Chateaubriand,art. 25. Ibid., B 1904, fo. 89. Isambert,Recueil general, 13: 198-199. 23 A.D.H.G., B 1901, fo. 73. Viala, Parlementde Toulouse,1: 86 and 395-396. 24 Chenon, Histoiredu droitfranqais, 2: 514-515. Doucet, Institutions,2: 219.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 50 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Joursat Le Puy in 1548 were similarin format.They began on 1 September and the geographicjursidiction included the Seneschalsy of Rouergue while excludingthe Governmentof Montpellier.The only otherGrands Joursfor Languedoc duringthis period convened at Bezierson 1 September 1550 and heard cases fromthe Govemmentof Montpellierand the Sene- schalsiesof Nimes-Beaucaireand Carcassonne.In each instancethe session lasted until the end of October.25The monarchyexplicitly commanded the Grands Joursof Languedoc to proceed against "Lutherans" and other membersof heretical sects.26 The directivesare noteworthywhen considered in relationto the geographiccompetence of the Grands Jours.The Rhone valley, lower Languedoc, Rouergue and Cevennes mountains were not only relativelyisolated fromToulouse, but the reformhad a strongand earlyimpact in these regions.27The Grands Joursat Le Puy in 1548 tried sixheretics and at Bezierstwo yearslater they instituted proceedings against sixteenaccused hereticsand orderedthe arrestof anotherfifteen suspects.28 The Parlementof Toulouse was itselfrigidly orthodox in the yearsprior to the Wars of Religion.A representativefrom the town of Albi indicated duringthe summerof 1539 thathe was unable to pursue the city'saffairs beforethe courtbecause it was preoccupiedwith "Lutherans."29 Only two counsellorswere even suspected of sympathizingwith the reformmovement.30The humanistscholar Jean de Pins was the object of an erroneous accusation of unorthodoxyin 1532. The incidentarose fromhis corre- spondence withErasmus regarding a Greek manuscriptof the Jewishhis- torianJosephus and occurredat a timewhen many leading humanistsat Toulouse foundthemselves under suspicion. The Parlementexamined the letterfrom Erasmus and foundthat it containedno basis forformal charges against de Pins. He remained on the bench of the Parlementuntil his death in 1537.31 Anothercounsellor, Antoine de Lautrec,sire de Saint- Germier,did join the Protestantcamp. He secretlyconverted to Calvinism and successfullyavoided detectionuntil afterhis flightto Geneva. He registeredas an "inhabitant"there on 25 November 1553. The Parlement subsequentlyordered his arrestin mid-Decemberand condemnedhim in

25 A.D.H.G., B 34, fo. 362 and 544; B 41, fo. 447v0; B, Toumelle, reg. 34 (28 juillet1550). Lapierre,Parlement de Toulouse,59-60. 26 A.D.H.G., B 34, fo. 544; B 41, fo. 448; B, Toumelle, reg. 38 (28 juillet 1550). 27 EmmanuelLe RoyLadurie, Les paysans de Languedoc,1: 334. 28 A.D.H.G., B 92 j, fo. 10, 11, 64, 68, 90 and 203; B 92 1, fo. 23, 58, 87, 154-155, 161, 187, 190 and 195. la cause et raisonque je ne puys estredespeche si est que la courtest grandement occupee aux affaireset matierescontre les lutheriens. ." A.M., Albi, BB 132. 30 The situationchanged somewhat after1560. A generaldiscussion is available in Emile Connac,"Troubles de mai 1562 a Toulouse,"310-339, and RaymondA. Mentzer,Jr., "Calvinist Propaganda and the Parlementof Toulouse," 268-283. 31 Christie,Etienne Dolet. 67-68. EtienneDolet, StephaniDoleti Orationes duae in Tholosam, 60. DesideriusErasmus, Opus EpistolarumDes. ErasmiRoterodami, ed. PercyS. Allen,9: 469- 470 and 10, 40-41. Louis de Santi,"Rabelais a Toulouse," 53-56. PreservedSmith, Erasmus, 412-413. Vindry,Parlementaires franqais, 2, pt. 2: 186-187.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE ROYAL TRIBUNALS 51 absentiaon 6 February1554. De Lautrec was bumed in effigythe next day, Shrove Tuesday.32 Aside fromthe counsellors,the most active memberof the parlement in therepression of heresywas theroyal attomey general (procureur general du roi). Entrustedwith the defense and maintenanceof the rightsof the crown,he watched over the proceedingsof the parlementand intervened in matterstouching upon royalprerogatives and jurisdiction.He had since the fourteenthcentury assumed the role of public prosecutorfor criminal litigationin France. He could initiatejudicial action even if therewas no formalprivate complaint and his subsequent motionspaced the criminal trialprocedure.33 Consequently, as themonarchy came to perceivea positive correlationbetween the enforcementof religiousunity and the preservation of public order,the royalattorney general was vigorouslyactive in heresy cases as chiefprosecutor before the parlement.34Two barristersor avocats du roi,one forcivil and anotherfor criminal affairs, assisted the attomey general and usually pleaded the actual cases. Jeand'Eygua, forexample, presentedthe attomeygeneral's positionto the Parlementin the conflict between the archbishop of Toulouse and the inquisitorin 1532. These prosecutorialassistants generally acted as substitutes,both in actual liti- gationand in secondaryfunctions such as theregistration of royaldecrees.35 Appeals beyond the parlementwere unusual in heresy proceedings. Unsuccessfullitigants sometimes solicited assistance from the Chancellery of Toulouse whose principalfunction was the issuance of lettersof justice. Andre and JehanJustin obtained lettersof relieffrom the chancelleryin theirattempt to secure release fromprison in 1542. Guillaume Mercier, seigneur of Lapalme, presented the Parlementof Toulouse with letters seekingto reversethe decree of banishmentpassed against him in 1554. FrancoisDampton and Guillaume Ferrandelicited similar letters of relief in 1557 and 1559 fortheir respective causes.36 The defendantwho wished more than reconsiderationof certainaspects of the case, oftenby the very tribunalwhich had originallytried him, found the procedure extremely lengthyand elaborate.

32 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle,reg. 47 (19 decembre1553). A.M., Toulouse, layette47 (6 fevrier 1554). Geisendorf,Livre des habitants,1: 28. Paul Romane-Musculus,"Genealogie des Toulouse Lautrecbranche protestante de Saint-Germier(XVIe et XVIIe siecles),"99-107. EmileSzapiro, "L'entourage d'Antoine de Lautrec et les debuts de la reformea Toulouse," 341-344. A detailedexamination of de Lautrec'splace in theToulousan Reformationis Mentzer,"Calvinist Propaganda," 268-283. 33 Ordonnance de Villers-Cotterets,art. 147. Doucet, Institutions,1: 172-173. Isambert, Recueilgeneral, 12: 630. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime, 217 and 249-250. 3' The commonformula reads: ". . . le procureurgeneral du roy,demandeur en cas d'exces et crimed'her6sie . . ." 35 A.D.H.G., B 44, fo. 675; B, Tournelle,reg. 40 (5 fevrier1552), reg. 42 (28 mai 1552); B 2025, fo. 615; 112 H 6, Extraitdes registres,fo. 10v?. Doucet, Institutions,1: 173. 36 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 11 (4 avril 1542) and (27 avril 1542), reg. 51 (22 decembre 1554), reg. 62 (18 fevrier1557), reg. 71 (23 septembre1559). Regardingthe Chancelleryof Toulouse, consultViala, Parlementde Toulouse,1: 352-385.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 52 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

An especially well-documentedincident is the appeal of Guillaume Carvel. He possessed clericalstatus, enjoyed an affiliationwith the Uni- versityof Montpellierand was a procureurdu roi for the Chambre des Comptes at Montpellier.37The lieutenantof the governorof Montpellier, actingwith the authorityof the Parlement,arrested Carvel and two other residentsof Montpellierin May 1528. The threemen were imprisonedat Toulouse and accused of the "Lutheran" heresy.The Parlementordered them to be triedby the inquisitor,a substitutevicar for the bishop of Maguelonne,and two counsellorsof thehigh court.38 Carvel's simultaneous status as clericand royal officercomplicated the case and worked to his advantage. He managed to obtain royalletters transferring his case to the Grand Conseil, presumablyby virtueof its claim to competencein causes of generalinterest to the monarchy.39On the strengthof the royalbriefs, Carvel secured his release fromthe episcopal prison of Hauts-Muratsat Toulouse. The Parlementimmediately challenged his dischargeand ordered the arrestof the responsibleprison official, but it was too late. Carvel was at libertyand soughtredress. On 12 April1529, the Grand Conseil declared thatthe chargesagainst Carvel and the two individualsarrested with him were relatedand should be adjudicated accordinglyby judges appointed by the bishop of Maguelonne. The new trialdid not progressfar before Carvelreturned to theGrand Conseil. He requestedthat it quash a judgment of excommunicationwhich lawyers for the bishop of Maguelonne had obtained fromthe apostolic chamber at Avignon. The Conseil ruled the procedurein violationof the Gallican privilegesand on 7 September1529 it lifted Carvel's excommunication.He was presumably acquitted of all charges for his career at Montpellier continued without further interruption.40 The expanded competenceof royaljustice over heresywas not of course limitedto the parlement.The changes initiatedin 1539 applied to the lessercourts of the crownas well. The parlemententertained appeals from these inferiortribunals and oftenpronounced final sentence. The officers of the seneschalsies and bailiwicks were, on the other hand, the chief agentsof the king for the apprehension and trialof heretics. The jurisdictions dependentupon the Parlementof Toulouse included the Governmentof Montpellier,the Seneschalsiesof Armagnac,Carcassonne-Beziers, Nimes- Beaucaire,Quercy, Rouergue and Toulouse, and the Bailiwicksof Gevau-

37 The Chambredes Compteswas a royal courtwhich possessed extensivecontrol of the king's finances.Chenon, Histoiredu droitfranqais, 2: 533-534. Doucet, Institutions,1: 189- 196. 38A.D.H.G.,B 19, fo.358; B 22, fo.239v?. Archives de la Facultede Medecinede Montpellier, S 19, fo. 82v?.Cartulaire de lUniversite'de Montpellier,2: 29-30. Guiraud,Reforme d Montpellier, 1: 41-43. 39 Chenon, Histoiredu droitfranqais, 2: 531-533. Dognon, Institutionsde Languedoc,429- 431. Doucet, Institutions,1: 203-204. 40 A.D.H.G., B 22, fo. 292v?,304-304v?. A.N., V5, 1047. Archivesde la Facultede Medecine de Montpellier,S 2, fo.95v? and 101; S 5, fo. 8 and 11. Cartulairede l'Universite'deMontpellier, 2: 33. Guiraud,Reforme d Montpellier,1: 45.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE ROYAL TRIBUNALS 53 dan, Velay and Vivarais. The governorand each seneschal and bailiffor, moreaccurately, their lieutenants possessed originalcompetence in criminal actions.The lieutenantge'ne'ral or juge-mageas he was called in the Sene- schalsy of Nimes-Beaucaireheard both civil and criminalcauses until FrancisI alteredthe arrangementin 1523 when he createda special lieutenantcriminel for each district.Inspired by the model alreadyin existence forthe Provostshipof Paris,the new magistratewas to "judge and decide all cases, crimes,misdemeanors and offenses.. .."41 The judicial archivesamply attest to theimportance of thesesubordinate jurisdictionsand the role of the lieutenantscriminels in the prosecution of heresy. The lieutenantcriminel for the Governmentof Montpellier presidedover the trialof Andre Bourgoing,Guillaume Dalencon, Arnaud Aynnierand PierreBorgas in 1553. The correspondingmagistrate in the Seneschalsy of Rouergue condemned Jehan Bardon in 1554. And after denyingthe appeal of BarthelemyAndre duringthe same year,the Parle- mentof Toulouse remanded him specificallyto the lieutenantcriminel of the Seneschalsy of Carcassonne forexecution of sentence.42 Several lieutenantsparticuliers also assistedin the administrationof justice. They commonlyresided at secondarytowns where special seats had been established.The Seneschalsyof Quercy,for instance, had secondary seats at Montauban, Lauzerte, Gourdon, Martel and Figeac, in addition to the principalone at Cahors.43These subordinatelieutenants possessed competencein criminalaffairs and oftenmaintained a good deal of independence vis-a-vis the chief seat of the seneschalsy or bailiwick.The Seneschalsy of Carcassonne-Beziers,as an example, was double and the lieutenantat Beziers, though secondaryin importance,was as active in heresyprosecution as the principallieutenant at Carcassonne.4 The lieutenantsdid not sit in judgmentalone, but were aided in their taskby counsellors.Beginning in the 1520s, FrancisI graduallytransformed thatwhich had been an irregularattendant into a definedand proprietary office.The counsellorshad a deliberativevoice. They were required to offertheir considered opinions and judgmentswere then renderedby the majority.45The whole systemaccorded well withthe requirement contained in theEdict of Chateaubriand(June 1551) thatat least tenjudges be present for the definitivejudgment of accused hereticson the level of the seneschalsyor bailiwick.When the courtof the Seneschal of Nimes-Beaucaire convened for the sentencingof Estienne Geynet in October 1553, ten

41. . . juger et decider de tous cas, crimes,delictz et offenses. . ." Isambert,Recueil general,12: 197. Doucet, Institutions,1: 254. Dupont-Ferrier,Officiers royaux, 379-380. 42 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 47 (11 decembre1553 ?), reg. 50 (27 octobre1554) and (29 octobre 1554). 43 Viala, Parlementde Toulouse,1: 469. 44 Ibid., 1: 463-465. A.D.H.G., B 1901, fo. 215; B 92 1, fo. 190; B, Toumelle, reg. 24 (16 novembre1546), reg. 31 (30 juillet 1549), reg. 37 (27 aofit1551), reg. 38 (5 novembre1551), reg. 44 (7 janvier 1553), reg 46 (4 aoat 1553), reg. 49 (26 mai 1554), reg. 50 (24 octobre 1554). 45 Chenon, Histoiredu droitfranqais, 2: 517-518. Doucet, Institutions,1: 256-257.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 54 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC juristswere present.They were the officialof the archbishopof Arles,the lieutenantscriminel, particulier and principalof the seneschalsy and six counsellors.46 A few of the seneschalsies had, in addition,a special juge d'appeaux, a seigneuralmagistrate roughly equal to the seneschal withinthe judicial hierarchy.Though his power had declined in the sixteenthcentury, the juge d'appeaux at Toulouse continuedto hear causes on appeal. And he meritsadded attentionbecause he was the juge des encours for the In- quisitionas well. The fate of several persons triedby the Inquisitionat Toulouse illustratesthe particularrole of thisdual official.Convicted and unrepentantheretics were typicallydelivered to secular justice forcapital condemnation.The procedurerequired at least a pro formaappearance in the secular tribunal.The requisitecooperation was assured because the magistratebefore whom the offenderappeared was the juge d'appeaux. Thisjudge would be intimatelyfamiliar with the case forhe had participated in the inquisitorialtrial by virtueof his role as juge des encours.47 The only major change in the organizationof the seneschalsies and bailiwicksduring the period under considerationcame in January1552 when Henry II created the presidial courts (presidiaux).While the term ".presidial"had been used forsome time,it did not have officialmeaning until Henry's action. The creationof the presidials at once enrichedthe royal treasurythrough the sale of new officesand realized an important judicialmodification. The presidialsbecame an intermediatelevel of justice between the seneschalsies and the parlements.The initialpresidial seats forLanguedoc were at Toulouse,Beziers, Carcassonne, Nimes, Villefranche and Cahors. Theirpersonnel included lieutenantsgeneral and particulier, civil and crimineland the customarynumber of counsellors.48 A varietyof inferiorjudicial agents known as viguiers,bailes or simply juges ordinairesexisted below the seneschal and his lieutenants.While these lesser magistratesalmost never tried accused heretics,they were oftencompetent for the crimeof blasphemy.The adjudicationof simple blasphemyby a juge ordinairewould occasionallyreveal the moreserious offenseof hereticalblasphemy.49 This infrequentinvolvement with heresy

46 A.D.H.G.,, B 1904, fo. 87-88. Isambert,Recueil general, 13: 192-193. AlbertPuech, La Renaissanceet la reformed Nfmes,62-70. 47 A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 95; B, Toumelle, reg. 8 (21 avril 1540), reg. 16 (1 avril 1545), reg. 45 (21 mars 1553) and (14 avril 1553). Crespin,Histoire des martyrs,2: 31. Dupont-Ferrier, Officiersroyaux, 400-401. Viala, Parlementde Toulouse,1: 477-478. 48 A.D.H.G., B 1904, fo. 147-157. Chenon, Histoiredu droitfranqais, 2: 520-526. Doucet, Institutions,1: 264-265. 49 Hereticalblasphemy contains error against the Faith,as when one denies one or more establisheddoctrines. Simple blasphemy is when, withoutrepudiation of any established doctrine,one denies certainattributes of God or ascribes to Him qualities which He does not possess as, forexample, God is cruel or unjust. Carena, Tractatus,121-122. Durand de Maillane,Dictionnaire de droitcanonique, 1: 542-544. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 333- 334.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE ROYAL TRIBUNALS 55 tookplace, forexample, in thetrial of Arnauldde Lane by thejuge ordinaire of Estampes duringthe late-1550s.5? The extentto which the officersof the seneschalsies and theirsubor- dinateswere conscientiousin thepursuit of hereticsis difficultto determine. These officialswere sometimes accused of heresy or leniency towards heretics.Yet the commontendency was to exoneratethem of such charges. The Parlementinvestigated the conduct of Jean de Golard, seneschal of Armagnac,and his juge mage Blaise Guinard in 1551-1552. Negligence in the executionof theirjudicial duties led to the suspicionthat both men had assistedknown heretics and themselvesentertained heresy. The Parle- menteventually absolved themof the charges,but it did admonish them to be more diligentin the prosecutionof heresyand to informthe court of such cases. A similarscandal occurreda few monthslater when Jehan de Lafont,enque^teur for the Bailiwickof Velay at Montfaucon,accused Claude Ales, lieutenantprincipal for the bailiffat the same seat, of heresy. The Parlementof Toulouse once again conductedan investigation.It ruled the accusationerroneous and released Ales fromcustody. The courtthen punishedde Lafontand severalothers associated with the false indictment.5' The presidialof Nimes triedthe baille of Saint-Jean-du-Gard,a certain JeanFraissinet, in 1553. Portrayedas a rustic,ignorant and illiteratepeasant, Fraissinetwas originallyapprehended for having createdan uproarin the Nimes cathedralon the occasion of a gatheringof the clergy.The trial proceedingsprompted the lieutenantcriminel to investigatefurther. He discoveredserious disorder in Fraissinet'sadministration at Saint-Jean-du- Gard. Unlicensed preachersand schoolmasterscaused particulardistress. The resultwas Fraissinet'sdismissal fromthe officeof baille, along with theimposition of a fineand themandatory performance of publicpenance. Evidentlythe courtdid notrealize the fullextent of Fraissinet'scommitment to Protestantism.He subsequentlyimmigrated to Geneva and on 9 October 1559 registeredthere as an "inhabitant."52Imputations of heresy and misconductwere similarlydirected against Pons Sicard, lieutenantof the judge of Lauragais at Beaumont,in 1554 and against Pierrede Molinier, lieutenantof the judge of Verdun at Revel, in 1559. Both men managed to establishtheir innocence. Sicard benefitedfrom royal intervention.De Molinierdemonstrated the ill-intentof his accuser and the resultantques- tionablenessof the charges.53

50 A.D.H.G., B 1900, fo. 248-249; B, Toumelle, reg. 67 (23 novembre 1558). Guenois, Conferencedes ordonnances,769. 51 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 39 (17 decembre1551), reg. 40 (21 janvier 1552), (17 fevrier 1552) and (20 fevrier1552), reg. 41 (8 mars 1552) and (11 mars 1552), reg. 42 (1 juin 1552), reg. 43 (9 aofit1552). 52 CharlesBost, "Les pasteursd'un eglisedes Cevennes au XVIe siecle (1561-1605), Lasalle (Gard)," 564-565. JeanBoisset et al., "Les premierestraces de la reformea Saint-Jean-du- Gard, Anduze, et Le Vigan," 639-640. Geisendorf,Livre des habitants,1: 210. Puech, La Renaissanced Nimes,60-61. 53 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 48 (30 mars 1554), reg. 69 (9 mai 1559).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 56 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Nearly everyfacet of royal justice became involved in the prosecution of heresy. The effortwas not merelysupplemental to the work of the ecclesiasticaltribunals. The crownwould not toleratethe disruptionof the public weal by thisreligious quarrel and thusits magistrateshad complete controlover those aspects of heresy which threatenedsocietal order. If certainof these royal officerswere lax in the performanceof theirjudicial duties,the same could be said forcertain ecclesiastical judges. Accordingly, the jurisdictionalsituation remained fluid throughout the firsthalf of the sixteenthcentury. The monarchyaltered the relationshipbetween secular and ecclesiasticaljustice more than once in the attemptto combat the Reformation.It even enlistedthe municipalgovernments in the effort.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions V. Municipal Justice

he French crown shared a portionof its secular responsibilityfor Tthe maintenance of religiousunity with the towns of Languedoc. Despite extensiveincreases in the size and power of royal administration,the southernmunicipalities retained many of theirtraditional privilegesand liberties.Some citygovernments were self-elected,though the "franchise" could be quite limited. In addition, the towns usually enjoyed considerablerights of appointment.The religiousorthodoxy of thesecivic officers and appointeesbecame a vitalquestion in the sixteenthcentury.A few towns also possessed semi-autonomousjudicial powers, and this exerciseof justice occasionally extended to the criminalsphere and the adjudicationof heresy. One area in which cityofficials became involved in heresyproceedings was with Lenten and Advent preachersas well as local schoolmasters. These positionstended to be under municipal control;the town council usually selected and paid the appointees. Imputationsof heresyagainst a preacheror schoolmasterconsequently reflected upon the councilmen.The drama which unfolded at Nimes in 1532 is typical.During the evening of Holy Saturday,30 March, two process-servers(huissiers) for the Parle- mentof Toulouse arrestedand imprisonedan Augustinianfriar who had preachedthe Lentensermons at Nimes. The followingday, EasterSunday, the city council met in special session to discuss the matter.A total of twenty-fourpersons spoke in favorof assistingthe monk;no one opposed the idea. All agreed that he had "nourished the town's citizens in the sustenanceof love and good evangelical doctrine."' The council then decided to augmentthe friar'snormal salary of twelve livres to aid him in the impendinglitigation. The sole debate concerned the amount of the subsidy.A majority,nineteen, of those in attendancefavored the sum of thirtylivres toumois including the friar'sregular salary. Several individuals also advocated that the council provide the monk with the servicesof a canon lawyer.However, no officialdecision was reachedon thissuggestion. The councilmenof Nimes were no doubtconvinced that the Augustinian friarhad been arrestedunjustly. At the same time,they took precautions to demonstratetheir own desire to extirpateheresy. Already at the Easter meetingsome councillorsproposed thatthey request the bishop of Nimes, Michel Brifonnet,to cease his practiceof non-residenceand to appoint a qualifiedcleric to preach everySunday. The councilformalized its petition

. . .a noryles habitantsde la ville pabulo caritatiset bonne doctrineevanglique . . .' A.M., Nimes, LL 5, fo. 244. 57

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 58 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC at the next session on 7 April and asked as well that the diocesan official issue a monitoryfor the purpose of eliminatingall possible heresyamong the city'sresidents.2 A similarincident occurred at Anduze in 1547, but withdifferent effect. The FranciscanNicolas Ramondy had scandalized the local clergyin the course of his Lentensermons. The priorof the local church,friar Aldabert Dragon de Pompeyron,requested and receivedpermission from the town council to examineRamondy. The hearingtook place on 26 March in the parish churchand was attendedby the greaterpart of the town's clergy. The meetingquickly deteriorated. The priormaligned Ramondy and struck him, hard enough to make his mouth bleed. The municipal councillors reactedpromptly and forcefully,summoning a generalcouncil of thecitizens of Anduze on 27 March and recountingthe previous day's events. The councilmencharacterized Dragon's behavior as an insultto the dignityof theirmandate and a desecrationof the church of Saint Etienne. They chargedthe priorwith the task of purifyingthe "polluted church."Mean- while, Ramondy continued preaching in the church of the Franciscan monastery. Rather than submit to the reprimands,Dragon de Pompeyron com- municatedhis versionof the affairto the inquisitorat Toulouse. By mid- Septemberhe obtained a summons forRamondy's arrestand transferto the prison of the Inquisition.On 18 September,Dragon presented the council of Anduze with lettersfrom the inquisitorwhich ordered coop- erationin theseizure of Ramondy.Refusal or negligencewould be punished with a fineof fivehundred livres. Faced with thisultimatum, the council agreedto pursuethe matter diligently.3 Whether, in fact,Ramondy's former protectorsapplied themselvesto the task is open to question. There was no furthermention of the affairand Ramondy apparentlydisappeared. Not long afterwards,in 1550, the town of Pamiers experiencedtrouble overa preacher.By thistime, the Frenchmonarchy required that clergymen engaged in preachingor religiousinstruction obtain prior permission from the local bishop. The requirementpresumed diligence and orthodoxyon the part of the individualprelate and his administrators.The assumption was not alwaysjustified. Jean de Barbancon,bishop of Pamiers,was himself accused of Calvinistbeliefs in 1563.4 The town council of Pamiers had engaged Vidal Paris, prior of the Carmelitesat Condom, to deliverthe sermonsfor the Adventof 1549 and

2 Ibid., LL 5, fo. 244-246v?. Leon Menard, Histoirecivile, ecclesiastique et litterairede la villede Nfmes,4: 117. CharlesDardier, "Origines de la reformea Nimes jusqu'a l'etablissement d'un consistoire(1532-1561)," 482-484. Abraham Borrel,Histoire de l'eglise riformee de Nfmes,2. 'A.M., Anduze, BB 1, fo. 259v?-260v? and 271. Boisset,"Premieres traces," 640. Jean- PierreHugues, Histoirede l'eglisereforme'e d'Anduze, 41-46. 4Letters-patent of Henry II, Moulin, 20 October 1548. Isambert,Recueil general, 13: 60. B.N., ms. latin, 8994, fo. 216-221. Degert, Proces de huit eveques, 2. Jules de Lahondes, Annalesde Pamiers,1: 461-462.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MUNICIPAL JUSTICE 59

Lent of 1550. When Paris reproachedthe officialand diocesan clergyfrom his pulpit,the Parlementof Toulouse decided to investigate.The court soughtParis's apprehension,but he had alreadyfled. It thencited the city councillorsfor negligenceand complicity.They seem to have narrowly escaped punishmentdue to a technicality-theirterm of officeexpired priorto the Parlement'sissuance of the summons.5 City officialshad to be just as cautious in the employmentof schoolmasters.The councillorsof Nimes,for example, claimed the right to choose the schoolmasterand, on 15 April 1537, selected ImbertPecolet for the position.Pecolet had been previouslyassociated with the schools of Nimes, but had only recentlyreturned to the town afteran absence of two years. The precenteuror capiscol6 of the cathedral,however, refusedto invest the nominee. He suspected Pecolet of heresy and forbade him to teach under pain of excommunication.Jean du Cayla, lieutenantof the vicar general for the diocese of Nlmes, representedthe precenteurbefore the town council on 7 October 1537. He reiteratedthe suspicions against Pecolet and warned the councilmenneither to favornor aid the accused untilhe was purged.The councillorsprotested and declaredthe lieutenant in error.On Sunday 11 October,Pecolet went to the Cathedral of Notre- Dame to hear Mass, but was barredfrom entry. The afternoonof the same day he learned that he had been excommunicatedfor violatingthe pro- hibitionsplaced on him by the officiality.Officers of the diocese arrested Pecolet, but then allowed him to remain at semi-liberty. The councillors,anxious to assert theirrights of presentation,elected to pursue the dispute.They offeredPecolet anew to the precenteuron 15 October. As expected, he again declined to accept the candidate. The councilmenthen appealed thedecision to theSeneschal of Nimes-Beaucaire. A hearingtook place beforethe juge-mage ten days later.Jehan Lansardi, representingthe citycouncil, argued that the precenteur'saction was an infringementupon municipalliberties and prerogatives.Furthermore, the PragmaticSanction, the Concordat and various ecclesiasticalregulations obliged each diocese to provide the people with a programof popular religiousinstruction in the formof sermonsand lessons. The implication was clear enough. The diocese's obstructionof Pecolet's appointmenthin- dered effortsto curtailmisbelief. Robert de La Croix, vicar general and officialof the diocese of Nimes, largelyignored the debate over rightsof presentationin his response. He insistedthat Pecolet firstclear himselfof

5A.M., Pamiers, BB 104. A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle, reg. 34 (23 aoat 1550). Lahondes, Annales de Pamiers,1: 460-461. Marie-TheresePorte, Les debutsde la reformea Pamiers (1562-1565),4. 6 The capiscolor precenteuris a dignityor officein the cathedralchapter. It is not easily distinguishedfrom the chantreor ecoldtre. Some scholarscontend that the name derivesfrom the titlegiven to the head of a school (caput scholae),while othersargue thatit comes from the two wordscaput chori which refer more to the chantre.Louis Amiet,Essai surl'organisation du chapitrecathedral de Chartres(du XIe au XVIIIe siecle), 130-132. Durand de Maillane, Dictionnairede droitcanonique, 1: 636.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 60 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC the imputationof unorthodoxbelief. The schools, meanwhile,could not await the outcome of the undoubtedlylengthy procedure. The municipal councilconceded this final point and presenteda second candidate,Gaspard Caiart,for diocesan approbation.7 Caiart proved no more acceptable than the originalnominee. He was a friendand companionof Pecolet and, presumably,tainted also by religious error.Moreover, he had publiclyassociated with a certainBatlier, an accused hereticwho had fled Nimes in disgrace. De La Croix then declared his intentionto informthe Parlementof the disobedienceand contemptwhich several councilmenof Nimes had demonstratedtowards the ecclesiastical officers.Yet nothing came of this threatand, in the end, the religious officerslost the fight.Imbert Pecolet seems to have escaped custody.He fled to Geneva and remained thereuntil mid-September1538 when he accepted a positionas Professorof Hebrew at the Academy of Lausanne. And the councillorsof Nimes successfullypressed theirrights. Gaspard Caiart,despite earlier objections, was authorizedto instructin the schools at Nlmes for 1538.8 Anothereducational controversy was takingplace concurrentlyat Mon- tauban. The post of principalmaster for the regencyof the schools there fell vacant duringJune 1537. The municipal council had rightsof pre- sentationand, accordingly,it nominatedMichel de Affinibus,a doctorof theologyand memberof the Order of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. The candidate's credentialswere respectable and he had demonstratedhis teachingability through several lectures to themasters, regents and students of Montauban. Approval by the bishop of Montauban or, in thiscase, his vicargeneral Guy de Vinhaleseemed certain.Nonetheless, the vicar would not consentto the nomination. De Vinhale based his refusalon the opinion of Aumaise Albonita,the man whom de Affinibuswas to succeed. Albonita contended that the candidate,in readingan epistleof Saint Paul, had proposed a numberof hereticalideas. De Affinibusissued a writtenreply to the vicar general and firmlydenied the alleged errors.But Albonita was adamant. On 16 June 1537, de Vinhale explained to the councillorsof Montauban that because it would be necessaryfor de Affinibusto read the Holy Scriptures to his students,he could not permithim to assume the duties of principal master until the questions raised by Albonita had been settled. In the interim,de Affinibuswould be permittedto lecturefor beginning students and to administerminor punishments.9

7A.N., U 20, fo. 6. Mathieu-JulesGaufres, "Imbert Pecolet," 51-57. Henri Hauser, Etudes sur la reformefrancaise, 193. Menard, Histoirede Nfmes,4: 133-135. Puech, La Renaissance ai Nimes,18-24. 8 A.M., Nimes, CC 2, fo. 220. Gaufres,"Pecolet," 58-64, Hauser, Reformefrancaise, 96. Aime-LouisHerminjard, ed. Correspondancedes reformateursdans les pays de languefrancaise 9: 459 and 463. Menard,Histoire de Nimes, 4: 135-137. ' A.M., Montauban, 1 BB 6, fo. 47-48. Devals Aine, "Les ecoles publiques a Montauban du Xe et XVIe siecle," 105. Mathieu Mras, "Michel de Affinibuset les originesde la reforme a Montauban," 324-326. Serr,Montauban, 2.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MUNICIPAL JUSTICE 61

The Parlementof Toulouse respondedto these earlyincidents at Nlmes, Montauban and othertownsl0 by adoptingmore stringentregulations for religiousinstruction. On 21 April 1539, it prohibitedschoolmasters from readingand interpretingpublicly the Epistlesof Saint Paul withoutexpress permissionfrom the bishop or his delegate. Warningsagainst those who soughtto fosterthe reformmovement under the guise of teachingScripture were repeatedin December 1539 when the Parlementregistered the royal letters-patentcreating a college at Nimes. Even the Inquisitionaffirmed the value of municipalvigilance by institutingin the late 1540s an oath for the councillorsof Languedocien towns. The formulawas brief,but obvious in its intent.The councillorspromised to assist the inquisitorin the pursuit,arrest and detentionof suspected heretics,to observe and respect the privilegesof the Holy Officeand to insure the election or appointmentof irreproachable persons to thetown councils." These various efforts,however, were far fromsuccessful. Problems of unorthodoxydid not cease to plague the municipal gov- ernments.The Parlementof Toulouse, on 15 March 1559, upheld the convictionof several residentsof Bram. They had been implicatedin the electionto the citycouncil of two individualscharged with heresy.12 Later in theyear, the Parlement dispatched two ofits counsellors and theattorney general to Montauban to look into a heresy scandal which seemingly involved several municipal magistrates.Three of the city's councillors, Coffinhal,Saint-Just and de Moncade, had met on 12 June 1559 and named Jehande La Rogerayeto the position of oratorfor the municipal schools. The followingday, two othercouncillors, Formosi and Samenat, protestedde La Rogeraye's appointmentand refused to concur in the decision.They claimed the choice was contraryto thewishes of themajority of the town'sresidents and thatmany of the school's studentswould leave Montauban and study elsewhere. The vigorous protest prompted the councillorde Moncade to admitthat, while he was presentwhen Coffinhal administeredthe oath to de La Rogeraye,he had since learned of the new orator'slack of abilityand scandalous behavior. If he had known this originallyhe would never have consented to the appointment.He con- sequentlyagreed with the objectionsadvanced by Formosiand Samenat. Coffinhaland Saint-Just,for theirpart, stood by the appointmentand maintainedits legality.They heard nothingto contradicttheir belief that de La Rogerayewas a respectableman of sound doctrineand erudition. They refusedto considerthe protestand forthe momentde La Rogeraye retainedhis post.'3

'0 A maftred'ecole at Rodez, forexample, was arrestedfor "Lutheranism" in 1538. A.D.H.G., B 32, fo. 34. " Ibid., B 32, fo. 313v?-314; B 33, fo. 36v?. B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. 35, fo. 214-214v?. "Documents ineditset originaux.L'heresie lutheriennea Toulouse en 1540," 202. Freville, "Un index," 1 (1852): 354-355 and 361, n. 5. 12 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 68 (15 mars 1559). 13 A.M., Montauban, 1 BB 22 (12 et 13 juin 1559). Histoireecclesiastique, Baum and Cunitz, 1: 347.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 62 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

By early October, the city council learned that the new orator had publiclyread certainlessons on Sacred Scripture,contrary to the prohibitions of the Parlement. The council examined de La Rogeraye on 9 October.The membersspecifically asked whetherhe had read fromScrip- ture in the schools withoutpermission from the bishop or his vicar. De La Rogerayedenied any such action,except for one or two lessons he had given on the feast days fromthe poet Helius Eobanus Hessus who had translatedthe Psalms of David. The work had been printedat Paris with royal permissionand, according to de La Rogeraye, contained nothing relatingto thewritings of theChurch Fathers, the Gospels or theEpistles."4 Despite the protest,the municipal officialsbarred furtherreadings from the book. Evidentlythe oratordid not complywith the restrictionsfor on 28 Octoberhe was arrested.The followingnight he escaped fromprison with the assistance of several anonymous friends.And when the parle- mentarycommission arrived at Montauban it was unable to obtain any informationof value despite an officialpromise of five hundred ecus to those who would reveal de La Rogeraye'sactivities or whereabouts.'5 Beyond the general responsibilityfor the electionand appointmentof competentand religiouslycorrect persons, city governmentssometimes became directlyinvolved in heresyproceedings by virtueof theirjudicial authority.Many southerntowns had long possessed judicial competence, even in criminalmatters, and itwas a sourceof continuingfriction between themand the royal magistrates.Both the municipalitiesand the ordinary royaljurisdictions claimed exclusiveauthority to trycriminals. Two basic solutions to the conflictemerged in Languedoc by the early sixteenth century.In the towns of Graulhet,Revel, Solomac, Palaminy, Realville and Montpezat-du-Quercy,the citycouncillors and juge ordinaireor baile jointlyexercised justice. A second and more commonsystem, practiced at Toulouse, Montauban, Rabastens and Castelnaudary,among others,was more or less that of pre'vention.The theoryof preventionwas based on argumentsdrawn from Roman law and theprinciple that the king possessed a rightof supremejustice. It assertedthe rightof a certainjudge to take cognizance of an action over which he had concurrentjurisdiction with anotherjudge. The argumentworked in favor of the royal judge and to the detrimentof municipaland seigneuraljustice. The practicewas further complicatedin Languedocien towns by the fact that it was neitherfully nor uniformlyimplemented.16

14 Probablythe PsalteriumDavidis carmine redditum per Eobanum Hessum, cum annotationibus Viti Theodore. . . Cui accessitEcclesiastes Salomonis eodem genere carminis redditus (Paris, 1547). Anotheredition was printedat Paris in 1549. The authorsof the Histoireecclesiastique des e'glisesreformees au royaumede Francereport that the Psalms were read in French.Histoire ecclesiastique, Baum and Cunitz, 1: 373-374. 15 A.M., Montauban, 1 BB 22 (29 octobre 1559). Devals, "Ecoles publiques," 106-108. Histoireecclesiastique, Baum and Cunitz, 1: 373-374. 16 Chenon, Histoiredu droitfranCais, 2: 491. Doucet, Institutions,2: 525. A comprehensive survey of the situationat Toulouse and elsewhere in Languedoc can be found in Viala, Parlementde Toulouse,1: 541-551.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions MUNICIPAL JUSTICE 63

At Toulouse, the viguier,a royalordinary magistrate, repeatedly asserted his superiorityover the capitouls.The Parlement,however, seeing its own importanceincreased by a rivalrybetween the two jurisdictions,tended to ignorethe notion of preventionand defended the prerogativesof the capitouls in the field of criminaljustice. As a result,the capitouls still effectivelyexecuted their own criminalcondemnations in the earlysixteenth century. FrancisI, reactingagainst the alleged incompetenceof consularjustice in Languedoc, attempteda reorganizationin the late 1530s. He initially orderedthe municipalitiesto name the juges ordinairesas theirassesseurs or judicial assistants,"7but the Parlementof Toulouse objectedand refused to implementthe royalplan. The monarchythen tried to restrictmunicipal authorityto police mattersand the maintenanceof public order. Again the Parlement,along with the capitouls of Toulouse, frustratedthe effort. Finally,a royaledict of October 1545 declared thatthe royaljudges would benefitfrom the doctrineof preventionin the exerciseof criminaljustice. In the event of negligenceby the municipal councillorsof Languedoc, eitherin the implementationof the edict or in the trialof criminals,competence to adjudicate criminalcases would pass to the juge ordinaire.An interestingexclusion to the 1545 edictstated that the crowndid not intend a limitationon the jurisdictionof the capitoulsof Toulouse. They were to retaintheir rights in the exerciseof justice so long as theywere not prej- udicialto royalprerogatives and authority.The clause leftthe issue clouded and promptedthe capitouls to request furtherassurances of theirrights. And no clear statementemerged until Henry II's edict of December 1554. It confirmedthe capitouls' authorityto judge in firstinstance divine and human lese majesty,heresy, counterfeiting and several other capital offenses. Appeals against theirjudgments would revertimmediately and directlyto theParlement. Intermediary hearings in thecourt of the seneschal would be eliminated.Finally, convicted criminalswhose appeals were denied by the Parlementwould be returnedto the capitoulsfor execution of sentence.18 The resultantrole of municipal courts in heresy proceedings varied considerablyfrom one location to another.The majorityof towns in Lan- guedoc had littleor no involvement.Heresy litigationwent immediately to the courtof the seneschal. At otherplaces, royal and municipalofficers joined in the adjudicationof unorthodoxbelief. The viguierand the judge of the communal court of Le Puy, for instance,tried Pierre Barbat and JehanFeuvre in 1555 and Claude Aliraud in 1557. Cooperation was less evident elsewhere. The municipal councillorsand assesseur of Martes-

17 The assesseurswere the primaryjudicial assistantsfor the municipalcouncillors. Leon Clos, Etudehistorique sur le capitoulattoulousain, 61. 18 A.D.H.G., B 1903, fo. 196-196v?; B 1905, fo. 61-62; B 20.., fo. 427, requisitoiredu 10 decembre 1538. Clos, Capitoulattoulousain, p. 41. Antonin Deloume, Vue de Toulouse au XVIe si&cle.Les capitouls,46. Jean Ramiere de Fortanier,Chartes de franchisesdu Lauragais, 108-109. Vic and Vaissete,Histoire de Languedoc,11: 279.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 64 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Tholosanes triedRamond Boun for heresy in 1546. Boun subsequently appealed his convictionand on 28 Junethe Parlementordered a retrial by the seneschal of Toulouse or his lieutenant.The seneschal was further instructedto disregardcompletely the sentenceand procedureof the councillorsof Martes-Tholosanes.19Toulouse was the only cityin the region which possessed a substantialmeasure of judicial independence in the pursuitof heretics.The capitoulswere vigorousin the applicationof their authority;they tried no less than fifteenpersons for heresy between 1545 and 1555.20 In addition, they arresteda number of persons who were ultimatelyprosecuted before the Parlement.21 Theirzeal was such thatin October 1554, the capitouls expressedconcern that theylacked sufficient wood to burn the multitudeof "Lutherans."22 The changingand oftenconfusing nature of municipaljustice reflects, as do the otherecclesiastical and secular courtsystems, the dual phenom- enon occurringin France between 1500 and 1560. The monarchywas in theprocess of implementing legal reformand expandingthe role and scope of its own judicial agents. At the same time,it faced the difficulttask of decidingwhich legal institutionswere best able to controlthe spread of heresy in a fashion suitable to the crown. The two objectives of royal policy did not always coincide and the resultwas an apparent congeries of overlappingjurisdictions among the variouscourts. There was, however, a certainlogic to the system.The monarchynever allowed the power to tryheretics to become the monopoly of any one of the courtsand both religiousand secular tribunalswere active in theirprosecution. Yet those cases which threatenedthe politicaland social order,cas privilegies,were reservedfor royal justice. Finally,the crown throughits Parlementwas the ultimatearbitrator of all jurisdictionaldisputes. The royalgovernment endeavoredto treatthe judicial aspects of the heresyquestion in a manner thatwould be effectiveand responsiveto its own policyaims. It employed a varietyof tribunalsand repeatedlyadjusted theirrespective competence and jurisdictionin the attemptto achieve these goals.

19 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 22 (28 juin 1546), reg. 54 (5 juillet 1555), reg. 64 (31 aouit 1557) and (13 septembre1557). 20 Ibid., B, Toumelle, reg. 18 (7 septembre1545), reg. 20 (14 avril 1546), reg. 42 (24 mars 1552), reg. 45 (28 fevrier1553), reg. 50 (23 aofit 1554), (29 aofit 1554) and (1 septembre 1554), reg.59 (9 fevrier1555), reg.53 (31 mai 1555), reg.54 (12 juillet1555). A.M., Toulouse, BB 269, fo. 72; BB 274, fo. 162; layette48 (11 avril 1558); layette90 (15 f6vrier1555). 21 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 46 (23 octobre 1553), reg. 50 (6 septembre 1554), (12 septembre1554), (23 octobre 1554). A.M., Toulouse, BB 175, fo. 134v?-135; BB 269, fo. 72v'-73v?; BB 274, fo. 149-150 and 163; layette90 (1 septembre1554). Lafaille,Annales de Toulouse,2: 170-171. 22 A.M., Toulouse, BB 175, fo. 134v0.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Part 2.

Criminal Procedure

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VI. Preliminariesof the Trial

he firsthalf of the sixteenthcentury was a formativeperiod in the Tevolution of French criminal procedure. Although the process had few of the fluctuationsevident in the jurisdictionalsphere, the emergingsystem did representthe ascendancyof royallegal practice.The crown, throughits legislativepower, affirmedand embodied in statute law rules developed, admittedand recognizedby its courts.The famous ordinancesof Blois (1498) and Villers-Cotterets(1539) mark the full receptionof theRoman-canon inquisitorial procedure. The olderaccusatorial process,characterized by the privatecomplaint, the detentionof accused and accuser pending trial,and the judicial duel, had disappeared. The inquisitorialsystem with the enhanced role of the state as prosecutor dominated. An officerof the state, the magistrate,investigated and es- tablishedthe facts,principally through the examinationof witnessesand theaccused. He assembledthe evidence in a writtendossier which provided the basis for the court'sjudgment and finalsentencing. The royal legislationof the early sixteenthcentury represents the cul- minationof a long process whose originsare to be foundin the thirteenth century.As the Frenchmonarchy gradually assumed theinstitutional forms which would bringan end to the feudal period, it progressivelyadopted and refinedthe Roman-canon model of criminalprocedure which originated with the Church and the northernItalian city-states.The ordinances of Blois and Villers-Cotteretstherefore came late and were more regulatory than innovative.The statutesassumed the existenceof the inquisitorial procedurein criminalprosecution and soughtto refineit. They were neither comprehensivenor systematicin their elaboration of procedure. Being remedialand interstitial,they confirmedestablished usages and particu- larized points on which practicewas inexactor inconsistent.At the same time,their promulgation signaled the definitiveestablishment of the royal legal system.' The effectwas particularlypronounced in the area of heresyproceedings. Though the Churchhad occupied a keyposition in the initialdevelopment

1 The adoption of Roman-canoninquisitorial procedure is describedin R. Howard Bloch, Medieval FrenchLiterature and Law; Adhemar Esmein, Histoirede la procedurecriminelle en Franceet spe'cialementde la procidureinquisitoite depuis le XIIIe sie'clejusqu'd nosjours, which is also available in English translation,A Historyof ContinentalCriminal Procedure, trans. JohnSimpson; Langbein, ProsecutingCrime, whose examinationextends to England and Germanyas well as France,but limitsitself chronologically to the sixteenthcentury; Bruce Lenman and GeoffreyParker, "The State, the Communityand the CriminalLaw in Early Modem Europe," in Crimeand the Law: The Social Historyof Crimein WesternEurope since 1500, eds. V. A. C. Gatrell,B. Lenman and G. Parker,11-48. 67

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 68 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC of the inquisitorialprocess, the Frenchadaptation slowly divergedin accordance with the monarchy'srequirements and objectives. Coupled to thiswas thesixteenth-century shift of primaryresponsibility for prosecution of heresyfrom ecclesiastical to royal tribunals.Finally, the ecclesiastical and secular courtswere generallyobliged to observe the proceduralrules imposedby theroyal ordinances.2 An accused heretic,in whichevertribunal he appeared, found his case adjudicated accordingto the proceduresdeveloped by the courtsof the king. The Frenchmodifications of the classic inquisitorialprocedure were, in theirown way, significant.The laicizationof the crimeof heresyinvolved morethan just a reductionin thesphere of competenceof theLanguedocien Inquisition.The processmeant changes from the "purer"practices followed by the Roman and Spanish Inquisitions.The characterand impactof these differencescan be more readily appreciated througha preliminaryde- scriptionof the originalforms. Upon receiptof a denunciationor otherevidence suggestiveof heresy, the inquisitorquestioned the relevantwitnesses and recordedtheir testimony.3Each deponent was asked how long he had known the suspect; the circumstancesof theiracquaintance; community opinion of the suspect, especiallyin those aspects pertainingto the Faith; and so forth.The inquisitorhad to maintainparticular guard againstrancorous testimony and enjoinedeach personto keep his depositionsecret. If the gathered testimony showed sufficientgrounds, the inquisitorwould take the matterto trial. The suspect,who had not participatedin the depositionprocess and who had probablynot known of itsexistence, was eithersummoned or arrested dependingupon the gravityof the charges. The inquisitorbegan a diligentand deliberateinterrogation of the accused. He did so in the presence of a notarywho recordedthe proceedingsand two assistantswho acted as witnesses.The questionswere initiallygeneral: who were his parents,where was he born, where had he lived. The in- quisitorrarely revealed the fullextent or the exact natureof the evidence in his possession. The accused normallyhad littlemore than a vague idea of thespecific charges against him. Only slowlyand withoutcausing alarm did the inquisitordirect his questions towards those areas where he possessed detailed information.The prudentinterrogator avoided provoking

2 Doucet, Institutions,2: 786. Jean Papon, Recueil d'arrestsnotables des courssouveraines de France,56. 'This summaryof Inquisitorialprocedure is drawn from three manuals. The firstis theDirectorium Inquisitorum composed by theDominican Inquisitor of Aragon,Nicolas Eymeric (1320-1399). His work was reeditedand published in the sixteenthcentury with extensive commentaryby the Spanish canonist,Francesco Pegna (d. 1612). The indefatigablePegna also edited anothermanual, De CatholicisInstitutionibus authored by the Spanish Bishop of Zamora, Diego Simancas (d. 1583). Finally,there is the Tractatusde OfficioSanctissimae Inquisitionisput togetherby a seventeenth-centuryItalian jurist associated with the Inquisition at Cremona, Cesare Carena (fl. 1645). The numerous misconceptionsand pitfallswhich confrontstudents of the Inquisitionare describedby Tedeschi, "PreliminaryObservations," Continuityand Discontinuityin ChurchHistory, 232-249.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PRELIMINARIES OF THE TRIAL 69 the accused and leftno issue unresolved.The sessions were frequentand lengthy,often extendingover several weeks. An astute and patient interrogationwas criticalto the Inquisition.Until the degree and character of the defendant'serror were fullyknown, the suitable correctivescould not be applied. If the defendantconfessed to the crime,any defense on his part was said to be superfluous.The more common reactionwas a denial of guilt and in thisevent the Inquisitionpermitted a juridicaldefense directedby an attorney.The principalmethod of rebuttalavailable to the accused was the challengeto a witnessand it was narrowlyrestricted. The sole grounds forexception to testimonywas mortalenmity (inimicitia capitalis). Anything less did not void testimony,but only weakened it. Furthermore,the In- quisitionin Italy and Spain zealously guarded the identityof denouncers and witnesses.The confrontationof defendantand witnesses,a standard practicein Frenchcourts, was an extremelyrare occurrence.The accused and his counsel were not allowed to view the originalof the depositions, but theydid receivea copy fromwhich the names of witnessesand other identifyingdetails had been deleted.The protectionand secrecyguaranteed to accusersand denouncerspresumably increased the likelihoodthat they would reportfuture heretical activity to the Inquisition.Classic Inquisitorial procedure then withheld the names of those who had testifiedfor the prosecution.Yet it did admita defensebased on a leisurelyperusal of the writtentrial records in consultationwith legal counsel. The contrastwith criminalprocedure in France is striking.A key featureprescribed in royal law was the confrontationof witnesseswith the accused. Moreover,the defendantbenefited from no more than an oral readingof the depositions and he was requiredto make immediateresponse withoutthe assistance of an attorney.While the individualknew his accusers,the reservationof a trialtranscript and absence of expertadvice hampered his defense. The Inquisitioncould and did administertorture and the practicehas been long regardedas an essential elementof its operation.The circumstances of its application,however, were well-defined.The defendant's responsesto theinquisitor's questions had to be inconsistentand vacillating, suggestingthat he was concealing the truth.Second, there had to be sufficientand strongcircumstantial evidence (indicia). The decisionto torture requiredepiscopal concurrenceand the actual process ideally began with nothingmore than brandishingthe instrumentsin the hope of frightening psychologically.The conscientiousinquisitor at firsttortured moderately and withoutbloodshed. He constantlyreminded the victimthat a full confessionwould immediatelyend his torment.Only when thisapproach failed did the inquisitorresort to harshermethods. The courtstaff in at- tendancewas minimalin orderto insuresecrecy and the tortureitself was inflictedfor a limitedperiod of time.The individualwho remainedsteadfast and admittednothing went free. If he broke down under torture,the confessionwas not valid untilhe voluntarilyratified it the followingday. Once completed,torture could not be capriciouslyreapplied. Specificrules

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 70 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC governedits repetition.The accused had to have confessedunder torture and then retracted;the torturehad to have been moderatethe firsttime; and the courthad to possess new evidence. At theconclusion of thetrial, the inquisitor had at his disposal a hierarchy of finalsentences and accompanyingpunishments. The many and varied verdictsand penalties are bewilderingunless the Inquisition'sintent is recognized. The tribunal desired punishments which corrected and emended the individual's delinquency,provided reparationfor his sins, and served to deterothers from similar error. Though Inquisitorialjustice was exactingat times, it was not retaliatory.The emphasis was upon correctionand the returnof the errantbeliever to the fold of the Church. The inquisitorordinarily took care to avoid a sentence of absolution. Ratherthan issue a statementof innocence,he preferredto declare that the accused had not been proven guilty.The practicecleared the way for retrialin the event that new evidence turnedup. The person who was scandalouslydefamed (diffamatus)as a hereticunderwent a ceremonyof canonical purgationlest he give credence to the slander. In what was usually,though not necessarilya privateexercise in the Inquisitorialcham- bersor episcopalpalace, theindividual renounced the rumors which caused his dishonor(infamia). The Inquisitionrequired the moresolemn and gen- erallypublic ritualof abjurationfor one suspected (suspectus)of heresy. The tribunalhad discoverednothing concrete in the testimonyof witnesses or the examinationof facts and the subject had not confessed. Yet circumstantialevidence (indicia) did exist.The strengthof the evidence de- terminedwhether the suspicion was light,vehement, or violent. In all threeinstances, the suspect affirmedthe articlesof the Faith and abjured the specificheresy of which he was suspected. The court also affixeda penance or punishmentwhich varied accordingto the degreeof suspicion. Lightsuspicion meritedsalutary penances such as fasts,pilgrimages, and frequentreception of the sacraments.Persons vehemently suspected could be imprisonedfor a limitedperiod of time.And the Inquisitionsometimes punished those violentlysuspected with perpetualincarceration and the requirementto wear penitentialvestments, the san benito.The inquisitor actuallyhad a wide range of otherpunishments available to him: fines, detentionin a monastery,exile, fustigation and servicein the galleysamong others. A discriminatingjudge imposed penalties appropriateand pro- portionalto the offense.He was clementand compassionate,rather than cruel and severe. The convicted,confessed and penitentheretic was condemned to a life in prison. He emerged only on Sundays and major feasts and appeared in penitentialrobes before the principal entrance to the town church. Though the inquisitorand bishop occasionally commuteda sentence of permanentimprisonment, they were considerablyless sympathetictowards the convictedheretic who manifestedanything less than full confession and steadfastrepentance. The relapsed heretic,he who had originally abjured but then revertedto his error,was handed over to the secular

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PRELIMINARIES OF THE TRIAL 71 authoritiesfor execution. The Inquisitionhoped thathe would repentanew and receive the Church's salvificsacraments. However, penitentor im- penitent,the relapsed heretichad proven himselfincorrigible and ecclesiasticaljustice demanded his condemnation.The courtalso surrendered the convictedbut impenitentand the convictedbut unconfessedheretic to secular justice for burning.The inquisitordid not proceed lightlyor hastilyto thisextreme action. The unrepentantor unconfessedheretic was oftenplaced in a harshprison to considerhis faults.The inquisitorfrequently visitedhim to explain the Faith and seek conversion.He mightlater be moved to a mildercell and shown the benefitsof mercy.The use of severe and lenient confinementand the constant attemptat persuasion could continuefor months.The Inquisitionunderstood that dedicated heretics often desired death and the aura of martyrdom.Isolated and long im- prisonmentsometimes cooled theirardor. From the Inquisition'spoint of view, the returnof a hereticto the Church was more desirable than his destructionat the stake. No one can doubt that the Inquisitionapplied itselfseriously to the task. The tribunalhad been created and its judicial proceduredeveloped and refinedspecifically to deal withoffenses against the Faith.The adoption and adaptation of the inquisitorialsystem by French courts during the fifteenthand sixteenthcenturies was by no means perfect.Indeed, it was not intendedto be. The problems,needs and traditionsof the two legal systemswere too dissimilar.Justice in France,for example, saw no over- ridingvalue in protectingthe identityof witnessesand actuallypreferred their confrontationwith the defendant to avoid erroneous accusation. Frenchmagistrates, even in the adjudication of heresy,were not nearly so concernedwith bringing the offenderto a recognitionof his error.The Inquisitionmade patientuse of the prison; the royal courtsoften opted formore immediateand expeditiouspunishment.

* * * The initialstep for a heresytrial in Languedocrequired that the competent magistratepossess knowledge that a crime may have been committed. Numerous commentators,some with greatersuccess than others,have attempteda systematicexplanation of the ways in which the judge might take cognizance. The modes may be summarizedin the followingthree: accusation, inquisition(public renown) and denunciation.4The firstof thesehad practicallyceased to functionby thesixteenth century. Accusation by a privateparty had falleninto disuse with the rise of the inquisitorial

4Jean Bouteiller, Somme rurale, ou le grandcoustumier general de practiquecivil et canon, 221. Carena, Tractatus,240-243. JoostDamhouder, Practiqueiudiciaire is causes criminelles, fo. 4-7v?. Damhouder's principalstrength is Flemishlaw. He is weakeron Frenchprocedure, but remains a useful cross-reference.Eymeric, Directorium Inquisitorum, 413-417. Annik Porteau-Bitker,"L'emprisonnement dans le droitlaique du moyen-age,"225-226. Flagrant delict,while not included here, is discussed in Doucet, Institutions,2: 536 and Esmein, La procedurecriminelle, 108-112.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 72 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC procedure.The public prosecutor,the procureurdu roi, assumed the role of accuserin criminallitigation. Indeed, the Churchhad specificallyfostered the officialinquisition because privateaccusation had provencumbersome and unwieldyin dealing with heresy. Public renown or fama sometimesprompted the magistrateto embark upon an investigationor inquisition.The issue presentscertain problems because heresytended to be clandestineand covertuntil it gatheredsuf- ficientstrength. During the beginningsof religious reform,individuals normallysought to avoid notorietyamong the general community.Yet therewere occasional rumorsthat an individual or group of individuals held unorthodoxbeliefs. Such hearsay,important but not well understood, could rarelybe tracedto any single source. On the otherhand, the courts foundit sufficientto warrantinquiry. The reportsof Protestantassemblies in various towns of Languedoc received by the Parlementof Toulouse duringthe firstmonths of 1560 appear to fitthis description.5 The most common methodby which the alleged criminalwas brought to the attentionof the authoritieswas the denunciation.The denouncer was not, in the strictlegal sense, an accuser. He merelyreported what seemed to him to be a crime.The decision to investigateand prosecute restedwith the judge. The informingparty would probablybe called upon to give testimonyand name other witnesses,but aside fromthat he remained in the background.6This technique,an essential elementin the attemptof the medieval Church to combat heresy,became a permanent featureof theinquisitorial process. The ecclesiasticaland secularjudiciaries of sixteenth-centuryFrance granted it especial favorin theirefforts to stem Protestantism.A royal edict of January1535 commanded all subjects of the crownto reveal known or suspectedheretics lest theythemselves face prosecutionas accessoriesto and participantsin heresy.Similar directives appear in the royal edicts of June1540, April 1541, and June1551.7 The Church was equally vigorousin upholding this particularobligation. An ordinancepublished by authorityof the archbishopof Toulouse in 1550 listed a lengthyseries of religiouserrors. Persons acquainted with individuals taintedby these errorswere enjoined to informthe officersof the archdiocesewithin four days under pain of excommunicationand punishmentas harborersof heretics.A 1557 textof the synodal statutesfor the diocese of Mende contained an analogous clause orderingclerics to reportknown or suspected heretics.8While the specificeffects of such admonitionsremain open to question,the courtsdid not want forinstances.

5A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 74 (19 avril 1560) and (20 mai 1560). Bouteiller,Somme rurale,221-223. Damhouder, Practique,fo. 6v?-7. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 416- 417. Tanon, Histoirede lInquisition,266-271. 6 Bouteiller,Somme rurale, 221-223. Damhouder,Practique, fo. 5-5v?. Esmein,La procidure criminelle,109-111. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 415-417. 7A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 207v?; B 1904, fo. 91-92. Guenois, Conferencedes ordonnances,99. Ordonnancesdes rois,4: 182. Isambert,Recueil giniral, 12: 680 and 13: 200-201. 8 A.D.H.G., 1 G 642, Ordonnance imprime du Cardinal de Meudon, 1550. A.D., Lozere, G 703.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PRELIMINARIES OF THE TRIAL 73

Clergymenwere a frequentsource of denunciations.The syndicof the Franciscanhouse at Rabastansinformed the inquisitor of Toulouse in 1536 of the possible unorthodoxyof the town's rector,Durand Dardene. Friar Aldabertde Pompeyrontook similaraction against a preacherat Anduze in 1547. Five years later,a Franciscanmonk fromPezenas denounced a certainJehan Affreas a heretic.9These denouncementsoriginated with the secular elementsof societytoo. Pierre Serre,who had been a priest at Lezat in the diocese of Couserans beforeemigrating to Geneva, decided to returnto southernFrance and visit his brotherduring the winterof 1552-1553. Serre's sister-in-lawunfortunately had littleregard for his reformedreligious ideas. She spoke of her disliketo a neighboringwoman who, in turn,denounced Serre to the officialof the Bishop of Couserans. A few years later,four university students of Toulouse found themselves denounced as hereticsby theirservant.10 Finally, convicted heretics oc- casionallybecame theunwilling denouncers of theirfellow believers. Mag- istrateswould sometimes,upon completionof a trial,command the torture of the condemned in the hope thathe would reveal his associates. Jehan de La Cassaigne came underinvestigation by the Inquisitionof Carcassonne aftera condemned heretic,under torture,named him as an accomplice." The very nature of the denunciatoryprocess poses serious questions concerningpossible motivationand intention.The denouncerdid not assume thecosts of litigation;he was not obligedto sustainthe heresycharge beyondhis initialdeposition and testimonyduring the trial; and theaccused was under a strong presumptionof guilt until such time as he could demonstratehis innocence. Althoughsincere religious conviction cannot be discountedas a major inducementto denunciation,abuses did exist. When the Franciscansyndic of Rabastansdenounced the rector Dardene, it came as the high point in a long legal battleover the revenues derived fromthe burial of laymen in the order'smonastery. The rectorclaimed a portionof theprofits from this pious practice.The monksnaturally opposed himand in theensuing quarrel apparently felt that he had violatedreligious orthodoxy.12 Guillaume Bigot's denunciation of Claude Baduel to the Grands Joursheld at Le Puy in 1548 had much the same personal tenor. Both men had been professorsat the municipalcollege of Nimes and had originallyquarreled over educational policy and administrativearrange- mentsfor the school. The debate escalatedwith charges and countercharges, came to involve the municipal council, and led to several court suits.

9 A.D., Tarn, H 275. Charles Portal, "La reformeen Albigeois,enquete de 1536," 195- 196. A.M., Anduze, BB 1, fo. 259v?-260v' and 271-271v'. Boisset,"Premieres traces," 640. Hugues, Eglise reformied'Anduze, 44. A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 50 (4 aofit1554). 0 A. M., Toulouse, layette48 (11 avril 1558). Crespin,Histoire des martyrs,2: 30. " A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 26 (9 aoat 1547), (23 septembre1547) and (9 novembre 1547). The tortureof convictedheretics to learnthe names of accompliceswas a noted French development.Cf. sixteenth-centuryInquisitorial practice in Italyand Spain. Carena, Tractatus, 55-56. Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 176. 12 A.D., Tarn, H 275 containsfull documentationof the controversy.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 74 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Baduel's reactionto theheresy charge of 1548 was predictable.He protested his innocenceand argued thatBigot was the heretic.In truth,Baduel had sympathizedwith Calvin's ideas as early as 1545. The pressureat Nimes ultimatelybecame too greatand in 1550 he fledto Lyon. He finallysettled in Geneva duringthe followingyear.13 While Baduel's subsequentactions confirmedthe earlierdenunciation for heresy, considerable doubt remains whetherBigot's principal concern had been the preservationof the Faith. A furthercomplication in the problem of motivationis the financial reward which oftenresulted from denouncement. One of the numerous punishmentswhich could be imposed upon an individual convicted of heresywas the confiscationof his goods and property.The person who had originallyexposed the convicted hereticreceived a portion of the confiscation.Under Francis I, the amount was set at one-quarterof the total value of the goods and property.Henry II later raised this share to one-thirdand, at the same time,demanded strictpunishment for anyone who mightbe temptedto seek financialenrichment through false accusation. Denouncing parties seem to have been aware of these benefits. FollowingJehan Affre's conviction and executionin 1552, the Parlement neglectedto award the customarythird of the condemned's confiscated goods to the Franciscanhouse at Pezenas, a memberof which had denounced Affre.The syndic of the monasterypetitioned the court and obtained full satisfaction.14 The single appreciablesafeguard against possible abuse was the threat of countersuit.The suspectedcriminal would have the opportunityin the course of his trial to confrontthe witnesses against him and offerhis personalobjections to them.Such objectionsnormally related to thecapacity or motivationof the witness. The defendantmight claim, for example, that the witness (and in this instance denouncer) was moved to action throughmalice or envyunrelated to heresy.If the objectionswere sustained and the defendantdeclared innocent,he could bringsuit against his de- nouncerfor false accusation and slander.Although such actionswere rare, they did occur. The Parlementdecided in 1557 that Jehan Martin,the priorof Saint-Auban at Rodez,had calumniouslynamed as hereticAnthoine Bernard,an apothecaryof the same town. The priorhad to pay a fineof fiftylivres tournois to theking and one hundredlivres tournois to Bernard. Three years later,the courtfined Salveur Raufel in the amount of three hundredlivres tournois payable to the widow of JehanRobert for having produced false testimonyin a heresydenunciation against Robert.15

13 JohnCalvin, Ioannis Calvini Opera quae supersuntomnia, ed. Baum, Cunitz and Reuss 13: 587-590 and 20: 374. Dardier,"Reforme a Niumes,"BSHPF, 29 (1880): 490-491. Eugenie Droz, "Claude Baduel, traducteurde Bucer," 348. Matthieu-JulesGaufres, Claude Baduel et la riformedes etudesau XVIe siecle,235-288. Geisendorf,Livre des habitants,2: 12. 14 A.D.H.G., B 1904, fo. 92-93; B, Toumnelle,reg. 50 (4 aout 1554). Ordonnancesdes rois, 9: 182-183. Isambert,Recueil giniral, 12: 403 and 13: 201. '5 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 49 (27 juillet 1554), reg. 64 (29 octobre 1557), reg. 68 (6 mars 1559) and reg. 74 (8 avril 1560). False witnesswas a problemwhich sometimesplagued

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PRELIMINARIES OF THE TRIAL 75

When one is suspected of heresy,the actual trialprocess begins with the informationor inquisition,from which thistype of criminalprocedure takes its name. The ordinances of Blois and Villers-Cotteretsstipulated thatthe judge, afternotification of the crime,should investigateor order preliminaryinquiries himself.'6 Magistrates of all tribunalscompetent to tryheresy could orderthe information.The inquisitorof Toulouse directed thatinformations be undertakenagainst Durand Dardene at Rabastans in 1536, several suspectedheretics at Agen in 1538, a certainPrior of Vasus at Toulouse in 1546, and fourinhabitants of Bomiquel in 1550. The official of the archdioceseof Auch prescribedsimilar action withrespect to Jehan de Verdusan and Raymond de Orto in 1532. The officialof the diocese of Mirepoixauthorized an inquiryinto the activityof Pascal Gormontin 1549 and, eightyears later,the ecclesiasticalcourt of Mende initiatedan informationagainst several persons in thatdiocese. The juge-magefor the Seneschalsyof Nimes-Beaucairesanctioned a preliminaryinquiry into certain religiousdemonstrations at Bagnols in 1549. The bailiffof Vivarais instructedhis lieutenantto conductan inquisitionagainst three suspected hereticsat Annonay a few years later.The judge of Verdun in the Sene- schalsyof Toulouse performedthe same task concerningseveral residents of Gimont in 1553. Withinsix years, the crown itself,in a rare case of public renown,commissioned the judge of Villeneuve-de-Bergto inquire into the validityof rumorsof heresyat Privas and Aubenas.17 The informationconsisted of the depositionsof witnesses against the partyin question. It occurredprior to the suspect's appearance in court and he remained at large duringits conduct. Inquiries into heresy were usually undertakenin secrecyto avoid alarm and flight.The object of the investigationoften had no knowledge of it, played no active role in its preparation,and was rarelyapprised of its contents.Each witnessin the informationwas heardprivately and separatelyby thejudge, special officers ofthe courtcalled examiners(enqueteurs), or an officerof thecourt assisted by a notary.18Gerauld Pagesi, the chiefnotary and clerkof the Inquisition at Toulouse, supervisedthe inquisition at Rabastansin 1536. The inquisitor de Rochetteand his lieutenantRichardi personally went to Agen to record the various testimoniesin 1538. The inquisitorcommissioned Raymond de Clauvet, a licencie'in law, and Sebastien Floreusse,a bachelierin law, as examinersin the case against the Prior of Vasus. Bernard Pellicier, officialfor the archdiocese of Auch, heard witnesses in the information theInquisition in Italyand Spain,too. Carena,Tractatus, 263. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 522-527. 16 Esmein, La procedurecriminelle, 136-141. Isambert,Recueil general,11: 362 and 367, and 12: 630. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime, 224-228. 17 A.D., Ardeche,C 1451, no. 59, fo. 1-4. A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 31 (4 and 5 juillet 1549), reg. 39 (17 decembre 1551), reg. 42 (28 juin 1552), and reg. 45 (25 fevrier1553); 1 G 642, Inquisitionde 1532; 112 H 6, Inquisitionde 1546. A.D., Lot-et-Garonne,G 29, fo. 1. B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. 35, fo. 202v?-204. Eugene Arnaud,Histoire des Protestantsdu Vivaraiset du Velay 1: 10-11. 18 Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, 141. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 574-576. Langbein, ProsecutingCrime, 224-227.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 76 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC regardingJehan de Verdusan and Raymond de Orto. Louis de Lamothe de Chalender,lieutenant of the Bailiwickof Vivarais at the site of Ville- neuve-de-Berg,conducted the inquiryat Privas and Annonay in 1559.19 The deposition of each witness was recordedin its entiretyand then read to the witness who was requiredto sign it or make his mark upon it.20The process could last several days or several weeks dependingupon the number and length of depositions. In order to elicit adequate and pertinenttestimonial evidence, the examinerssometimes issued monitories enjoiningthe faithfulto reveal what theyknew about the alleged crime. Upon his arrivalat Agen, the inquisitorde Rochetteaffixed monitories to the doors of the cathedraland otherchurches as well as to the town hall. The practicewas in one sense successfulfor between 6 March and 29 April 1538 de Rochetteand his lieutenantexamined a total of sixty-nine persons. The judge of Verdun also posted monitorieswhen he inquired into hereticalpasquinades and placards which had been published at Gimont.And Pagesi carefullyread the generalmonitory against "Luther- ans" to each person whom he interviewedat Rabastans.2' If the examinerswere unaware of specificcriminal acts or particular suspects,they tended to recordtestimony from a large numberof people and, in particular,the socially and religiouslyprominent members of the community.When de Lamothede Chalenderwent to Aubenas and Privas he did not have priorknowledge of particularheretical acts or persons believed guiltyof such crimes.He benefitedonly frompublic rumorof heresy and recorded twelve depositionsduring the course of two days. They were as follows: Age Profession 15 July1559, at Aubenas JehanChabrollin 50 Professorof law, vicarof Ailhonand Mercuer Mathieudu Sollier 45 Vicarof Saint-Etienneof Fontbellonand Saint-Laurensof Aubenas EstiennePansier 60 Vicarof Saint-Laurensof Aubenas JehanValeton 56 licencie'in law, lieutenantgeneral of the cour ordinaireof Aubenas

18 July1559, at Privas AndreChambon 68 Priest SymonCrespin 60 ?

19 A.D., Ardeche,C 1451, no. 59, fo. 1-4. A.D.H.G., 1 G 642, Inquisitionde 1532; 112 H 6, Inquisitionde 1546, fo. 1-7. A.D., Lot-et-Garonne,G 29. A.D., Tarn, H 275. Arnaud, Protestantsdu Vivraiset du Velay,1: 10-11. 20 Esmein,La procidurecriminelle, 141-142. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 646-647. 21 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 45 (25 fevrier1553). A.D., Lot-et-Garonne,G 29. Falfieres, "Enquete," 213-220. A.D., Tarn, H 275.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PRELIMINARIES OF THE TRIAL 77

Age Profession SymonChamynas 50 Priest Jehande Sibleyras 45 Bailiffof Privasfor the Duchess of Valentinois AntoineArnaud 45 Royalnotary JehanGarnier 25 Clerkof thecour ordinaire of Privas Pierrede Conches 55 Chiefmunicipal councilman of Privas JehanCompte 50 Merchantand municipalcouncilman of Privas

The criterionfor the selectionof witnessesseems to have been theirrel- ativelyimportant status. They were presumablyfamiliar with all facetsof municipallife. Yet when questioned,they knew of no one who had spoken againstthe Church or its doctrines,refused the sacraments,or committed any othersuspicious act, save a group which had been prosecutedby the Parlementof Toulouse some twentyyears earlier. The value ofthe technique and the reliabilityof the witnesses are subject to doubt, at least in this instance.The inquiryfailed to uncover hereticalactivity, yet withintwo years,by 1561, a reformedchurch organized at Privas.22 Pagesi's informationat Rabastans was considerablymore defined.He gatheredtestimony concerning a specificperson, the rectorDurand Dar- dene, and over a total of six days he took twenty-fivedepositions.

Age Profession 5 November1536 Pierrede Borde 43 Franciscanfriar

6 November1536 Anthoinedu Blet 62 Bachelierin law Pierrede Figaco 46 Notary BertrandGiscard 45 Sabotmaker (sabatier) AnthoineVayssiere 49 Notary Pierredu Puy 53 Substitutefor the procureur du roi at thesite of thejudge of Aubiges

7 November1536 Guilllaumedu Solier 50 Bachelierin law JehanFrespech 40 Merchant

22 A.D., Ardehe, C 1451, no. 59. Arnaud, Protestantsdu Vivaraiset du Velay,1: 11.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 78 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Age Profession 21 November 1536 Paul Romanhac 35 Priest JehanOlyvieri 30 Priest Vidal Calvet 34 Priest JehanRobert 40 Butcher(maselier) JehanNycolau 45 Priest Guillaume de Fijac 40 Priest JehanBadene 45 Priestand rectorof Saint-Amans

22 November 1536 JehanRosolieres 40 Priestand bachelierin law BerenguierGayrault 50 Priest PierreSurbayrolles 42 Priest FranfoysLacombe 33 Sculptor(imagineur) BertrandBayssac 45 ?

23 November 1536 Arnauld Burnet 45 Priest Domenge Olyvie 33 Priest Jehannede Lerm 18 Wife of Hughes de Cumenge, an apothecary Franfoysede Camps 25 Widow (relayssee)of Fransoys Cueilhe, a merchant Catherinedel Cayre 28 Wife of JehanAlbert, a notary

All deponentswere residentsof Rabastans and nearlyhalf, twelve, were clergymen.Of thelaymen, there were two bacheliersin law, one magistrate, two notaries,four artisans,three women, and one man of unspecified occupation.They representa mixtureof respectablemembers of the communityand witnesses to allegedly criminalacts committedby Dardene. Althoughmany of them merelyrepeated previous testimony,only five claimed to be uninformedin the matter. The informationrevealed severalareas where Dardene could have been faulted.Fourteen deponents recounted a quarrel between Dardene and friarSymon de Quercu,a Franciscanwho had preachedthe Advent sermons in 1535. The monkhad urgedthe faithful to seek intermentin theFranciscan monasteryand therebyobtain partial remissionfor theirsins. Dardene, the rectorof Rabastans,countered that burial in the habit of Saint Francis would not abrogate one's sufferingsin purgatory.He even resortedto

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PRELIMINARIES OF THE TRIAL 79 prolonginghis sermon one Sunday so that de Quercu had littletime re- mainingwhen finallypermitted to ascend the pulpit. Moreover,in order to lengthenhis sermonDardene employedthe "unusual" liturgicalpractice of recitingthe Pater noster,the Ave Maria and the Credoin Latin, French and Occitan, the local language. Othertestimony suggested faults which bore less resemblanceto Protes- tant ideas. Dardene was said to have incurredexcommunication on two differentoccasions: once when he performeda clandestinemarriage and again when he failed to pay the tithe(deicime) on his Prioryof Mordagne. Six witnessesincluding the threewomen attestedto his pratice of reading palms and anothertold of the rumorthat he could make moneyby magical means. Beyond the imputationsassociated with popular superstition,it even developed that Dardene kept a mistressnamed Francoise Cariere. Some of the testimonywas obviouslyhearsay. One priesttestified that he heard froma ploughman (laboureur)who heard fromanother priest who said thata certainJehan de Lerinhad a "Lutheran" book which belonged to Dardene. Even theincidents which could be substantiateddo not appear to have been sufficientfor prosecution.The documentssuggest that the authoritiesdid not proceed beyond theirinitial investigation. Litigation continuedbetween the rectorDardene and the Franciscanprior over burial rights.Further mention of the heresycharge, however, is conspicuously absent.23 The informationwas not always and necessarilylengthy and broad in scope. If the alleged unorthodoxycentered on a particularevent involving one or two suspects,it could be quite briefand precise. Pellicier,official of the archdioceseof Auch, interviewedonly fivepersons at the archiepiscopal palace on 11 and 15 May 1532. All had been presentwhen Jehan de Verdusanand Raymondde Ortodenied severalteachings of the Church in the publicsquare of Montestruc.The testimoniessupported one another and were limitedto recall of the directstatements made by the suspects. A relativelyclear understandingof the purportederrors emerged. De Ver- dusan and de Orto maintainedthat the Church's power to forgivesins ended with the death of Saint Peter,and theydenied the utilityof both the Lenten fast and the venerationof the saints.24 The informationdirected against the Priorof Vasus at Toulouse in 1546 was ofan analogouscharacter. While visiting the home ofJehan Desplassan, a mastercouturier of Toulouse, the priordeclared thatthere was only one invisiblechurch which existedin the heavens and in the hearts of men. Despite the objections and argumentsof those in attendance,the Prior persistedin his contention.His opponentsattempted to bolstertheir claims by producinga copy of the Articlesof the Faculty of Theology of the Universityof Paris which had been published as partof a royalordinance

23 A.D., Tam, H 275. Portal,"Reforme en Albigeois," 193-207. 24 A.D.H.G., 1 G 642, Inquisitionde 1532.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 80 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC in 1543.25 The prior,however, refused to believethat the king had approved such nonsense. The inquisitionconsisted of an examinationof the five persons presentat the time the priormade his statements.Yet even in thiscase thedeponents could notrefrain from describing the prior's attempts to seduce the wife of theirhost Desplassan. Though it had littlerelevance to the heresyaccusation, several witnessesnoted thathe had slapped her buttocksand repeatedlysuggested that she accompany him to hear the Lenten preacherat the churchof La Daurade.26 The examinerassembled the completed testimonyand submittedthe dossierto the judge who had authorizedit. The judge, in turn,presented it to the prosecutor,the procureurdu roi, for his conclusions or recommendations.The prosecutormade his recommendationsto the judge in writingand, at the same time,returned the information.According to the advice containedin the conclusions,the judge eitherallowed the matter to restor he issued the decree forthe suspect's arrest.27 The testimonygathered in the informationbecame the basic document ofthe heresy trial. It providedthe evidence for arrest, formed the framework forthe interrogationof the accused, and containedthe statementswhich he was obliged to refutein orderto prove his innocence.Yet the accused did not participatein the preparationof the dossiernor would its contents be communicatedto him at any point in the trial.He had to rely upon the court'simpartiality in gatheringaccurate and trueevidence contained in a documentto which only membersof the courthad access.

25 Ibid., B 1903, fo. 60v'-62. Isambert,Recueil general, 12: 820-827. 26A.D.H.G., 112 H 6, Inquisitionde 1546. 27 Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, pp. 141-142. Isambert,Recueil general, 11: 362 and 12: 630. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime, 227-228.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VII. The Interrogationand Confrontation T he completedinformation went first to theprocureur du roi who, afterprompt but thoroughconsideration, attached his conclusions and returnedit to the court. Depending upon the prosecutor's recommendations,the judge eitherabandoned the affairor called forthe appearance of the suspect. If the procureurindicated a willingnessto prosecute,the magistratehad at his disposal two typesof decrees,personal summons (citatioverbalis) and bodily arrest(citatio realis). The personal summonscould be served directlyto the suspect at his home or by public proclamationin the town square. The court expected swiftcompliance fromthe individual who, thoughnot imprisoned,was subjectto provisional libertypending trial.He could not leave the town in which the tribunal sat. The judge invokedthe decree of bodily arrestfor grave offenseswhere the suspect mightbe temptedto flee ratherthan presenthimself to the court.Here the accused remainedin preventivedetention during trial. If the suspectfailed to respondto a personal summonsor eluded his captors in thecase ofbodily arrest, the court declared him contumacious. It ordered the annotationand seizure of his goods and propertyand grantedhim a delay of threedays (troisbriefs jours) to submitto justice. Failure to heed this finalsummons led eventuallyto condemnationin absentia.' The tribunalsof Languedoc employed the decree of bodily arreston those occasions when the suspicion of heresywas great. The officialfor the archdioceseof Auch ordered the bodily arrestof Jehande Verdusan and Raymondde Orto in 1532. The Inquisitionat Toulouse, followingthe recommendationof the procureurdes encours,acted similarlyin the apprehensionof the priorof Vasus. The courtsused the decree of personal summonsless frequentlyin heresycases. The Parlementof Toulouse issued a personal summonsfor thirteen persons linked to questionablereligious activityat Montauban in 1551.2 The determiningfactor in the choice of decree appears to have been the gravityof the evidence containedin the information.The aforementionedinhabitants of Montauban were only secondarilymentioned in the information,whereas in the other two examples the suspects had been the object of the information.

l Carena, Tractatus,244-245. Damhouder, Practique,fo. 10v?-13. Doucet, Institutions,2: 536. Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, 140-142 and 155-156. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 421. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 574-581 and 594. Isambert,Recueil general, 11: 362 and 12: 605 and 630. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime, 228. 2 A.D.H.G., 1 G 642, Inquisitionde 1532; 112 H 6, Inquisitionde 1546; B, Toumelle, reg. 38 (1 octobre 1551). 81

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 82 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

The summons to appear within three days, which ensued from the suspect'sdefault on the originalsummons, was oftenan implicitadmission thathe had permanentlyevaded justice. Few individualsnamed in these decrees were ever capturedand tried.During June 1532, forinstance, the lieutenantinquisitor and the vicar general of the archbishopof Toulouse summoned forty-onepersons to submitwithin three days on charge of heresy.The majorityhad already fled or were in hiding. Among the list of suspects,as a case in point,was Michael Servetus.Yet he had departed Toulouse as earlyas 1529. Only one of theforty-one, Francois Guilhomon, is known to have stood trial.The Parlementof Toulouse demanded the appearance in March 1546 of eightresidents of Marvejols under the provision of the delay of three days. Althoughnothing indicates that they complied,one of them,Jehan Orlhac, was apprehended eightyears later at Desmarques in the diocese of Nlmes. The Parlementissued an identical summonsfor eighteen persons in earlyOctober 1551. One man, Arnauld de Montserrat,either submitted voluntarily or was capturedshortly thereafter.Another, Jehan Massip dit David, eluded justiceuntil his arrestand trialin 1560. The remainingsuspects simplydisappeared.3 Between 1500 and 1560, no fewerthan threehundred persons became the object of summons to appear withinthree days. Remarkablyfew of these suspectedheretics ever came to trial,though most were condemned in absentia.4Even when apprehended,the individual condemned in ab- sentiareceived benefit of a fulltrial before the court.At least the Parlement followed this procedurewith respectto JehanOrlhac and JehanMassip dit David.5 Thus, the summonsto appear withinthree days and the sub- sequentcondemnation by defaultserved as littlemore than an outstanding warrantfor the suspect's immediatearrest and a legal justificationfor the seizure of his property. A less prevalentproblem in bringingaccused hereticsto trialwas their escape frompreventive detention. George Sapientis,a Franciscanmonk, escaped fromthe prisons of the bishop of Mende in 1539. Four years later,six prisonersescaped at Beaucaire while awaiting trial for heresy.

3Ibid., B 28, fo. 180; B, Toumelle, reg. 20 (26 mars 1546), reg. 38 (1 octobre 1551), reg. 40 (5 fevrier1552), reg. 41 (18 mars 1552), reg. 43 (1 juillet 1552), reg. 49 (12 juin 1554), (14 juillet 1554) and (31 juillet 1554), reg. 74 (10 avril 1560). A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 78v?- 80. Calvin, Calvini Opera, 8: 846. 4A.D.H.G., B 32, fo. 352v?-353; B 92 j, fo. 10; B 92, fo. 154 and 195; B, Toumelle, reg. 13 (10 avril 1543), reg. 14 (18 juillet 1543), reg. 20 (15 mars 1546) and (26 mars 1546), reg. 27 (27 janvier 1548), reg. 38 (1 octobre1551), reg. 39 (22 decembre1551) and (23 decembre 1551), reg. 40 (5 fevrier1552), reg. 41 (31 mars 1552), reg. 42 (3 juin 1552) and (13 juin 1552), reg. 45 (17 fevrier1553), reg. 47 (19 decembre 1553), reg. 49 (16 juin 1554) and (14 juillet1554), reg.50 (29 aoat 1554), (3 septembre1554), (12 octobre1554), (13 octobre1554) and (27 octobre1554), reg. 52 (13 mars 1555), reg. 56 (20 novembre1555), reg. 58 (15 mars 1556), reg. 63 (8 mai 1557), (3 juin 1557) and (4 juin 1557), reg. 68 (12 avril 1559), reg. 69 (9 mai 1559) and (10 mai 1559), reg. 72 (18 decembre 1559), reg. 76 (22 octobre1560); 112 H 6, Inquisitionde 1546. A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 78v?-80. 5 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 49 (12 juin 1554), (14 juillet1554) and (31 juillet 1554), reg. 74 (10 avril 1560). Procedurewas similarin the case of PierreChabot and JacquesCocombis. A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 45 (27 mars 1553), reg. 51 (22 decembre 1554).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INTERROGATION AND CONFRONTATION 83

The courtsubsequently tried the jailers fornegligence in the performance of theirduty. When Claude Leauton escaped in 1550, his jailer was also held responsible.While inattentiveguards and poorlyconstructed prisons may have facilitatedescape, other factorsdid come into play. Jehan de La Rogeraye allegedly received assistance fromProtestant sympathizers when he made good his flightfrom the prisons of Montauban in 1559.6 Assumingthe suspect heeded the personal summons or was arrested afterissuance of the decree of bodily arrest,the magistrateimmediately proceeded with his carefulinterrogation. The judge examinedhim on the charges and the evidence assembled duringthe inquisitorialphase. The law denied the accused benefitof counsel and required him to answer withoutknowledge of that which was contained in the information,the depositionsrecorded by thecourt. The clerkof thecourt kept an abbreviated versionof the questionsand answers.The suspectformally swore to speak the truthand, upon completionof the interrogation,affixed his signature or mark to the clerk'stranscription.7 The judge based most of his questions on incidentsdescribed in the information.He also asked severalstandard questions designed to ascertain whetherthe accused attendedMass, receivedthe sacraments and generally lived according to the precepts of the Church. As one purpose of the interrogationwas the elicitationof furtherevidence, this time fromthe accused himself,the judge's queries often seem leading or suggestive. Many of the questions put to JehanOrlhac were of this nature. Antoine de Paulo and Gabrieldu Bourg,counsellors of the Parlement,interrogated him on 9 June1554 in the chamberof deliberationsof the Chateau Nar- bonnais, the buildingwhich housed the high courtat Toulouse. JehanOrlhac, native of La Fage,five leagues distant from Marvejols, presently livingat Desmarques in the diocese of Nimes, a butcher,fifty years old or thereabout, afterhaving taken the oath upon the Holy Gospels, has promisedto tellthe truth. Askedif he knowswhy he is a prisoner. Answeredthat he knowsnothing about it. Asked if he has ever been accused of the crime of heresy (and) pursued by summons of threebrief days, forreason of which he leftMarvejols and became a fugitive. Answered that he does not know that he had ever been accused and that in additionhe was never notifiedof the summons of threebrief days.

Asked why it is that he, a native of La Fage, came to Desmarques. Answeredthat he changed residenceten years ago because he could not make a livingat La Fage, an infertileand sterileplace.

6 Ibid., B 32, fo. 353v?; B 92 1, fo. 190; B, Toumelle, reg. 13 (10 avril 1543) and (19 avril 1543), reg. 14 (18 juillet1543). Devals, "Ecoles publiques," 108. Histoireecclesiastique, Baum and Cunitz, 1: 914. Menard, Histoirede Nimes,4: 168-169. 7 Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, 142-143. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 627-628. Isambert, Recueilgeneral, 11: 364 and 12: 630 and 633. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime, 228-230.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 84 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Askedif he everlived at Marvejolsand when. Answeredthat after leaving La Fage and beforegoing to Desmarqueshe lived at Marvejolsfor two or threeyears. Askedif duringLent in 1545 whichwas the yearbefore he was accused,he and his entirefamily had eatenmeat, although no one was ill in his house;and ifhe had roastedmeat on Good Fridayand his son Anthoineate it indifferently to thegreat scandal of thepeople. Answeredno; and thathis son Anthoinewas thenonly two years old, forhe is notyet twelve. Askedif he knewJacques Grimailh, a butcherof Marvejols,and if theyever traffickedtogether in livestock. Answeredthat he knewmany butchers from Marvejols, but he doesnot remember theirnames and cannotsay ifhe knewGrimailh or traffickedwith him. Askedif while purchasing some livestock with Grimailh in thecountryside, he had said to Grimailhthat there was no purgatoryand thathe wouldnot pray for thesoul of his father, because his prayers would not aid thedead manand would notrelieve the punishment in whichhis father'ssoul maybe constituted. Answeredthat he neverspoke in thismanner, nor is it properfor men of his professionto becomeinvolved in suchaffairs. Askedif he said thatadoration of the Holy Host when it was elevatedwas useless,because the Host was merebread or doughwhich did not containthe bodyof ourCreator. Answeredno. Askedif he said thatit was as usefulto prayto God outsidethe churchas within;that a pilgrimageto Notre-Dame-de-Quesacwas worthlessbecause the Lady cannotaid thosewho seek herintercession; and thatone mustnot adore imagesbecause they were simply wood or stone. Answeredno. Askedif when making trips and traffickingwith Grimailh, the latter questioned himwhy he had not baredhis head and made the signof the crosswhen he passeda crucifixalong the road; and he respondedby these or similar words: The signof thecross is notworth a damn. Answeredno. Askedif since1545 he has gone to confessionand receivedthe Lord'sBody and who was his confessorand minister. Answeredthat he has beento confessionand received the Holy Sacrament since thattime; and at Desmarquesit was atthe hands of the cures who were successively there,Barthelemy Carriere, Jehan Cortail, and thechief priest of Desmarques; and thiscurrent year he confessedto thecure of thetown and receivedthe Holy Host fromthe Carmelite who preachedthe Lenten sermons. Askedwhy he has notalways received, and especiallythis past year, his Creator fromthe cure at Desmarques. Answeredthat it was due to business,especially this year, because it happened thaton HolySaturday before Easter the aforementioned cure went to say Mass and he wouldhave had to waituntil Sunday, the next day; now he is obligedby hisbutcher's trade to servemanual workers on Sunday,and also he is a taxfarmer

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INTERROGATION AND CONFRONTATION 85 forthe equivalent8 and must tend the accounts and the value of his companions' business. Askedif he said thatall the greaterrors proceed from the Churchin which thereis morewickedness than in all otherliving things. Answeredno. Askedif he said thatmoney given to priestsdid notprofit a deceasedsoul and thatit wouldbe betterto keepit to enricha legacyor similardisposition. Answeredthat he neversaid this. Askedif one day in the publicsquare of Marvejolsaccompanied by several residentsof thetown, he said thatit was as valuableto givebread to a dog as to bringofferings to the Churchand moreso, becausethe ministers of the Church weremerely vilely living devils. Answeredno. Askedif he said thatMasses and venerationof the saints profited little because thepriests were not worthy to administeror consecratethe Lord's Body; all the moreso becausethey were lechers and keepers of concubines; and one mustadore a sole God who residedin heaven. Answeredthat he has neverheld these notions, although he confesseshaving said thatthere is onlyone sole God; and as forthe rest he believesthat which HolyMother Church commands. Askedif whenhe made thesestatements, being in the companyof someone who pointedout thatthey were heretical and contraryto the determinationof HolyMother Church, he nonethelesspersisted in his opinionand threatenedto strikethe person who made theremonstrances. Answeredno. Askedif he everprohibited his wifefrom confessing to thepriest and receiving theLord's Body on Easter,saying to herthat if she did so, she couldnever again eat in his presence. Answeredthat as muchas he mustuse prohibitionswith respect to his wife, he has alwaysexhorted her to performthe duties of a good Christian,although she has no needof exhortation, because she has neveravoided that which a good and faithfulChristian must do. Askedif when told that a daughterof PierreCabanes who was crippledbegan towalk immediately after she had veneratedat Saint-Jean-de-Tantillac,which was reputedto be a greatmiracle, he respondedthat the girl could walk just as well withoutpraying to SaintJean and thatSaint Jean could not aid her. Answeredthat he neversaid this. Asked(if he said)that offerings ofcandles simply serve to maintainthe ribaldry of thecure or vicar. Answeredno.

8 The equivalent of Languedoc, like the aides elsewhere in France, was a tax on the sale of merchandise.The Estates of Languedoc negotiateda fixedcontribution with the crown and thenfarmed the tax throughout the province. Martin Wolfe, The Fiscal System of Renaissance France,27-32 and 317-329. Specificinformation is available in Jacques Vidal, L'equivalent des aides en Languedoc.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 86 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Askedif he eversaid thatif one strikesthe statue of SaintJean or any other saintwith a knife,it will not bleed and if one puts a lightedcandle to it, it willbum. Answeredthat he neversaid this. Askedif when someonepointed out thatthese statements and propositions wereheretical, he respondedthat in puttinghim to death theycould not kill his soul. Answeredno. Askedif on thefeast of the Conception of Our Lady in 1554,he workedpublicly at Desmarques,making sabots; and whensomeone chided him he withdrewand wentto workin his shop. Answeredno.9 Orlhac's answers are remarkablefor a man whose illiteracyprecluded his signatureon the transcriptof the interrogation.He could not even affix his initialsand settledinstead for a simplemark consisting of a half-square surmountedby a cross. The astutenessof thisenterprising butcher is par- ticularlystriking considering the tremendouspressure placed upon him. His failure,perhaps innocent,to respond to the heresysummons issued eightyears earliercould not have weighed favorably. Orlhac simplydenied the alleged statementor actionwhenever possible. If the response requiredexplanation, he carefullyavoided incriminating himselfand othermembers of his family.He protectedboth his wife and son, stressingthe faithfulChristian character of the formerand the youth of the latter.Orlhac cautiouslyaffirmed the one orthodoxstatement attributedto him, that therewas one sole God. He probablyrealized that it would be unwise to deny the possibilityof contactwith Grimailh,the fellowbutcher who had evidentlyoffered testimony in the case. He merely said that he did not rememberthe name nor the circumstancesof the alleged incidents.Above all, he unequivocally denied saying anything which even hintedat heresy. AdrianPanatier, the son of a spurmakerfrom Pamiers, pursued a slightly differenttack when interrogatedby the counsellorsGuerin d'Alzon and Louis de Lauselergie on 27 January1560. He had presentedhimself to theParlement following the issuance of a personalsummons. The questions once again dealt with the incidentsdescribed in the informationand the suspect'sfulfillment of certainreligious obligations. Panatier, on the other hand, respondedwith more openness and detail than Orlhac. Perhaps the less serious natureof his summonspermitted greater confidence. Askedwhat is thecause of his summons and why he is beingheard and examined. Answeredthat he does notknow. Askedif he knowsRamond La Paire,maftre Lestaigner, the son of Le Petit, maitreLe Ardonnerand the son of maltreMartin, a locksmith,the servantsof

9A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 49 (12 juin 1554). The transcriptsof interrogations,if they survive,are normallyquite informative.Cf. Brian Pullan, "'A Ship with Two Rudders': 'RighettoMarrano' and the Inquisitionin Venice," 25-58.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INTERROGATION AND CONFRONTATION 87

Martin,the son of Olholiecalled Bellan and one calledBedoret, sousviguier; and if,in theircompany, in theirhomes (and) shopsas wellas in thestreets, at night as well as duringthe day, theywould go outsidethe towninto the fieldsand assemblein large groups, singing the Psalms of David even though it was prohibited. Answeredthat it is truethat, without thinking, he has sungthe Psalms of David severaltimes while working in his father'sshop, until the prohibitions against it werepublished in thesquares of Pamiers by Monsieur d'Alzon and he understood thatit was forbidden;and he tookspecial care not to violatethe published prohibitions;but he has neverattended the aforementioned assemblies nor sung in thecompany of otherseither within or outsidethe town. Askedwhat is thereason that he recentlyceased attendingchurch as a good Christianis bound,especially on Sundayand otherfeasts when it is commanded to hearthe parish Mass and divineoffice. Answeredthat he does not believethat he has ceased to attendchurch on Sundayand otherfeasts to hearMass and fulfillthe other obligations. Askedif he has confessedand receivedthe Holy Sacrament the preceding feasts of Easterand fromwhom. Answeredunder oath that during the preceding feasts of Easterhe confessed at theDominican monastery of Pamiers to friar Alexandre, a member of the house, and receivedthe holy Sacrament from Jehan de Negratzat the collegialchurch of Le Camp;both will testify that not only this past year, but also thepreceding ones,he confessedand receivedas a goodChristian; and he wouldnot have done otherwisebecause he wishesto live and die as a good Christianaccording to the constitutionsand commandmentsof Our HolyMother Church."0 The single piece of serious evidence against Panatierseems to have been that he had sung certainPsalms. Ratherthan deny the act, he chose to explain the mitigatingcircumstances. Althoughin the two precedingexamples the accused protestedtheir innocence,the courtswere occasionallysuccessful in obtainingadmissions of guiltduring the interrogation.These confessionswere normallyof two types.An individualwhose errorwas minimalmight be temptedto confess and at the same timerepent. The penitentin such instancesmight expect a lesser punishment.Anthoine Amasi, a schoolmasterof Albi, confessed to the officialof that diocese in 1547. He publiclyrenounced his errorin the ceremonyof the amendehonorable and was banished fromLanguedoc forone year.Eleven otherpersons known to have confessedand repented were treatedsimilarly. They receivedsentences calling for public abjuration of theircrime along withfines or banishment.11The second typeof confession occurredwhen the accused admittedto beliefswhich the courtlabeled heretical,yet refusedto retractthem. Jean de Caturce, for example, ad- amantlymaintained beliefs which the vicarof the archbishopof Toulouse and the lieutenantof the Inquisitiondeclared heretical.The martyrologist

0 A.D.H.G., reg. 79 (1 fevrier1560). " Ibid., reg. 26 (16 septembre1547) and (9 novembre1547), reg. 40 (5 janvier 1552), reg. 42 (25 mai 1552), reg. 45 (27 mars 1553) and (14 avril 1553), reg. 46 (26 septembre1553), reg. 49 (28 mai 1554) and (3 juillet 1554), reg. 50 (26 octobre 1554), reg. 51 (8 decembre 1554).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 88 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Jean Crespin reportsthat both Jean Joeryand Pierre Serre made ample confessionof theirreformed faith and the Parlementof Toulouse noted in 1554 thatFrancois Linhac obstinatelypersisted in statementscontrary to the Christianreligion."2 Such admissions of guilt withoutrecantation insured the most severe punishment.All of the aforementionedburned at the stake. If the accused confessedin the courseof theinterrogation, the procureur du roi reviewed the dossier and considered whether to move for final judgmentin his conclusions.Voluntary confession precluded the accused's formaldefense, save whatevermitigating factors he mightwish to raise. Assumingan affirmativedecision, only pronouncementand executionof sentenceremained. The procureurhowever did not always desire to con- clude the trial,especially if the accused's confessionwas inconclusive. AlthoughAnthoine Saliceti, for instance, admitted during interrogation to certainreligious crimes, his trialcontinued."3 Saliceti's confessionwas ap- parentlyless than satisfactory. When the trial continued,the procureurmoved for an interlocutory decree to employ eitherthe ordinaryor extraordinaryprocedure and the courtnormally followed his recommendation.The ordinaryprocedure was by inquests(enquetes) and pleadings(plaidoiries) and permittedthe accused to be released on bail. The prosecutor'scall for the ordinaryprocedure meant the criminalcase was not worthpursuing. Any furtherlitigation would take the formof a civil action between the disputingparties and was, as such, a rarityin instances of heresy.The judiciaryinvoked the extraordinaryprocedure for grave crimeswhich demanded rigorousad- judication.These serious offensesincluded heresy and, already in 1541, FrancisI instructedthe courtsto proceed againstheretics according to the extraordinaryprocedure. Its distinguishingfeature was the confrontation of the accused withthe witnesses (accarations et confrontationsdes te'moins). The procedure,moreover, was conductedin secretand permittedthe applicationof torture.14 The rulingfor the extraordinaryaction once made, the court fixeda day to proceed with the confirmationsand confrontationsof witnesses. The numberof witnessessummoned and the lengthof the delay within which theywere to appear naturallyvaried fromcase to case. The usual stated delay was one or two weeks. On 20 May 1547, the Parlement orderedthe royalprosecutor to produce in person withinfifteen days the sevenwitnesses named in theproceedings against Anthoine de Montejudeo.

12 Ibid., reg. 50 (16 octobre 1554). A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 67v'-69. Crespin,Histoire des martyrs,2: 30-31 and 160. 13 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 14 (29 octobre 1543). Doucet, Institutions,2: 536-537. Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, 143. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 630-631. Isambert,Recueil gene'ral, 11: 364-365 and 12: 630-631. 14 A.D.H.G., B 1902, fo. 206v?. Doucet, Institutions,2: 537. Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, 136-138 and 143-145. Guenois, Conferencedes ordonnances,100. Isambert,Recueil ge'neral, 11: 364-367 and 12: 630-633. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime, 231.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INTERROGATION AND CONFRONTATION 89

The eightwitnesses called to appear in the trialof JacquesFrine, a carpenter of Lectoure,in 1551 were granteda delay of eightdays. And the delays could be longer in actual practice due to repeated postponementsand renewals.15 The judge, whose knowledge in the case thus far derived fromhis familiaritywith the dossier of the informationand his examinationof the accused, firstheard the witnessesindividually and separately.Each was sworn and, without acquainting him with the contentsof his original depositioncontained in theinformation, the judge questionedhim regarding the accusation and asked him to summarizehis testimony.The purpose was to ascertainthat his statementswere substantiallythe same as those containedin the deposition.Afterwards, the originaldeposition was read to the witness and he was asked in what ways he would confirm,alter or correctit.16 The actual confrontationof the witness with the accused followed. The confrontationhad several purposes. It obviated the problem of mistakenidentity. The witness had to affirmsolemnly that the accused was the person of whom he spoke in the deposition.At the same time, it permittedthe accused, again withoutbenefit of counsel, to state his objectionsto the witness. This was his firstand only opportunityto do so. The ordinance of Villers-Cotteretsstated that the accused must offer his objectionsprior to the readingof the deposition.After the reading,he would no longerbe permittedto state or allege any objections(reproches de temoins).The requirementseems unfair,but it did forcethe accused to disassociatehis objectionsto the person of the witnessfrom his objections to the substanceof the testimony.Once the objectionshad been put forth, thecourt proceeded with the reading of the deposition.The judge requested the witness to confirmit and permittedthe accused to contest it. This confrontationprocedure and subsequent reading of the deposition was repeated for each witness.17Only upon completionof this stage of the trialwould the courtconsider the questionof release on bail and entertain whateverdefense the accused mightoffer. Release on bail is a complex question whose solution is to be found more in the realm of judicial practice than theory.The records of the Parlement of Toulouse reveal that between 1500 and 1560 some 168 personscharged with heresy, nearly 16 per centof the total1074 suspects, were freedon bail. Yet the circumstancessurrounding their release varied widely.

15A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 25 (20 mai 1547); reg. 38 (6 octobre 1551). Esmein, La procedurecriminelle, 144-145. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 638-641. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime,231-232. 16 Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, 145-146. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 643-645. Langbein, ProsecutingCrime, 233. 17 Damhouder, Practique,fo. 24v?-25. Esmein, La procidurecriminelle, 146-147. Imbert, La practiquejudiciaire, 648. Isambert,Recueil gieneral, 12: 632. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime, 233-234.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 90 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Prevailingstatutes and theoryprovided that in cases of heinous crimes, justiciableaccording to the extraordinaryprocedure, bail was refuseduntil completionof the confrontationsand verificationsof testimony.Not only did the courts desire a firmernotion of the gravityof the affairbefore grantingor refusingbail, but theysought to avoid falsificationof themodes of evidence and in particularthe subornationof witnesses.18 An obvious exceptionwhich permittedearlier release was an instanceof criticalillness or infirmity.The Parlementgranted bail to twelve ailing or aged heresy defendants,though it did place half of them under house arrest."9 Normal release on bail, upon conclusionof the confrontationsand verificationsof witnesses,resulted from a varietyof reasons.The courtallowed two men to post suretiesof 200 and 1000 livres respectivelythat they mightbe at libertyfor the celebration of Christmas1551. Severalindividuals weregranted bail pendingtheir transfer to anotherjurisdiction for execution of sentence.The Parlementfreed at least seven persons on bail as they awaitedthe disposition of theirappeals fromlower tribunals.20 And another twenty-sevenaccused hereticssecured provisionalliberty while the court examined the witnesses summoned on theirbehalf and investigatedex officiowhatever defenses they had raised.21 Taken together,the various instancesof bail heretoforedescribed account for 56 persons, one-third of the 168 defendantswho so benefited.The remaining112 individuals constitutea distinctlydifferent group. The Parlementreleased them on theirown recognizance (cautionsd'eux-me'mes) and without geographic restriction(partout). It merely instructedthat there be furtherinquiry (il sera plus amplementinforme) into the charges against them. This practiceof indefiniterelease on simplerecognizance pending further investigation,the plus amplementinforme, demands closerexamination.22

18 Damhouder, Practique,fo. 21-22v?. Esmein, La procedurecriminelle, 152-153. Imbert, La practiquejudiciaire, 658-660. Isambert,Recueil gene'ral, 12: 631. Papon, Recueild'arrests, 1314. Annik Porteau-Bitker,"Le systemede l'1argissementsous caution en droitcriminel franpaisaux XIIIe et XIVe siecles," 79-80. The Inquisitionwas equally strictregarding release on bail. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 638-640. 19 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 38 (3 novembre1551), reg. 40 (10 fevrier1552), reg. 42 (4 juin 1552) and (10 juin 1552), reg. 43 (1 juillet 1552) and (17 septembre1552), reg. 44 (7 janvier 1553), reg. 46 (14 aofit1553), reg. 49 (6 juin 1554) and (31 juillet 1554), reg. 53 (15 juin 1555), reg. 63 (19 juin 1557). 20 Ibid., reg. 12 (23 septembre1542), reg. 24 (14 decembre1546), reg. 37 (30 juillet 1551), reg. 38 (3 novembre 1551), reg. 39 (17 decembre 1551) and (24 decembre 1551), reg. 40 (5 fevrier1552), reg. 41 (3 mars 1552) and (23 mars 1552), reg. 49 (6 juin 1554), reg. 50 (12 septembre1554); B 24, fo. 193. 21 Ibid., B 32, fo. 352v?; B, Tournelle,reg. 20 (15 fevrier1546), reg. 22 (8 juin 1546), reg. 38 (14 octobre1551) and (5 novembre 1551), reg. 40 (5 fevrier1552) and (6 fevrier1552), reg. 43 (8 novembre1552), reg. 44 (31 decembre 1552), reg. 46 (23 aofit1553), reg. 49 (25 mai 1554) and (1 juin 1554), reg. 50 (2 aofit1554), (1 septembre1554) and (12 septembre 1554), reg. 51 (27 novembre 1554) and (6 decembre 1554), reg. 64 (27 aouit1557) and (9 novembre1557), reg. 74 (13 mai 1560). 22 Only the plus amplementinforme indefini is consideredhere. A plus amplementinforme a tempsalso existedand was invoked under differentcircumstances, for other jurisdictions,

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INTERROGATION AND CONFRONTATION 91

The ordinanceof Blois (1498) provided thatif nothinghad been learned throughthe extraordinaryprocedure, the courtcould hear the partiesand admit them to the ordinaryaction. Yet this would not appear to be the Parlement'sintention as civil litigationunder the ordinaryprocedure was practicallynonexistent for heresy. The more likelyexplanation is thatthe tribunalfollowed a modifiedversion of therules set forth in royallegislation. Where criminalfault appeared minimal or virtuallyunprovable, the Parlementprobably preferredto release the defendantsubject to recall should futureinvestigation warrant it. In 1554, for example, the official of the diocese of Castresconducted an informationwhich led to the arrest of six personson the chargeof heresy.They were imprisonedat Toulouse and theirtrial transferred to the Parlement.Following the interrogation, the high court decided to proceed against two of them accordingto the extraordinaryaction. As forthe otherfour, it simplyordered further in- vestigationinto the chargesand, meanwhile,released themon theirown recognizance.23It is doubtfulthat the court meant to pursue the latter suspectsactively. Yet it was unwillingto exoneratethem completely. The courtleft the charges outstandingin the event thatit should obtain new evidence at a futuredate. This interpretationgains support when several other factorsare considered. A number of persons released on bail pending furtherinquiry had already received minor punishments.The court fined one woman fifteenlivres tournoisbefore releasing her under the provision of plus amplementinforme. On two otheroccasions, the courtdecreed thatbooks foundin the possession of the accused be burnedprior to implementation of bail. And in several instances,bail pending furtherinvestigation came only afterappeal to the Parlementfrom the decision of an inferiorjurisdiction.The appeal was denied in each case.24Finally, the Parlementdoes not seem to have undertakennew investigations.None of the persons grantedbail in this manner reappear in the court records.Bail with the plus amplementinforme was itselfa finalaction. The sixteenth-centuryjurist Jean Papon observedthat the release of the accused on bail afterthe extraordinaryaction was equivalentto discharge.25 Yet it was considerablyless than acquittal. The Parlementof Toulouse

and at differenttimes. Esmein, La proc6durecriminelle, 244-245. JohnH. Langbein, Torture and the Law of Proof Europeand Englandin theAncien Re'gime, 52-55. BernardSchnapper, "La repressionpenale au XVIe siecle; l'exemple du Parlementde Bordeaux (1510-1565)," 16-20 and 53. Schnapper,"Parlement de Paris," 260-262. 23 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 49 (28 juin 1554). 24 Ibid., reg. 38 (3 novembre 1551), reg. 43 (30 octobre 1552), reg. 45 (28 fevrier1553), reg. 49 (21 juillet 1554), reg. 51 (19 janvier 1555), reg. 73 (1 mars 1560). 25"Elargissement d'un accuse partoutapres le proces extraordinairefait, encor qu'il soit chargede baillercaution, vaut absolution.. . ." Papon, Recueild'arrests, 1314. Othersixteenth- centuryjurisconsults, such as JeanImbert, La practiquejudiciaire, 660, made similarobservations. Schnapper,"Parlement de Paris," 261-262.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 92 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC demonstrateda remarkableaversion to absolution pure and simple for heresy,26especially if strongsuspicion of guilt remained. Complete ex- onerationwould have providedthe defendant a readydefense in theevent thatnew and incriminatingevidence was discovered.Rather than declare theminnocent, the Parlement chose to releaseon indefinitebail 112 persons, more than 10 percentof the 1074 heresysuspects. Bail, in thissense, was quite differentfrom provisional liberty awaiting or duringtrial.

26Both the medieval inquisitor Nicolas Eymericand his earlymodem commentatorFrancesco Pegna cautioned against absolving and declaringinnocent a heresy defendant.Eymeric, DirectoriumInquisitorum, 475.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VIII. Defense and Torture

T he defensepermitted the accused heretic was restrictedand indirect. Though his responses to the judge duringthe initialinterrogation were basically aimed at exculpation,the formaldefense did not begin untilthe confrontation.He then had the privilegeof replyingmore fullyto the evidence and a limitedopportunity to examine the witnesses producedby the prosecution.However, he did not receivea writtentran- scriptof the testimonyagainst him; the courtonly provided him an oral reading.The rules of royal criminalprocedure further denied the accused assistancefrom legal counselin theorganization and conductof his defense. He could not even summonwitnesses on his own behalf unless the pros- ecutingattorney, the procureur du roi,allowed. In thissense, the prosecution controlledthe defensive proceedings.Prevailing theory approved these limitationsas expeditious.The grantof counsel,it was said, would merely prolongand retardthe proceedings.' A negativefact such as nonculpability, moreover,required no proof.In the event thatthe accused's guiltwas not legallyproven by the witnessesfor the prosecution,any proofon the part of thedefendant was regardedas useless. If,on theother hand, theevidence sufficientlyestablished that a crime had been committedand that the accused was the perpetratorof it, he could only rebut the testimonyby means of the objections to witnesses which he had alleged at the confrontation;or prove thatthe witnesseshad been suborned;or finally,offer certainaffirmative facts which formed his justification.Finally, proof offered in the accused's defense always had to be in supportof some factdistinct fromthat proven by the prosecutionand the defendantcould not produce this proofuntil the prosecutorcompleted presentation of his case.2 Accused hereticsdid at timesdefend themselves adequately. Acceptable challengesto thepersons of thewitnesses, typically based on mortalenmity, were not unknown.A priestand two notariesfrom the diocese of Cahors sustained theirobjections to the witnesseswho testifiedagainst them in 1546. The objections alleged by Blaise Goubert,a residentof Minerve, were equally successful.They enabled him to secure acquittal in 1560. Anotheruseful defense tactic designed to discreditwitnesses for the pros-

1 Commentatorson the ecclesiasticalInquisition, though more willingto permitdefense counsel, questioned its value for the same reasons. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 445-449. 2 Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, 142-148. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 647-649. Langbein, ProsecutingCrime, 234-239. 93

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 94 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC ecution was to argue that they had been subomed. Claude Ales made exactlythis claim duringhis trialin 1552.3 A somewhat differentand less negative defense was the advance of justificativefacts (faits justificatifs). These precise affirmativefacts had to be quite distinctfrom the proofsoffered by the prosecutionand were of two kinds.Some provedthe innocence of theaccused indirectly,but beyond dispute. In 1547, for example, the Parlementof Toulouse charged Bar- thelemyAugier with heresy. He securedhis releaseby producinga sentence of absolution renderedby the Inquisitionof Toulouse for the crime in question. Arnauld Helye made a similarcontention when on trialbefore the Parlementten years later. Other justificativefacts, without rebutting the factsestablished by the prosecution,deprived them of all criminality. Paul de Venetan,a bakerfrom Castres, did not deny thatcertain forbidden songbookspenned in longhand had been found in his home. He merely arguedthat since he could neitherread nor write,he could not have copied them or known of theircontents.4 The courtusually requiredthat justificativefacts be raised duringthe initialinterrogation, much as personal challengesto witnesseshad to be lodgedat themoment of the confrontation. And while theywere the only formalmodes of exculpationafforded the accused, it stillremained that he be allowed to prove them. All of the documentsamassed duringthe trial,the information,interrogation,confrontations and confirmations,were communicatedto the royal prosecutor.If he found thatthe defendanthad pleaded any lawful and admissiblefacts concerning objections or any peremptoryfacts favoring his acquittal,he moved thatthe accused promptlyname the witnessesby whom he intended to establish these facts. The alternativesto the examinationof defense witnesses were two: the use of judicial tortureor finaljudgment. Assuming the procureurdu roi favoredthe presentation of the accused's defense,he so indicatedin writtenconclusions addressed to the judge or judges. The court,which could always disallow a defense hearing,then ruled on the motion. EstienneGeynet, on trialfor heresy before the presidialcourt of Nlmes in 1553, objected that several men who offeredtestimony against him were motivatedby malice. He furtherindicated one or two persons of good standingwho would attestto his observance of the preceptsof the Church. On 9 October, the court assembled and discussed whether to proceedwith final judgment or examinethe personal challenges to witnesses and peremptoryfacts alleged by Geynet. Four members,including the lieutenantprincipal, favored the admission of Geynet's defense. The six

3A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 22 (5 juillet 1546), reg. 43 (9 aouit 1552), reg. 73 (8 mars 1560). The problem of challenges to witnesses is treatedby Bernard Schnapper, "Testes inhabiles:les temoinsreprochables dans l'ancien droitpenal," 575-616. 4A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 26 (3 novembre 1547), reg. 49 (16 juin 1554), reg. 64 (17 septembre1557). On the subject of faitsjustificatifs, see Andre Laingui, La responsabilite penale dans l'anciendroit (XVIe-XVIIIe si&le), 254-350.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions DEFENSE AND TORTURE 95 othersin attendance,including the lieutenantscriminel and particularand the officialfor the archdiocese of Arles, voted for immediate and final judgment.Sentencing was thus fixedfor 12 October. When the tribunaldecided in the affirmativeand wished to admitproof ofthe objectionsand justificativefacts, it required the defendantto indicate at once, usually withinthree days, all the witnessesby whom he intended to sustain his defense. The witnesseswere, in turn,heard and examined ex officioby the courtor its commissioners,at the expense of the accused and withouthis presence.The suspectedheretic could not even participate directlyin his own defense.5 The scope of theinquest ex officionaturally depended upon theobjections and factsalleged by the defendant.The courtissued precise instructions to its deputies regardingthat which they were to determine.A frequent subjectfor verification was theaccused's practiceof confessing and receiving the Eucharistduring the Easterseason.6 Equally commonwas the directive forinquiry into the life and general reputationof the defendant.7On 27 June 1554, the Parlementof Toulouse decided upon an inquest ex officio in the trialof AnthoineteHuyllete plainly delineatingthe mattersto be investigated: Firstthere will be inquiriesconcerning the life, reputation and devotionof the said Huylleteand ifshe frequentlyattends church. If she has had reverencefor the ministers of theChurch. If she receivedoften the Holy Sacrament of theAltar. ThePrior of Clarensac will be heardwhether he administeredthe Holy Sacrament of theAltar to thesaid Huylletethis past Easter and on otheroccasions. AnthoineteGivaudant, Catherine La Fouemereand a certainLe Vis,all residents ofNimes, will also be heardwhether they saw thesaid Huylletereceive the Holy Sacramentof theAltar this past Easter.8 The particularsrequiring confirmation in the defenseof Marie Durante, a native of Pezenas, were much the same: First,if the said Durante,presently imprisoned, lived and lives Catholically, frequentlyattending church, hearing Mass (and) confessing;and ifshe annually performsher Easter duty and otheracts of a good Christian.

I Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, 146-149. Imbert, La practiquejudiciaire, 647. Isambert, Recueilgeneral, 12: 632-633. Puech, La Renaissanced N'mes, 62-65. 6 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 14 (29 octobre1543), reg.40 (10 fevrier1552) and (19 fevrier 1552), reg. 42 (24 mai 1552), reg. 49 (27 juin 1554), reg. 50 (2 aouit1554), (18 aofit 1554), (24 aout 1554) and (12 septembre1554). 7Ibid., reg. 14 (29 octobre 1543), reg. 20 (15 mars 1546), reg. 36 (14 mai 1551), reg. 40 (6 fevrier1552), (10 fevrier1552) and (19 fevrier1552), reg. 42 (24 mai 1552), reg. 44 (31 decembre 1552) reg. 49 (16 juin 1554), (27 juin 1554) and (24 juillet 1554), reg. 50 (2 aofit 1554), (29 aofit1554), (1 septembre1554) and (12 septembre1554), reg. 53 (1 avril 1555), reg. 54 (26 aout 1555), reg. 63 (3 juin 1557). 8 Ibid., reg. 49 (27 juin 1554).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 96 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

If thispresent year she confessedand performedher Easter duty and where. Withrespect to this, the vicars of the parishes for the past six years, the principal religiousof the monasteries,and also the guardians,prelates, sacristans, vicars, preachersand councilmen(consuls) of thetown of Pezenaswill be heard. Ifshe oftenrequested Masses to be said,thus making offerings to theChurch.9 The defensesoffered by thesetwo women were simpleand straightforward. Theywere good, practicing members of the faithful and properinvestigation by the courtwould establishthe proofof this fact. Anotherrecurrent purpose of the inquestex officiowas a determination of the accuracyof the defendant'sobjections to the persons of witnesses. The locksmithJehan Grand du Rie named four reputable residentsof Montpellierwho would attestto the fact that the testimonyagainst him was hatefuland malevolent.The Parlementinstructed its commissioners to question the notaryand threemonks concerningthe . . .disputeand debatewhich the said prisonerclaims to have had withPierre Figniere,his father-in-law,the wife and brother-in-lawof the said Figniere,and M. Pierredu Mas,a priest,all witnesses against him, (and) of the beating committed on theperson of theprisoner . . .10

The high courtinitiated a similarinvestigation in 1552 when Claude Bes- sonnetcontended that the witnesses against him were motivated by "enmity and malice." Several years laterAnthoine Malecare, a notaryof Castres, defended himselfwith the argumentthat "his mortal enemy" had denounced him as a hereticfor the expresspurpose of vengeance.The Parle- ment looked into the matter.1" Other investigationsex officiowere unique in that theydealt with the exact circumstancesof the criminalacts allegedly committedby the defendants.Pierre Peloux, a licencie of Gimont,did not dispute the claim that he had spoken with BarthelemyRomanes, a Franciscanmonk who had spenttime in Geneva. He furtheradmitted that he had accepted from Romanesa book whichhe burnedshortly thereafter because of thereligious errorscontained in it. He named threewitnesses to the innocentnature of his conversationwith Romanes and to the factthat he had burned the book upon learningof its contents.Accordingly, the Parlementassigned deputies to examine these individuals.12 The courtadded the officialreport of the inquest ex officioto the other trialrecords and again transmittedthe dossierto the procureurdu roi. His recommendationsor conclusions could be definitiveand demand final judgment;or he could issue provisionalconclusions, calling for continuation

I Ibid., reg. 50 (18 aofit1554). 0 Ibid., reg. 40 (10 fevrier1552). " Ibid., reg. 42 (24 mai 1552), reg. 54 (26 aout 1555). 12 Ibid., reg. 46 (30 octobre 1553).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions DEFENSE AND TORTURE 97 of process and application of torture.The examinationof the accused under torturewas possible in the adjudicationof serious crimes-heresy, witchcraft,treason, homicide, theft, forgery and the like-whose punishment involved "blood sanctions," death or maiming.The Roman-canon standardof proofsufficient for conviction of heinous crimesrequired either two wholly unimpeachable eyewitnessesor the defendant's voluntary confessionbefore the judge. Anythingless did not constitutefull proof. Circumstantialevidence (indicia) was inadequate forconviction and con- demnationto capital punishment,but under certaincircumstances it did sufficefor authorizationto torture.Coercion, in this sense, secured the vital confession.The chiefsafeguard against irresponsibleuse of torture was the requirementof half proof.A suspect could not be torturedunless therewas eitherone eyewitness,or grave incriminatingevidence. Though therewas considerablediscussion among juristsregarding the exact con- stitutionof thehalf proof, it did set limitsfor invocation of judicialtorture."3 Royal ordinancesand internalregulations of the Parlementprovided a frameworkfor the administrationof tortureat Toulouse. The decision was to be carriedout promptly,the same day or the next,unless therewas an appeal whichrequired prior adjudication. The judge himselfpresided over the session while a notarykept a writtenrecord and two honorable men, usually lawyers,assisted. The procureurdu roi probablyattended and, of course, those skilled in the use of the instrumentswere there. Torture could neverkill or mutilatethe defendant.The imprudentmagistrate who failedto observe thisprinciple was liable to strictpunishment. The Parle- ment proscribedcertain barbarous procedures such as the strappado, hangingthe victim by his armsfrom a pulleyon the ceiling.Heavy weights were attachedto his feet;he was slowly raised and suddenly allowed to fall with a jerk. The effectwas to distendand perhaps dislocatethe arms and legs. The Parlementcould not, however, preventsubalternate jurisdictions,the seneschalsies,from employing the strappado and the actual methodsof torturevaried fromone localityto another.The most common appear to have been formsof the boot, the rack, or water torture.And once completed,torture could not be reapplied withoutsubstantial new evidence or a more profoundunderstanding of the affair.14 Whateverthe methodsand restrictionsplaced upon them,the tribunals

1 Damhouder, Practique,fo. 35-36 and 49-49v?. Piero Fiorelli,La torturagiudiziaria nel dirittocomune, 1: 243-248 and 2: 1-39. Langbein,Torture, 3-4 and 13-16. Schnapper,"Parle- mentde Bordeaux,"20-27. Schnapper,"Parlement de Paris," 260-266. Schnapper,"Testes inhabiles," 577 and 589-606. Viala, Parlementde Toulouse, 1: 413-414. Mirjan Damaska, "The Death of Legal Torture,"860-884 oughtto be read in conjunctionwith John H. Langbein's study,Torture and theLaw ofProof. 14 Damhouder,Practique, fo. 42-44v?. Dupont-Ferrier,Officiers-royaux, 395-397. Esmein,La procidurecriminelle, 148-149. Fiorelli,La tortura,2: 143-154. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 651-652 and 684-685. Isambert,Recueil ge'n6ral, 11: 365-366 and 12: 633-634. Langbein, ProsecutingCrime, 239-241. Langbein, Torture,13-16. Viala, Parlementde Toulouse, 1: 414-415.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 98 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC of Languedoc could and did use torturein instancesof heresy.The records of the criminalchamber of the Parlementindicate that at least twenty- eightheresy suspects were torturedprior to 1560, seventeenof themduring the course of theirtrial, the othereleven afterthey had been condemned. The ordinaryuse of tortureprior to finalsentencing was knownas question preparatoire;torture before the executionof capital sentence was called questionprealable. The courttortured these convictedheretics to learn the names of theiraccomplices15 and, in one case, to ascertainwhether the condemnedhad been sent fromGeneva to spread religiouserror. Claude Dimenche's revelationof a single accomplice is the sole verifiedsuccess attributableto the technique.16 The questionsput to defendantswho were torturedas an ordinarypart of theirtrial were not meant to differgreatly from those posed in the originalinterrogation. Suggestive questioning served no good purpose.The thoroughjudge desired detailed responses which only the perpetratorof the crime could know. He sought to elicit additional reliable evidence. And if the accused offereda confession,the preciseinformation which he providedconfirmed it. The uninformedconfession possessed littlevalue.'7 The Parlementthus directedits questionsat the particularsof the offense when it drew up a list for the examinationunder tortureof Arnauld Esculierand Pierred'Alemans: First,they will be interrogatedas to wherethey originally came from;where theyhave livedfor the past five years; whom they have knownduring that time; and whatoccupation (metier et office)they pursue. If duringthat time they resided at Montech(and) how long;and withwhom did theyassociate? How longhave d'Alemans and Esculier, prisoners, known each other and where did theiracquaintance originate? If theyknow M. PierreBorrelle, M. Jehandel Bose,a priest,and Anthoinede Puy;for how long;and wheredid theiracquaintance originate? How longhave theyassociated and where? Wherewere they this past Christmas, especially Christmas day?

15The practiceof torturingconvicted heretics to discovertheir accomplices seems to have developed graduallyduring the firsthalf of thesixteenth century in France.Fiorelli, La tortura, 1: 111-113. Langbein,Torture, 16. 16 A.D.H.G., B 92 1 fo. 87; B, Toumelle,reg. 13 (10 avril 1543), reg. 18 (7 septembre1545), reg. 21 (14 avril 1546), reg. 24 (16 novembre 1546) and (5 fevrier1547), reg. 26 (9 aouit 1547), (23 septembre1547) and (9 novembre 1547), reg. 27 (16 janvier 1548), (27 janvier 1548) and (3 mars 1548), reg. 28 (18 juillet1548), reg. 31 (4 juillet1549) and (5 juillet1549), reg. 37 (14 aout 1551) and (17 aofit 1551), reg. 38 (25 septembre1551), reg. 40 (8 fevrier 1552), reg. 50 (23 aou't 1554), (29 aout 1554), (6 septembre1554), (12 octobre 1554), (13 octobre1554), (16 octobre1554) and (26 octobre1554), reg. 63 (29 mai 1557), (3 juin 1557) and (5 juin 1557). Langbein,Torture, 16-17. Schnapper,"Parlement de Paris," 262-264. 17 Fiorelli,La tortura,2: 66-67. Langbein, Torture,5 and 15.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions DEFENSE AND TORTURE 99

If,on themorning of Christmas day around seven o'clock, d'Alemans, Esculier, Borelleand a boyfrom Pomarez named Anthoine would have been in theoutskirts (faubourgs)of thetown; and is thiswhere they lived? If,being near the cross of Saint-Jacquesby theravine at Montechand looking at the cross,they saw JehanFontrie coming from town; and if theymade him pass behindso thathe couldnot hear the conversation between them? Wheredid theysup theevening of Christmas? If theyassembled after supper; who called themtogether; and wheredid theygo? If theymet Borrelle, del Bose and de Puy;and if theywent through the town singing,"Reveillez vous, reveillez;" and did d'Alemans and Esulier bring their swords? If,going through the townof Montech,they rolled two smallbarrels which werein thetown square? Ifthey rolled one ofthe barrels as faras thetown hopital where there is a statue of MaryMagdalene? If,while they sang "Reveillez vous, reveillez" in frontof thehouse belonging to thetinker Pierre Giraud, Esculier struck the statue several times with his sword, especiallyon thenose; and ifthey cut the arm which held the mite box? If thatnight they went to theoutskirts of Montechto thecross and oratoryof Saint-Roch;and ifthey took the saint's statue and threwit intoa well? If,afterwards, they also wentto thecross and oratoryof Saint-Jacques near the ravine;and ifthey took the cross and threwit intothe ravine? If,the same night about two hours after midnight, they went to thechurch of Notre-Damede La Falhadeand circledit threetimes; and forwhat purpose? And whichof themcarried a batonin his hands? If,upon leavingthe churchof Notre-Damede La Falhade,they went to the squarewhich is on theroad comingfrom the church of Saint-Blaiseand where thereis a memorialto thedeceased M. AnthoinePerignon; on it thereis a statue ofthe "Ecce Homo" and anotherof OurLady and SaintJoseph fleeing into Egypt; and ifthey threw stones at thesestatues and brokethem? If thatnight they knocked down the statueof Our Lady whichwas on the comerof thehouse belonging to JehanFlonchard near the Porte de la Galle?If theystruck the statue with the baton, causing it to fall? Ifthat night they went down the rue Torte, passing before the homes of Anthoine Sorbiand M. BemardChabbre?18 The courthad a detailed account of the various iconoclasticincidents and sought additional explanationand confirmationfrom d'Alemans and Es-

18 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 27 (16 janvier 1548).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 100 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC culier. The pair evidentlybroke under torture,for less than two weeks laterthey were condemned to death.19 A theoreticalprecaution favoring the accused was the stipulationthat he freelyratify his confessiona day or so afterthe ordeal. No one could be condemned because of a confessionmade under tortureif he did not persistin thatconfession for a sufficientperiod of timethereafter. Voluntary repetitionvalidated it. If the accused refusedto adhere to his confession and actually retractedit, the court could not simply torturehim anew. The ordinanceof Blois (1498) specifiedthat torture could not be reapplied withoutsubstantial new evidence. The extentto which the tribunalscom- plied with these limitationsis debatable. The definitionsof new evidence and a single session of torturewere apparentlystretched upon occasion. Even the requirementfor voluntary ratification of confessionwas altered. The juristJean Imbert reports that because many persons would totally deny whateverthey confessed under torture,it became customaryto condemn upon the confessionmade under tortureif it conformedgenerally to the contentsof the information.20 Despite the precedingremarks, the severityand frequencyof torturein heresy trialsshould not be overestimated.The Parlementdistinguished degrees of torturewhich were less than full application. The court was sometimescontent to brandishthe instrumentsand therebyintimidate the accused.The GrandsJours held at Beziersin 1550 instructedthat Barthelemy Philibertbe tortured"moderately" in order to learn the truthabout the heresyattributed to him.21Furthermore, magistrates do not appear to have utilizedtorture as a means to secure a convictionmore serious than would have been otherwisepossible. BernardManuel and AnthoinePerrin suc- cessfullymaintained their innocence when examined under tortureand were subsequentlyfreed on theirown recognizance.The finalsentence is known for thirteenindividuals subjected to tortureduring the course of theirtrial. Only six perished at the stake; the other seven were fined, banished or imprisoned.Torture did not always produce full proof of heresyand here the courtinvoked milderpunishment.22

Ibid., reg. 27 (27 janvier 1548). 20 Damhouder,Practique, fo. 44-44. Dupont-Ferrier,Officiers royaux, 398. Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, 99-100 and 150. Esmein,Continental Criminal Procedure, 113-114. Fiorelli, La tortura,2: 117-124. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 654-657. Isambert,Recueil general, 11: 366. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime, 241. Langbein, Torture,15-16. 21 A.D.H.G., B 92 1, fo. 87; B, Tournelle,reg. 31 (4 juillet 1549) and (5 juillet 1549), reg. 50 (23 aout 1554) and (29 aofit1554). Schnapper,"Parlement de Paris," 262-264. 22 Pertinentto the matterof not using tortureas a means to obtain a convictionmore seriousthan otherwisepossible are the remarksof Damaska, "The Death of Legal Torture," 865-869. A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 21 (14 avril 1546), reg. 24 (5 fevrier1547), reg. 27 (27 juin 1548), reg. 38 (25 septembre1551), reg. 40 (8 fevrier1552), reg. 50 (6 septembre 1554), (12 octobre 1554) and (26 octobre 1554), reg. 63 (3 juin 1557) and (5 juin 1557). AlfredSoman, "Les proces de sorcellerieau Parlementde Paris (1565-1640)," 804-805 and "The Parlementof Paris and the Great WitchHunt (1565-1640)," 40-42 touches upon the moderateand scrupulousapplication of tortureby the Parlementof Paris.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions DEFENSE AND TORTURE 101

The twenty-eightaccused hereticswho sufferedtorture represent ap- proximately3 percentof the 951 individualscharged with heresyin Lan- guedoc between 1540 (when the Parlementbecame directlyresponsible forprosecution) and 1560. The rate may be slightlyundervalued, but not abnormallyso. Even with allowances formissing documentation, it com- pares favorablywith estimatesfor parlementselsewhere in France. The Parlementof Bordeaux,which administered a smallergeographic area than its sisterinstitution at Toulouse and whose archivesare farless complete, torturedeleven (2 percent)of 477 suspected hereticsbetween 1541 and 1559.23 The proportionwas somewhat higherfor the Parlementof Paris. Between 1540 and 1546, it examined 6.5 percentof the accused heretics (24 of 370 persons) under torture.24The infamouschambre ardente cited 557 heresysuspects at Paris between May 1547 and March 1550. Fifty- fiveof them (10 percent)suffered torture.25 Though the rates forthe applicationof torturein heresycases vary a good deal, runningas low as 2 percentand as high as 10 percent,they are uniformlylower than the proportionsfor other serious crimes. A studyby BernardSchnapper of criminaljustice rendered by the Parle- mentof Paris concentrateson two annual sessions, 1535-1536 and 1545- 1546. His findingson the applicationof torturefor major criminaloffenses confirmthe low incidence in heresycases, especially when compared to othercrimes. Number Number Percent Offense Accused Tortured Tortured26

Homicide 227 48 21% Theft 176 40 23% Forgery 84 25 30% Heresy 184 12 7% All Crimes 903 152 17% The frequencyof torturefor heresy is strikinglylower than for other serious crimesas well as all crimestaken together. Schnapper's explanationfor the relativerarity of torturein heresyproceedings addresses itselfto the confessionwhich torturewas designed to elicit.A good numberof accused heretics,he argues,voluntarily confessed theirreformed faith, thus obviatingthe need to coerceit. While the theory cannotbe discountedin its entirety,the abundant evidence of confession requiredfor its supportis absent. Open and freedeclarations of faithby reformedChristians are insufficientto account forthe lesser frequencyof

23 The arre^tsare published in Patry,Debuts de la reforme. 24 PierreImbart de La Tour, Les originesde la reforme4, Calvin et l'institutionchretienne, ed. JacquesChevalier, 370. 25 The arretsare published in Weiss, La chambreardente. 26 Schnapper,"Parlement de Paris," 258-265.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 102 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC torturein the trialof heresyas opposed to otherheinous crimes.Additional factorsdeserve consideration. The crimeof heresytended to be more communaland less specificthan homicide,theft and forgery.The latteroffenses were typicallycommitted by one individualor at most a small, closed and tight-knitgroup of con- spirators.The perpetratoracted surreptitiouslyand avoided recognition. The solitaryand furtivecharacter of homicide,theft and forgeryleft few eyewitnessesand increased the likelihoodthat the courtwould resortto torturein the absence of full proof. Heresy was a more social activity. Believersfrequently assembled for religious purposes-prayer, Bible study and preaching-and proselytizingefforts, even when guarded, entailed contactwith persons outside the group and incriminatingexplanations of belief. Greateropportunity existed for personal testimonyagainst heresy suspectsand therebydiminished the necessityfor judicial torture. A second and relatedconsideration is thatthe criminalacts associatedwith homicide, theftand forgerylimited and circumscribedthe choice and number of suspects. The courts sought to identifypersons who mightbe held responsiblefor singular and precisedeeds. Accusationswere thus restricted to a small group which met specificrequirements. Once arrested and charged,however, the defendantcould expect his trialto move through all proceduralphases to a definitiveconclusion, usually conviction.27 Heresy depended less on the commissionof a particularact. It was intellectual error28 and the courtstended to investigate,summon and interrogatesus- pects on the basis of evidence less compelling and rigorousthan that requiredfor the prosecutionof otherserious crimes.As a result,the trials of many accused hereticsnever reached the point of torture,having failed to go beyond the initialstages of judicial process.Either the evidence was insufficientto sustainthe chargeor the offenseproved minor and deserved but mild punishment. Following the administrationof torture,or if the conclusions of the royal prosecutorhad been definitiveat the outset, the judge or judges examinedin privatethe trialdocuments. Usually, thoughnot always, the clerkof the courtrecorded the opinions of the participantsin the delib- eration.The courtoccasionally questioned the accused one finaltime before passing judgment.As in the precedingphases of the trial,the defendant was denied benefitof counsel. The deliberationupon finaljudgment could occur in several ways. When a single magistratepresided, an advisory council of impartialpracticioners assisted. The judge noted the various opinions but did not considerthem binding upon his decision. Tribunals such as the Inquisition,Parlement and presidials possessed a panel of

27Examination and comparisonof the statisticspresented by Schnapperregarding conviction and punishmentfor homicide, theft and heresylend supportto this argument,Ibid., 273- 277 and 282. 28 Carena, Tractatus,43-46. Rousseaud de La Combe, Jurisprudencecanonique, 2eme partie, 26-27.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions DEFENSE AND TORTURE 103 judges and normallydecided by vote of the majority.The magistrates could give theiropinions orallyor by writtenballot.29 The recordeddeliberation of the presidial court of Nimes in the final sentencingof EstienneGeynet on 12 October 1553 illustratesthe process. Jehan Robert,the lieutenantcriminel, declared the defendantguilty of heresyand called forstrangulation followed by burning.In addition,Gey- net's goods and propertywould be confiscatedin the name of the king. Jehandu Port,official of the diocese of Arles,agreed with the verdictbut stronglyprotested the invocationof the death sentence. JehanAlbenas, thelieutenant principal, objected to finalsentencing at thistime. He wished to entertainGeynet's defense and urged an inquest ex officiointo the personal objectionsto witnesses and justificativefacts raised by Geynet. JehanRochemaure, the lieutenantparticulier, also protestedfinal sentencing. He demanded the application of torturefor discoveryof Geynet's accomplices.A certainM. Richiercalled for the amende honorable, fustigation,piercing of thetongue, perpetual banishment from the Seneschalsy of Nimes-Beaucaire,and confiscationof Geynet'sgoods and propertywith the exceptionof one-thirdof the assets which would be reservedfor the defendant'schildren. M. Brueis asked for the amende honorable and a fineof twenty-fivelivres. The remainingsix opinionsechoed or onlyslightly modifiedthose alreadyexpressed. Those who urged tortureor an inquest ex officiowere in theminority. Most favoredfinal judgment and pronounced Geynetguilty. Yet therewas no consensus regardingsentence. The lieutenantcriminel invited a second round of opinionsand themajority rallied to the view originallyexpressed by M. Richier,except forthe piercingof the tongue. Thus Geynet was sentenced to the amende honorable, fustigation,perpetual banishment from the Seneschalsyof Nimes-Beaucaire, and confiscationof his goods and propertywith the exemptionof one- thirdfor his children.30 The judge theoreticallycommunicated the finalsentence to the prisoner in the council session or alone in the courtroom. Yet Imbertreports that thisceremony was not uniformlyfollowed. The courtsometimes omitted the formalityand informedthe prisonerof its decision throughthe clerk of the court.Sentence was executed the same day, unless the defendant appealed.3" The appellate process was an accessible recourse,especially in heresycases which could involve both ecclesiasticaland secular jurisdictions.

29 Dupont-Ferrier,Officiers royaux, 400. Esmein, La procedurecriminelle, 150-151. Imbert, La practiquejudiciaire, 685-686. Isambert,Recueil general, 11: 366 and 12: 633. Langbein, ProsecutingCrime, 242. 30 Puech, La Renaissancea' Nimes,66-70. 31 Esmein,La procedurecriminelle, 151-152. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 685. Isambert, Recueilgeneral, 11: 366-367.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions IX. Appeals A ppealsagainst judgments rendered in heresyprosecutions differed slightlyfrom the normalcriminal appellate process of sixteenth- centuryFrance. The participationof both secularand ecclesiastical courtsin the crime'sadjudication partially accounts for the variation.The rolesassigned to each jurisdictionwere not always well-definedand precise; and the crownactually encouraged appeals fromecclesiastical justice. Ap- pellate reviewby royaltribunals of decisionsmade in religiouscourts was yet anotherway by which the monarchyasserted control over a Gallican Church.A second distinctivefeature of heresyappeals was a consequence of the grave concernwhich the offenseelicited. It was equivalent to lese majesty and thus justiciable in firstinstance by the higher courts. The procedureleft only the parlementas a superiortribunal with which the defendantcould lodge an appeal. When the parlementitself participated in the case or pronouncedfinal judgment recourse was effectivelyclosed. The appeal in criminalcauses, whetherdirected against an interlocutory decisionto tortureor finaljudgment, had to be made immediately(illico). The only exceptionoccurred when lettresde relief,obtained from the royal chancellery,prolonged the intervaland permittedan appeal to be lodged threeor even six monthslater. Aid of counsel does not appear to have been prohibitedcompletely in actionson appeal, thoughit was specifically disallowed in appeals of sentencesinvolving afflictive punishment or torture. Furthermore,the absence of defense counsel in the original trial hampered the defendant'sability to identifyand propose those matters whichwould formthe basis ofhis appeal. The accused directedthe appellate motion to the court immediatelysuperior in the judicial hierarchy,the chain of appeals endingwith the parlement.It was possible upon occasion to pass over the intermediatejurisdictions and appeal directly,omissio medio,to a superiortribunal.' The Edictof Cremieuin 1536, conformingto a usage alreadyestablished, permittedthe appeal omissiomedio forcertain criminal causes. Appellants fromsentences of corporalpunishment were authorizedto proceeddirectly to the parlement.The ordinanceof Villers-Cotterets(1539) went further by providingthat all appeals in criminalcauses be taken "immediately and withoutintermediary step" to the parlement.2The procedure was

1 Doucet, Institutions,2: 532-533. Esmein, La procedurecriminelle, 245-247. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 456-459, 467-468 and 476-477. Langbein,Prosecuting Crime, 242-243. 2 Doucet, Institutions,2: 538. Esmein, La procedurecriminelle, 153-154. Isambert,Recueil general,12: 508-508 and 633-634. 104

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions APPEALS 105 soon deemed beyond the limits of fairness.A royal declaration of 20 November1541, addressedto theParlement of Paris,restricted the omissio medio provisionto appeals from . . .sentencesand judgmentsof tortureor othercorporal punishments such as civilor natural death, fustigation, mutilation of members, perpetual or temporary banishment,condemnation to publicworks or services,amende honorable, and no others.3 Because judgmentsentailing these penalties were commonlyhanded down in instancesof heresy,those persons accused and convictedcontinued to enjoy the privilegeof appeal omissio medio. Even withoutthe omissiomedio provision,appeals in heresyproceedings were normallyreviewed before the parlement.A royaledict of November 1549 stipulatedthat the parlementadjudicate appeals fromsentences rendered by both royaland ecclesiasticaljudges againstaccused heretics.The arrangementprincipally affected those individuals who appealed therulings of ecclesiasticaljustice. It regulatedthe appellate process for heresy de- fendantswhose offenseinvolved no more than a common misdemeanor (delit commun). Appeals of decisions handed down by the courtsof the seneschal or bailiff,empowered to tryin firstinstance serious cases (cas privilegies),would have gone to theparlement in any event.The parlement was the next higher jurisdictionin the judicial hierarchy.Finally, it is difficultto envisage a heresy appeal to the parlementfrom a subaltern secularjurisdiction prior to the edictof 1549. Under the termsof the Edict of Amboise,April 1541, the parlementpronounced final sentence for persons convictedof heresyin the courtsof the seneschal or bailiffand the high courtpresumably reviewed the principalelements of the case at that time. Indeed, the only heresyappeals which came beforethe Parlement of Toulouse priorto 1549 originatedwith defendants who had been tried by the Inquisitionor officialities.4 Personstried for heresy under municipal justice could also appeal directly to the parlement.An edict of 1554 confirmedthe power of the capitouls of Toulouse to judge certaincriminal matters including heresy and specified that appeals of theirdecisions would revertimmediately and directlyto the Parlementof Toulouse. The edictapparently affirmed an existentprac- tice for already in May 1552 Claude Bessonnet appealed his conviction forheresy by the capitoulsto the Parlementof Toulouse. Four university studentstook similar action after the capitouls judged themguilty of heresy in 1555. And duringthe same year,Jehan and Saux Azemarand Barthelemy

3 Isambert,Recueil general, 12: 760. 4A.D.H.G., B 31, fo. 36v?; B 32, fo. 20v?; B 92 j, fo. 203; B 1902, fo. 206v?-207v?; B, Toumelle, reg. 6 (12 decembre 1538), reg. 8 (10 avril 1540) and (21 avril 1540), reg. 9 (30 juin 1541), reg. 10 (7 janvier 1542), reg. 14 (19 juin 1543), reg. 16 (1 avril 1545), reg. 21 (30 avril 1546), reg. 25 (10 mars 1547) and (6 mai 1547), reg. 26 (9 aofit 1547), reg. 27 (3 mars 1548), reg. 30 (29 mars 1549). Guenois, Conferencedes ordonnances,99. Isambert, Recueilgeneral, 13: 137.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 106 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Vigniesappealed theircondemnation for heresy by the Toulousan coun- cillorsto the Parlement.5 The Parlementof Toulouse frequentlyentertained appeals frompersons tried for heresy before ecclesiasticaltribunals. Appellants sought relief fromthe decisions of the Inquisitionas well as the various officialitiesof Languedoc. They could avail themselvesof the traditionalappel comme d'abus.The motion,which was always addressed to the parlement,alleged thatthe ecclesiastical magistrate had trespassedupon thesecular jurisdiction or had acted contraryto canon law or royal statutes.Moreover, royal decrees such as that of November 1549 specificallydirected that appeals fromthe Inquisitionor officialityin heresycases be heard by the parlement ratherthan a superior ecclesiasticalcourt.6 A merchantof Montauban named Mabrun appealed to the Parlementof Toulouse in June1541. He claimedan abuse ofjustice in his condemnationby theInquisition. Ramond Pelissier,a residentof Fonsorbes, also appealed commed'abus when seeking relieffrom a judgmentrendered against him by the inquisitoreight years later.A certainRosscan appealed to the Parlementafter the inquisitorand officialof the diocese of Carcassonne declared him guiltyof heresy in 1552. Three years afterwards,the priestAnthoine Durand petitionedthe Parlementto reviewhis trialby the officialof the diocese of Cahors. And in 1560, Laurens de Lodis, a prebendaryof the cathedralat Tarbes,lodged an appeal comme d'abus againstthe inquisitorand vicar of the bishop of Tarbes. He argued that they had illegally sequestered his goods and property.7 Defendantssometimes found it necessaryto secure lettresd'appel from the royal chancelleryattached to the parlementor fromthe Holy See. Approximatelyone-half of theletters issued by thechancellery of Toulouse dealt with mattersof appeal. Prolongationof the time-limitfor appeal (reliefd'appel) was a common subject. An appeal normallyhad to be raised immediately(illico) afterpronouncement of the rulingin question. Lettresde relieffrom the chancellery,however, could authorizea delay, usuallyup to threemonths for the parlement.The reasonsincluded illness, absenceof pertinent materials, and difficultyof communications. The notary Fransois Dampton secured lettresde reliefin the matterof his appeal comme d'abus against the inquisitorof Carcassonne in 1551. During the nextyear, Benoist Pascal resortedto similaraction when appealing a judgmentof the consularcourt (cour commune) of Le Puy. Guillaume Ferrand, a priest,obtained lettresde reliefin 1559 permittinga delayed appeal

'A.D.H.G., B 1905, fo. 62; B, Toumelle, reg. 42 (24 mai 1552), reg. 52 (9 fevrier1555), reg. 54 (12 juillet 1555). 6 Doucet, Institutions,2: 786. Guenois, Conferencedes ordonnances,99. Isambert,Recueil general, 13: 137. Pithou, Libertezde liglise, 19. Chapter IV, The Royal Tribunals,offers a more detailed treatmentof the appel commed'abus. 7A.D.H.G., B 92 j, fo. 203; B, Toumelle, reg. 9 (30 juin 1541), reg. 30 (29 mars 1549), reg. 43 (31 octobre 1552), reg. 56 (20 novembre 1555), reg. 73 (1 mars 1560).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions APPEALS 107 comme d'abus against the inquisitorof Toulouse and the vicar of the bishop of Mirepoix.8 Under certaincircumstances, lettres de reliefallowing a delay of appeal in instancesof heresycould originatewith Apostolic officials. The inquisitor EspritRotier arrested and charged with heresy Anthoine Beauvoysin, a priestof the archdioceseof Toulouse. In an apparentjurisdictional dispute, Beauvoysin and JacquesSecondat, vicar general forthe archdiocese,appealed the inquisitor'saction to the Parlement.This occurredin January 1554. The courtinstructed that Beauvoysin be triedby a panel of judges- the inquisitor,the vicar general of the archdiocese,and two of its own clerical counsellors (conseillers-clercs),Raymond Samyn and Raymond Bonail. The Parlement empowered the two counsellors to assist in all interlocutorydecisions as well as finaljudgment. Evidently the case did not reach a conclusionsatisfactory to Beauvoysinfor in 1556 he returned to the Parlementwith a rescriptobtained frompapal representatives.The documentsought a continuanceof the time-limitfor appeal (reliefd'appel). The courtreceived the request favorably and permitteda groupof delegated ecclesiasticaljudges to hear the appeal.9 It shouldbe notedthat appellate issues were not limited to finaljudgment. Various interlocutorymatters such as application of tortureand imprisonmentfor those awaiting or on trialwere also susceptibleto challenge. BarthelemyAndre, a scribe(escripvan) from Espaly near Le Puy, appealed to the Parlementof Toulouse in 1554. He objected to a rulingfor the use of torturehanded down by the inquisitorof Carcassonne. Appeals of interlocutorydecisions had a suspensive effectupon the trial until the specificissue raised in the appellate motioncould be resolved.'0 The appellateprocedure was, in general,lengthy, difficult and veryoften a failure.The appeal of Ramond de Tirevieilleprovides some indication of thevarious elements which could workagainst the success of the motion. The defendant,a licencie fromCastres, had originallybeen arrestedand triedfor heresyby Georges du Gabre, the officialand vicar general for the diocese of Castres. Afterfour and one-half monthsin detention,de Tirevieillewas dismissedand released by directionof du Gabre. Yet Pierre Michaelis, procureurfiscal for the bishop of Castres, decided to pursue the matterfurther. He reopened litigation,ordered the conduct of a new informationand evidentlypetitioned the metropolitancourt at Bourges which agreed to review the case.'1 De Tirevieille,in turn,appealed Mi-

8 Ibid., B, Toumelle, reg. 62 (18 fevrier1557), reg. 66 (20 septembre1558), reg. 71 (23 septembre1559). Viala, Parlementde Toulouse,1: 369 and 440-442. 9 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle,reg. 59 (29 juillet1556); 1 G 410, Extraitdes registresdu Parlement, le 26 et le 31 janvier1553 (o.s.), Lettrede JacquesSecondat, le 27 janvier1553 (o.s.). Regarding the delay of appeal, cf. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 471-472. 10A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 50 (29 octobre1554). Esmein,La procedure criminelle,153- 154. Viala, Parlementde Toulouse,1: 432-443. 11For additional informationconcerning the metropolitanof Bourges,consult: Louis de Lacger,"La primatieet le pouvoirmetropolitain de l'archeveque de Bourgesau XIIIe siecle,"

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 108 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC chaelis's continuedprosecution to a mixed ecclesiasticalcommission. This was in 1533. Estienne Sacaley and Jehan Barthelemy,both clerics and membersof the Parlement,sat on the commission.Jehan de Landes, the lieutenant-inquisitorat Toulouse, may also have been a member. De Tirevieille'sfirst objective was obtainmentof the recordsfrom his initialtrial by du Gabre, the officialof Castres who had seen fitto dis- continueprocess. Michaelis,the procureurfiscal, resisted the attempt,but de Tirevieillefinally procured a courtorder for the transfer of thedocuments to Toulouse. Michaelisbrought the trial transcript from Castres to Toulouse in January1535 and then submitteda declarationof expenses which he had incurred.The expendituresamounted to sixty-fivelivres, fifteen sols tournois.The total included thirtylivres paid to have a duplicate copy made of the 267 foliopages of trialdocuments. Another thirty-five livres went to Michaelis and JehanNouvelli, a substitutesecretary of the bishop of Castres,for transporting the documentspersonally to Toulouse. They were paid for ten days: two days journeyon horseback fromCastres to Toulouse, six days at Toulouse, and a two day returntrip to Castres.The procurationsempowering Michaelis and Nouvelli to representthe official and vicar general for the diocese of Castres accounted for an additional ten sols and, finally,five sols toumois were paid to the clerk of Jehan Barthelemy,a counsellorof the Parlement,for receipt of the documents. De Tirevieillewas legally liable for these expenses and he protested vigorouslyto the counsellorsBarthelemy and Sacaley. He claimed that Michaelis and Nouvelli had failed to execute theircharge properly.The documentswhich they brought to Toulouse did not constitutethe complete trialrecord. Indeed, those which best demonstratedhis innocence were conspicuouslyabsent. De Tirevieillethought the errordeliberate and at- tributedit to personalenmity and maliceon thepart of Michaelis,Nouvelli, Jehande Paillards,chancellor of thebishop of Castres,and JehanBalarandi, procureurdes causes pies at Castres. They resented,in particular,the fact that de Tirevieillehad revealed certainfinancial abuses in theiradmin- istrationof the diocese. The defendantalso challengedthe expenditureslisted by Michaelis and Nouvelli. The ten days which they claimed were necessaryto bringthe trialrecords to Toulouse and returnto Castres were wholly unjustified. The distance between the two towns was only some ten leagues (about 72 kilometerson the presentmodern road) and hardlyrequired two full days to traverse.The six days spent at Toulouse were equally unnecessary and unwarranted.Furthermore, it was outrageousthat Michaelis should demand two livrestournois per diem as if he were a doctorand Nouvelli thirtysols tournoisas if he were a licencie.Michaelis was in truthonly a bachelierand Nouvelli a merenotary. Finally, the moneyspent fora copy

43-65 and 269-330; and "La primatied'Aquitaine du VIIIe au XIVe sieles," 29-50; Alfred Leroux,"La primatiede Bourges," 141-154; G. Pariset,"L'etablissement de la primatiede Bourges," 145-148 and 289-328.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions APPEALS 109 of the trial documents was squandered; they should have broughtthe originals. Michaelis issued a formalwritten response to these contentions.It was briefand succinct.He and Nouvelli had traveledto Toulouse to insure the properand safe deliveryof the records.The council of the bishop of Castres had specificallyentrusted the task to them. The remuneration which he received fortransport of the transcriptwas entirelyin keeping withthe dignity and importanceof his office.And ifthe documents received at Toulouse were incomplete,the blame did not restwith him. Anthoine Portalis,the notary and clerk at the original trial,was now deceased. Estienne Vinquevieille,the substituteand successor to Portalis,was no- toriouslyfavorable to de Tirevieille.Vinquevieille was responsiblefor the transcriptand if there were discrepancies,de Tirevieilleshould address his queries to this latternotary. Michaelis concluded with a refusal to toleratefurther invective from the defendantagainst himselfand other membersof the diocesan administration.They were respectablemen (gens de bien) and had been neitheraccused nor charged with any crime. De Tirevieilleanswered Michaelis in a second memorandumwhich he sentto Sacaley and Barthelemy.He rejectedMichaelis's argumentthat the council of the bishop of Castres had charged him and Nouvelli with the duty of bringingthe trialtranscript to Toulouse. And even if the council had done so, it had clearlyerred. De Tirevieillealso persistedin his al- legationsthat certain portions of the documentationwere missingand that personalenmity for the defendantmotivated Michaelis in thisobstruction of justice. What tortuousroute de Tirevieille'sappeal may have subse- quentlytaken is not known, thoughto all appearances it was protracted. Briefreference to his convictionfor "Lutheranism" and executionof sentence does not occur until February1540.12 The affairevidences many of the difficultiesinherent in an appellate motion.In the firstplace, it could be expensive.Although he was a licencie, de Tirevieillefound the sixty-fivelivres, fifteen sols toumois fortransfer of the trialrecords exorbitant and probablyhad difficultypaying the sum. Second, the process was prolonged. De Tirevieille'sappeal consumed at least fiveyears. Furthermore,the tribunalfrom which the defendantap- pealed could be expectedto defendits decision withsome vehemence,as did Michaelis. Associated with this is the normal expectationthat the magistratesand officersof the lower courtwould command more respect than the appellant. Michaelis's referenceto himselfand his associates as honorable men (gens de bien) was not an idle gesture.Lastly and as the outcomeof de Tirevieille'sappeal so aptlyillustrates, the chances of success were not markedlyhigh. The reversalof opinion on appeal tends to be the exceptionin any judicial systemand thereis littlereason to suggest that the situationwas otherwisein sixteenth-centuryLanguedoc.

12 A.D.H.G., B 32, fo. 363v?; 1 G 642. A.M., Toulouse, CC 2400, fo. 141av?.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 110 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

The criminalarchives of the Parlementof Toulouse contain appeals frommore than seventypersons accused or convictedof heresyby both secular and ecclesiasticaltribunals prior to 1560. In the case of five appellants,the Parlementaffirmed that they had been equitablyjudged (bien juge) by the subordinatecourt and that theyhad wronglyappealed (mal appelle). All were returnedto the inferiorjurisdiction for immediateex- ecutionof sentence.'3The Toulousan high courtdismissed the appeal (mis l'appel au ne'ant)of anothertwenty-four persons."4 Yet thisaction did not always and necessarilymean that the appellant was barred fromfurther hearingin thecourt.'5 The Parlementalso statedthat it retained jurisdiction overseven of thesetwenty-four causes and thenpronounced final sentence based upon the proceedingsheld in the subalterntribunal.'6 For another nine of the twenty-fourindividuals whose appeal was dismissed, the Parlementordered furtherinquiries concerningtheir cases (il sera plus amplementinforme) and, in the meantime,freed the accused on bail.'7 This action,as previouslynoted,18 was tantamountto acquittal.The other options exercisedby the Parlementof Toulouse in treatingappeals were littlemore than variationsof those already described.Twelve appellants found that the courtdisregarded the sentenceof the lower tribunal(sans avoir regardd la sentencede . . .) and then itselfpronounced sentence"9 or, in the trialof two persons,ordered further inquiries.20 The Parlement specificallydisregarded the appeal (sans avoir regardd l'appel) on at least three occasions and eithersentenced the defendantor returnedhim to the inferiorjurisdiction.2' Even when the Parlementof Toulouse agreed to a preliminaryexam- ination of an appeal, therewas no assurance that it would actuallyhear the case again. On 6 May 1547, forexample, the courtagreed to reexamine several witnesseswho had offeredtestimony against the appellant Pierre

13 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 6 (12 decembre 1538), reg. 14 (19 juin 1543), reg. 21 (30 avril 1546), reg. 37 (15 juillet 1551), reg. 45 (21 mars 1553). 14 Ibid., reg. 8 (10 avril 1540) and (21 aout 1540), reg. 9 (30 juin 1541), reg. 10 (7 janvier 1542), reg. 16 (1 avril 1545), reg. 25 (10 mars 1547), reg. 26 (9 aouit1547), reg. 27 (3 mars 1548), reg. 30 (29 mars 1549), reg. 38 (1 septembre1551) and (16 octobre1551), reg. 39 (17 decembre 1551), reg. 42 (24 mai 1552), reg. 43 (31 octobre 1552), reg. 44 (23 decembre 1552), reg. 45 (28 fevrier1553) and (14 avril 1553), reg. 51 (19 janvier 1555), reg. 55 (5 octobre1555), reg. 56 (11 decembre 1555), reg. 64 (27 aout 1557), reg. 73 (1 mars 1560); B 31, fo. 36v?. 15 Viala, Parlementde Toulouse,1: 450-451. 16 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 10 (7 janvier 1542), reg. 25 (10 mars 1547), reg. 26 (9 aouit 1547), reg. 27 (3 mars 1548), reg. 30 (29 mars 1549), reg. 51 (19 janvier 1555), reg. 55 (5 octobre1555), reg. 56 (11 decembre 1555). 17 Ibid., reg. 39 (17 decembre 1551), reg. 43 (31 octobre 1552), reg. 45 (28 fevrier1553), reg. 51 (19 janvier 1555), reg. 64 (27 aofit 1557), reg. 73 (1 mars 1560). 8 See chapterVII, The Interrogationand Confrontation. 19 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 50 (29 octobre 1554), reg. 52 (5 juillet 1555), reg. 54 (9 fevrier1555) and (12 juillet 1555). 20 Ibid., reg. 53 (5 avril 1555), reg. 73 (22 mars 1560). 21 Ibid., reg. 59 (17 juin 1556), reg. 60 (24 octobre 1556), reg. 60 (20 septembre1558); B 92 j, fo. 203.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions APPEALS 111

Sapientis. Yet upon completionof the inquiryon 3 June,it declined to entertainthe appeal and fourdays latersentenced Sapientis to bum. Other appeals seem to have been moresuccessful, but even thenthe resultswere nuanced. The Parlementof Toulouse agreed,on 15 March 1554, thatthere had been an abuse of justice in friarEstienne Martin's trial before the inquisitorof Carcassonne. The inquisitorhad neglectedto secure the concurrenceof the vicar forthe bishop of Castres. Martinwas triedanew by the inquisitorof Toulouse assisted by the vicar forthe bishop of Castres. The retrialwas hardlymore beneficial for the inquisitorand vicardeclared Martinguilty of heresy and remanded him to the Parlementwhich, on 21 April,sentenced the convictedheretic to burn at the stake. During the same year,the capitouls condemned fouruniversity students to burn for heresyat Toulouse. The youngmen successfullyappealed to the Parlement. It reduced theirsentence to performanceof the amende honorable,a fine, and imprisonmentfor six months.Afterwards, they were to be placed in theirparents' custody. The youthfulnessof the offendersevidently moved the Parlementin the directionof leniency.22 Upon adjudicationof theappeal or immediatelyfollowing final judgment ifthere had notbeen an appeal, it onlyremained that the sentence imposed by the courtbe executed.The judiciaryhad at its disposal a wide variety of penalties and punishmentswhich it applied in accordance with the gravityof the offense.They rangedfrom a simpleabjuration of one's error to executionat the stake and could be invoked eithersingly or in various combinations.Dispatch of sentence followed prescribedformat and was repletewith ritual.

22 Ibid., B, Toumelle, reg. 25 (6 mai 1547), (3 juin 1547) and (7 juin 1547), reg. 48 (15 mars 1554) and (21 avril 1554), reg. 52 (9 fevrier1555), reg. 53 (31 mars 1555). A.M., Toulouse, layette48 (11 avril 1558), layette90 (15 fevrier1555).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions X. Punishment

French courtsof the sixteenth century admitted an assortmentof pun- ishmentsprescribed for heresy by royalordinance, canon law, and judicial practice.The milderforms were the amende honorableand monetaryfines. More serious punishmentsranged fromconfiscation of goods and property,fustigation and banishmentto imprisonment,service in the king's galleys and death. The courtsoften combined two or more kinds in the sentenceof a convictedheretic. The choice varied according to the severityof the particularcrime and the degreeto which the offender was remorseful. Absolutionpure and simplewas rareand infrequentfor sixteenth-century justice. The judgmentof heresyprovided no exception.Secular and ecclesiasticalmagistrates declined to acquit. Only ten individualsare known to have been "absolved and relaxed" fromcharges of heresy.' A second and equally popular mannerfor treating the defendantwho was not guilty was his placement"out of court" (hors de cour et proce's).Less than full acquittal,it amountedto a verdictof culpabilitynot proven.The courtdid not declare the defendantinnocent and probably harbored unverifiable suspicions of guilt.2Lastly and most commonly,heresy tribunalscould release thesuspect pending "further inquiry," the plus amplementinforme discussed earlier.It was at best provisionalacquittal. The judge did not exoneratethe defendant,but left the charges outstandingin the event thatnew evidence should arise. The suspectremained in an uncertainand doubtfulstatus for his case was unresolved.He was neitherinnocent nor guiltyand theroyal prosecutor could, upon receiptof new evidence,reopen the matter.The magistratepronounced the plus amplementinforme only forgrave cases and where the presumptionswere strong.It was, in this sense, close to punishment,not fora crimeproven, but forpresumptions

1 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 22 (5 juillet 1546), reg. 34 (14 aofit 1550), reg. 41 (8 mars 1552), reg. 43 (1 juillet 1552) and (11 juillet 1552), reg. 64 (29 aout 1557), reg. 74 (8 avril 1560). Practicewas similarat the Parlementsof Bordeauxand Paris. Schnapper,"Parlement de Bordeaux," 13-20; and "Parlementde Paris," 260-262. Esmein, La procedurecriminelle, 244-245. The inquisitorsof Italy and Spain were also reluctantto grantabsolution or acquittal. Carena, Tractatus,304-305. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 474-475. 2 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle,reg. 42 (1 juin 1552), reg. 49 (30 mai 1554) and (20 juillet1554), reg. 53 (21 mai 1555), reg. 62 (18 fevrier1557), reg. 65 (22 janvier 1558), reg. 68 (4 fevrier 1559), reg. 73 (8 mars 1560), reg. 76 (1 octobre1560), reg. 77 (19 decembre 1560). Esmein, La proc6durecriminelle, 244-245. Schnapper,"Parlement de Bordeaux," 14-16.

112

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PUNISHMENT 113 not purged.3Thus the placement"out of court"was nearlyacquittal, and release pending "furtherinquiry" nearly punishment. The mostlenient sentence in heresyactions was the amende honorable, a ceremonyof public censure.The courtsimposed it as thesole punishment for minor faults:indiscreet utterances, singing of scandalous songs, un- knowing possession of censured books, or unwittingattendance at an assemblywhere heresyhad been preached.4The amende honorablecould be prescribedin conjunctionwith the sternerpenalties of a monetaryfine, banishment,and imprisonmentfor more serious offenses.This open ad- jurationof one's errornormally took place beforethe primarychurch or in the main square of the town where the convictedperson had resided or had been apprehended. The customarytime was on Sunday priorto the principalmass, althoughthe courtspermitted an occasional exception. GregoireNassia and JacquesPanyer submittedto the amende honorable on a marketday ratherthan Sunday. Anothermodification of the ritual concerned its public nature. Ramond Allemand performedthe amende honorable withinthe chambersof the juge ordinaireof Saint-Genies in 1548. The Parlement of Toulouse agreed to the private ceremonylest Allemand, a bachelier of the Faculty of Medicine, incur public disgrace (noted'infamie). Similar exceptions were made forJacques Fomyer, seigneur of Beauregard,and JehanRoques, a licencie in medicine.5They abjured in private.The Parlementdid not wish the convictionto reflectupon their honor and dignityor in any way reduce theirlegal status,evidently out of respectfor their social position.6 The amende honorable began with the appearance of the wrongdoer in penitentialgown withfeet bare and head uncovered.He held a lighted candle while he kneltand confessedthe foolish,rash and indiscreetoffense which he had committedagainst the Christianreligion. He begged the mercyof God, the king and justice. The ceremonysometimes took place on a raised platformso thatspectators not be obstructedin theirview. If the penitenthad been foundto possess censuredbooks, theywere burned in his presence.He mightalso be made to carrya bundle of wood on his back,symbolizing the burning to whichunrepentant heretics were subject. Anothervariation in this ritual purgationwas to have the transgressor publiclywhipped (fustigerjusqu'd effusionde sang) eitherimmediately pre-

3 See chapterVII, The Interrogationand Confrontation,for a more detailed examination of the plus amplementinforme. An analogous systemof less than fullacquittal and release pendingfurther investigation existed for the trialof witchesin Germany.H. C. ErikMidelfort, WitchHunting in SouthwesternGermany, 1562-1684, 74. 4 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 40 (5 janvier 1552), reg. 49 (2 juin 1554) and (3 juillet 155), reg. 50 (13 septembre1554). 5 Ibid., reg. 26 (7 octobre1547), reg. 28 (6 avril 1548), reg. 34 (8 novembre1550), reg. 46 (26 septembre1553). 6 Persons publicly disgraced and rendered infamescould be barred frompolitical office and the receptionof inheritances.Cf. the commentsof Carena, Tractatus,58 and 310.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 114 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC cedingor followinghis abjurationof error.A processionwinding through the town's chiefstreets often accompanied the public fustigation.A final and admittedlyrare ingredient was the piercingof the tonguewith a red- hot iron.7 Anotherfrequent penalty associated with the crimeof heresywas the monetaryfine. The magistratessometimes assessed a finein conjunction withthe penance of the amende honorable,the civildeath of banishment, or the hard labor of the galleys.8The amount of these finesranged from as littleas ten sols toumois to the extraordinarysum of two thousand livres. Though theoreticallyearmarked for the royal fisc,the fineswere employedfor a varietyof purposes. The Parlementrequired Jehan Fanjaulx to pay one hundredlivres to theking and an equal sum to be used according to the court'sown directives.When BertrandBordes and JehanBonheure paid finesof two thousand and one hundredlivres respectively, one-half of the combined sum went to the royal coffersand the remainderwas utilizedin pios usus. The courtinstructed its clerkto distributethe money among a numberof religiousinstitutions. Poor of the hospitals ...... 400 livres Convent of Sainte-Claire ...... 200 livres Friarsof the Grande Observance ...... 40 livres Friarsof the PetiteObservance ...... 60 livres Dominicans ...... 40 livres Carmelites ...... 30 livres Augustinians ...... 30 livres Sistersof Lespinasse ...... 200 livres Sistersof Saint-Pantaleon ...... 30 livres Beguins ...... 20 livres9 Religiousorders, especially those which depended upon public charity as did the Sisters of Sainte-Claire,were frequentrecipients of money collectedthrough fines.'0

7A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 11 (12 juin 1542) and (16 juin 1542), reg. 28 (24 juillet 1548), reg. 33 (18 juin 1550), reg. 39 (10 decembre 1551), reg. 40 (5 janvier 1552) and (6 fevrier1552), reg. 50 (29 aofit 1554), reg. 52 (13 mars 1555), reg. 54 (12 juillet 1555). Schnapper,"Parlement de Bordeaux," 29-30. Cf. the ceremonyof canonical purgationand abjurationdescribed in Carena, Tractatus,308-312; Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 475- 480 and 486ff.;and Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 193-194. 8 A.D.H.G., B 92 1, fo. 154; B, Toumelle, reg. 24 (5 fevrier1547), reg. 31 (24 septembre 1549), reg. 42 (25 mai 1552), reg. 45 (27 mars 1553), reg. 46 (26 septembre1553), reg. 49 (9 mai 1554), reg. 50 (24 octobre 1554) and (26 octobre 1554), reg. 64 (27 aofit 1554); 1 G 642, Sentence de l'inquisiteurcontre Ramond de Tirevieilhe.A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 72v?- 76. Lafaille,Annales de Toulouse,2: 75-77. Puech, La Renaissanced Nimes,61. 9 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 24 (5 fevrier1547), reg. 50 (26 octobre 1554). 10 Ibid., reg. 40 (12 fevrier1552), reg. 41 (29 mars 1552), reg. 42 (25 mai 1552), reg. 45 (27 mars 1553), reg. 46 (26 septembre1553), reg. 49 (9 mai 1554) and (26 mai 1554), reg. 50 (12 septembre1554), reg. 51 (8 decembre1554), reg. 59 (29 juillet1556), reg. 64 (27 aofit 1557), reg. 68 (12 avril 1559), reg. 77 (19 decembre1560); B 92 1, fo. 81.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PUNISHMENT 115

Other religiouspurposes and pious works to which the judges applied the finesincluded the purchase of sacred accoutrementsand the repairof churches.A part of the Parlement'ssentence against Pierrede Montrozie in 1549 stipulateda fine of ten livres toumois for the purchase of two candles. They were to be placed beforethe tabernaclesin the Church of Saint-Amansand the Cathedralof Notre-Dameat Rodez. The courtpenal- ized Louis Montinin likemanner shortly thereafter. In 1557, theParlement finedAndre Guyralh twenty-fivelivres for the fisc,fifty livres fordistri- bution among charitablereligious orders, and twenty-fivelivres for the purchase of vestmentsfor the church at Lux. And several years earlier, threeresidents of Bagnols had been finedtwenty-five livres toumois payable to the king's treasuryand anothertwenty-five for the repairof theirtown church." Secular projects,particularly royal construction, also benefitedfrom the impositionof fines.One such undertakingbegan in 1549 when Henry II ordered the demolitionof the Chateau Narbonnais, which housed the Parlementof Toulouse, and the erectionof a new building.The Parlement applied some of the money collectedin finesfrom heresy causes to help defraythe costs of the project.It finedboth JehanGarrigues and Franfois Charles, forinstance, fifty livres tournois to be distributedamong several religiousinstitutions and an additional one hundred livres in the king's interestto be applied to the new construction.'2Similar use of the royal share fromfines was common throughoutthe period.'3 The actual paymentof the fines,especially the largerones, was a serious problem for the individuals against whom they were assessed. The im- position could be under certain circumstancestantamount to a prison sentence.The ordinanceof Blois (1498) stipulatedthat a personcondemned to paymentof a finewould be held in prisonuntil he had made satisfaction. And the recordsof the Parlementsuggest the applicationof the rule. The tribunalassessed a fineof two thousand livresagainst Bertrand Bordes in 1547 and then ordered him held in custody until the sizable sum had been paid in its entirety.The courtdecreed that threepersons convicted of heresya few years later remainimprisoned until theymade complete satisfactionof the finesimposed upon them.An analogous provisionap- peared in the condemnationof PierreBonet in 1554.'4

" Ibid., B, Toumelle, reg. 31 (24 septembre1549), reg. 64 (27 aouit1557); B 92 1, fo. 81 and 154-155. 12 Ibid., B 1904, fo. 42-44; B, Toumelle, reg. 49 (9 mai 1554). Henri Ramet,Le Capitoleet le Parlementde Toulouse,130-137. 13 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 46 (26 septembre1553), reg. 49 (26 mai 1554), reg. 50 (12 septembre1554), reg. 51 (8 decembre 1554). 14 Ibid., reg. 24 (5 fevrier1547), reg. 40 (12 fevrier1552), reg. 49 (26 mai 1554). Isambert, Recueil ge'ne'ral,11: 368. The Parlementof Bordeaux also imprisonedconvicted criminals until the fineor costs of justice had been satisfied.Schnapper, "Parlementde Bordeaux," 33.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 116 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Banishment,in perpetuityor fora limitedterm, constituted a thirdmajor punishmentin heresyprosecution. The convictedparty always performed theamende honorableas a demonstrationof remorse,'5and was sometimes fined,'6whipped,'7 or had his tongue pierced.'8In one instancethe court imposed a prison sentence of threeyears to be served priorto the effec- tuationof banishment.'9The durationand compass of banishmentvaried considerably.It ranged fromone year to perpetuityand the area to which it applied could be the entirekingdom of France,the territoryadministered by theParlement of Toulouse,or a particularseneschalsy, bailiwick, viguerie or municipality.The most severe form,perpetual banishmentfrom the realm with confiscationof property,was equivalent to civil death in a societywhere civilrights and relationsdepended upon the abilityto have and hold property.20Civil death appears to have been the Parlement's intentwhen it permanentlybanished PierreMalefosse fromthe kingdom and confiscatedhis goods and property.There were, of course,less exacting sentencessuch as Sebastien Villeteau's banishmentfrom the territoryad- ministeredby the Parlementfor a period of three years. The tribunal sentencedGuillaume Lafaurie to threeyears exile fromthe diocese of Albi. It banished JehanPuget fromthe seneschalsyof Quercyfor ten years and barredGuillaume Bonauld fromliving in the cityand viguerieof Toulouse forthree years.21 Heresy of a more serious nature demanded sternerpunishment and justice had at its disposal both imprisonmentand forcedlabor, notably servicein the king'sgalleys. Prisonsentences presumed the condemned's repentanceand thus were precededby the ceremonyof the amende hon-

15 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 10 (7 janvier 1542), reg. 16 (1 avril 1545), reg. 21 (14 avril 1546) and (17 avril 1546), reg. 24 (16 novembre 1546) and (5 fevrier1547), reg. 26 (16 septembre1547), (7 octobre 1547) and (8 octobre 1547), reg. 28 (19 juillet 1548) and (24 juillet 1548), reg. 31 (24 septembre1549), reg. 33 (31 mars 1550), reg. 38 (22 septembre 1551) and (16 octobre1551), reg. 40 (6 fevrier1552) and (8 fevrier1552), reg. 41 (24 mars 1552) and (27 avril 1552), reg. 42 (25 mai 1552), reg. 44 (23 decembre 1552), reg. 45 (17 fevrier1553) and (14 avril 1553), reg. 46 (1 aofit 1553), reg. 49 (28 mai 1554), reg. 50 (27 octobre 1554), reg. 52 (13 mars 1555), reg. 57 (27 mars 1556), reg. 59 (18 juin 1556), reg. 60 (12 octobre 1556), reg. 61 (24 decembre 1556), reg. 63 (2 juin 1557) and (3 juin 1557), reg. 64 (21 aofit1557), (27 aouit1557) and (31 aouit1557), reg. 67 (23 decembre1558), reg. 68 (22 fevrier1559), reg. 74 (31 mai 1560); B 92 1, fo. 58. A.M., Toulouse, BB 269, fo. 67v?; BB 274, fo. 100-101. 16 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 31 (24 septembre1549), reg. 42 (25 mai 1552), reg. 64 (27 aofit1557); B 92 1, fo. 154-155. 17 Ibid., B, Tournelle,reg. 26 (8 octobre1547), reg.40 (6 fevrier1552), reg.44 (23 decembre 1552), reg. 49 (28 mai 1554), reg. 54 (6 juillet 1555), reg. 56 (11 decembre 1555), reg. 57 (20 fevrier1556) and (27 mars 1556), reg. 59 (18 juin 1556), reg. 61 (24 decembre 1556), reg. 63 (2 juin 1557) and (3 juin 1557), reg. 64 (21 aofit1557), reg. 67 (23 decembre1558). 18 Ibid., reg. 49 (28 mai 1554), reg. 74 (31 mars 1560). '9 Ibid., reg. 68 (22 fevrier1559). 20 Damhouder, Practique,fo. 56v?-57. 21 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 10 (7 janvier 1542), reg. 21 (17 avril 1546), reg. 60 (12 octobre1556), reg. 63 (3 juin 1557), reg. 74 (31 mai 1560).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PUNISHMENT 117 orable22and accompanied at times by public or private fustigation.23 Secular justice generallyregarded prison as a place for confinementas distinguishedfrom punishment and utilized it for preventivedetention duringtrial and bodily restraintpending the paymentof finesand court costs. The medieval Church developed and applied the concept of penal imprisonment.Ecclesiastical judges could notimpose blood sanctions,death or mutilation,and thus incarcerationwas the gravestpenalty available to them. Nearly every diocese had its own prison. Church courts viewed imprisonmentas correctiveand emendatoryas well as punitive;the In- quisitionand officialitiesfrequently applied it in heresycauses as penance and punishment.24When theroyal French judges came to adjudicateheresy, theytoo prescribedprison and typicallymade use of the episcopal com- plexes. Imprisonment,whether by decree of the ecclesiasticalor secular judge, could be extremelyharsh. It sometimesmeant a life of solitude withina confiningcell. The prisoner'sonly contactwith the outside world was a tinyopening (pertuisor petitguichet) through which he received a ration of bread and water.25Internment was less severe for others.Nicolas de Pierre,sentenced to threeyears in the prisonof the bishop of Beziers,was requiredto faston breadand wateronly two days each week. The Parlement committedAnthoine Clary to the episcopal prisonat Nimes withthe provision thathis diet be restrictedto bread and wateron Wednesday,Friday and Saturday.26While otherprison sentences issued by the Parlementof Toulouse forheresy do not specificallymention fasts of this sort,27there may have been some understandingto include them. The rigorsof prison,particularly solitary confinement on a regime of bread and water, could and did evoke violent reactions.The particulars leading to the executionof Simon de Marcis are illustrative.De Marcis,a Franciscanmonk, was declared guiltyof heresyby the inquisitorand vicar for the bishop of Castres. They remanded him into the custody of the

22 Ibid., reg. 24 (5 fevrier1546), reg. 31 (30 juillet 1549), reg. 46 (17 octobre 1553), reg. 49 (9 juin 1554), reg. 52 (1 fevrier1555), reg. 68 (22 fevrier1559); 112 H 6, Sentence de l'inquisiteurcontre Bertrand de Manso (23 juin 1518). A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 70v?-72v?. 23 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 31 (30 juillet 1549), reg. 46 (17 octobre 1553), reg. 49 (9 juin 1554), reg. 52 (1 fevrier1555). 24 Damhouder, Practique,fo. 16-17. Grand, "La prison," 58-63. Schnapper, "Parlement de Bordeaux," 31-33. Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 179. The originsof the modem prisonsystem were recentlytraced by Michel Foucault,Surveiller et punir:naissance de la prison. 25 A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 70v?-72v?. A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 8 (21 aofit 1540), reg. 46 (23 octobre1553); 112 H 6, Sentence de l'inquisiteurcontre Bertrand de Manso (23 juin 1516). Inquisitorialpractice may have been morelenient, Cf. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 506-507. 26 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 31 (30 juillet 1549), reg. 49 (9 juin 1554). 27 Ibid., reg. 21 (14 avril 1546), reg. 24 (5 fevrier1546), reg. 46 (17 octobre1553), reg. 52 (1 fevrier1555), reg. 55 (5 septembre1555), reg. 68 (22 fevrier1559).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 118 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Parlementof Toulouse which, on 14 April 1546, decreed a sentence of life internmentin the episcopal prison at Toulouse. The monk evidently foundprison intolerable, for on 6 Decemberof thesame yearthe Parlement orderedthat he burn at the stake forreason of the blasphemyand heresy which he had committedsince incarceration.28 The fate of a convictedheretic who styledhimself Jehan l'Evangeliste is perhapsmore dramatic. The earliestreports of his publicpreaching come fromBordeaux where he was arrestedduring the earlysummer 1553. The Parlementhad his greatbeard clipped and longhair shorn and thenexpelled him fromthe region.The itinerantpreacher wandered up the Garonne to Toulouse and by autumnhis activitiesled to confinementin theDominican monastery.He was unfortunatelygiven to "rash,execrable and scandalous" utterancesand on 23 October the Parlementdecided to imprisonhim in the harsh environmentof a small cell which had only a minimalopening forpassage of bread and wine. The parlementarycounsellor Jean Cognard supervisedl'Evangeliste's incarceration in an upper room of the Tour Ro- maine in the Conciergerie,the royal prison at Toulouse. Afternearly a year in prison,on 22 October 1554, l'Evangelisteset fireto the tower in which he was interned.The blaze blocked access to his cell and prison officialswere forcedto use a ladder and gain entryfrom the roof of the adjoining building,the Maison de la Garde du Palais. They knocked a hole in the wall of the prison tower and therebyextracted l'Evangeliste fromhis cell. This act, along with l'Evangeliste's continued scandalous outcriesand refusalto acceptconfession, led theParlement on thefollowing day to command that his tongue be cut offand he burn at the stake.29 An alternativepunishment for contrite heretics whose crimehad been grave was assignmentto the royal convictships. Once again, the amende honorable30always and fustigation31occasionally accompanied the condemnation.The lengthof servicein the galleys prescribedby the courts varied,though the most commonsentences were forfive years, ten years, and perpetuity.32The life of convictlabor, a relativelyrecent fifteenth- centurycreation, was accordingto all accountsmost unpleasant. The Parle- ment of Toulouse indirectlyacknowledged the distressof the oarsmen

28 Ibid., reg. 21 (14 avril 1546), reg. 24 (6 decembre 1546). 29 Ibid., reg. 46 (23 octobre1553), reg. 50 (23 octobre 1554). A.M., Toulouse, BB 175, fo. 135; BB 269, fo. 73vD;BB 274, fo. 149-150. Patry,Debuts de la reforme,143, n. 1 and 147. 30 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 13 (10 avril 1543), reg. 19 (28 janvier 1546), reg. 21 (17 avril 1546), reg. 60 (7 octobre1556), reg. 66 (20 septembre1558), reg. 77 (1 decembre1560); B 92 1, fo. 154-155. EtienneMedicis, Le livrede Podioou chroniquesd'Etienne Medicis bourgeois du Puy, 487. Menard, Histoirede Nimes,4: 168. 31 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 13 (10 avril 1543), reg. 60 (7 octobre 1556), reg. 66 (20 septembre1558); B 92 1, fo. 154-155. 32 Ibid., B, Toumelle, reg. 13 (10 avril 1543), reg. 19 (28 janvier 1546), reg. 21 (17 avril 1546), reg. 60 (7 octobre1556), reg. 66 (20 septembre1558), reg. 77 (14 decembre1560); B 92 1, fo. 154-155. A.M., Toulouse, BB 175, fo. 135; BB 269, fo. 72; BB 274, fo. 163.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PUNISHMENT 119 when itprohibited the condemned, upon pain of hangingand strangulation, fromleaving the galleys until completionof theirterm.33 If the convicted heretic's crime was serious and he obstinatelyand adamantlypersisted in the false beliefor had repentedbut then relapsed intoerror (as did Simon de Marcisand Jehanl'Evangeliste), justice deemed him incorrigibleand thus fitonly forremoval fromsociety through execution.Ecclesiastical tribunals did not theoreticallypossess the power and authorityto impose capital punishment.When the Inquisitionor an of- ficialityjudged a person guiltyof heresy and he declined to recant or initiallyrepented and then returnedto his heresy,the religiousmagistrate released him into the custody of a secular court which pronounced the death sentence.34If the condemned was a cleric,the ecclesiasticalofficers firststripped him publicly of his religiousstatus. The vicarof the archbishop of Toulouse and the lieutenantof the inquisitor,for example, declared Jehande Caturce, a licencie in law, guiltyof heresy in 1532. When he refusedto retract,they furtherordered that he be delivered over to the secular arm. Due to his association with the university,de Caturce was technicallya clericand had firstto be deprived of this status. Following a ceremonyof public degradationin the Place Saint-Etienneat Toulouse, the archiepiscopalvicar and lieutenantinquisitor released de Caturce to the Parlementof Toulouse which on 2 May sentencedhim to burn.35Felix Platter,a medicalstudent from Basle, witnessed a degradationat Montpellier on 16 October 1553 and has lefta good account. Guillaume Dalencon, a priestwho convertedto Calvinism,appeared in sacerdotalrobes and ascended a platformwhere the bishop as well as other ecclesiasticaland secular authoritieswaited. Dalencon's vestmentswere removed and replaced by secular garb while the ordinationtext was recitedin reverse: his priesthoodwas undone. Religiousofficials shaved his head to remove all signs of tonsure and cut the flesh fromthe bone of his thumb and index finger,symbolizing the removal of his power to celebratethe Eu- charist.36Dalencon was deliveredto secularjustice, condemned and burned shortlythereafter.37

3 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 77 (14 decembre 1560). On the subject of convict labor and the Frenchgalleys, see: Paul W. Bamford,Fighting Ships and Prisons:the Mediterranean Galleysof France in theAge ofLouis XIV, and Paul Masson, Les galkresde France(1481-1781); Marseille,porte de guerre,esp. 17-100. 34 Carena, Tractatus,63-70 and 306-307. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 510-528. Si- mancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 186v?-188. 3 A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 67v?-68. Christie,Etienne Dolet, 75-78. Crespin, Histoiredes martyrs,1: 284. Histoireecclesiastique, Baum and Cunitz, 1: 21-22. 36As the Churchcould notmaim, the fingerswere not cut off.Rather, the fleshwas scraped fromthe bone. For the Ordo degradationis:Gulielmus Durandis, Le Pontificalde Guillaume Durand, ed. M. Andrieu, vol. III of Le Pontificalromain au moyen-dge,607-608; loannes Monachus Picardus,Glosa aurea (Paris, 1535), fo. CCCXCIv?-CCCXCII; Imbert,La practique judiciaire,623. I am indebtedto ProfessorK. Schimmelpfennigof the FreieUniversitat, Berlin forthis reference. 37 Felix Platter,Memoires de Felix Platter,trans. Edouard Fick,57.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 120 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Executionwas an open ceremonywhich purifiedthe community38and exemplifiedthe dangerof heresy.A processionthrough the townpreceded the event. The victimrode in a cart with a noose attached to his neck (portantla hartau cou). The site of executionwas a town square. The Place du Salin, which both the Parlementand Inquisitionoverlooked, and the Place Saint-Georgeswere favoritespots at Toulouse. Alternatelocations were the square which opened beforethe Cathedralof Saint-Etienneand the marketplace near the churchof La Daurade. Sites forexecution elsewhere in Languedoc were the Place du Martoretat Le Puy and the Place du Salamandreat Nimes.39A groupof civilmagistrates attended the death of the heretic.The seneschal, juge d'appeaux, viguier and capitouls of Toulouse assisted at the burningof Jeande Caturce in 1532. A like body assembled forthe executionsof Louis de Rochette,Anthoine Richardi and Estienne Margotia few years later. At Le Puy in the followingdecade, the bailiffand judge of Velay, the baile and judge of the communalcourt, and the municipalconsuls witnessedVidal Badoc's death at the stake.40 Death could be immediatelypreceded by cuttingoff the tongue, especially if the victim'sheresy had involved passionate oratoryor inflammatory preaching.If reprobatebooks had been discovered in the condemned's possession,they were added to the consumingfires.4' In a more humane vein, thirty-sevenof the sixty-twoextant death sentencesissued by the Parlementof Toulouse before 1560 stipulatethat the victimbe strangled priorto burning.42Of the remainingtwenty-five persons, one was burned posthumouslyand the othertwo were strangledafter the fireshad been ignited.43There is no mentionof strangulationwith regard to theremaining

38 Natalie Z. Davis, "The Rites of Violence," Societyand Culturein EarlyModern Europe, 152-187 examinesheresy as "pollution" and the necessityof communalpurification. Cf. the remarksof RobertMuchembled, "Sorcieres du Cambresis,"in Prophe'teset sorciersdans les Pays-Bas,XVIe-XVIIIe sie'cle,eds. M.-S. Dupont-Bouchet,W. Frijhoffand R. Muchembled, esp. 244-246. 3 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 5 (10 septembre1538), reg. 14 (29 aofit1543), reg. 27 (27 janvier 1548), reg. 54 (5 juillet 1556). Medicis, Le livrede Podio, 2: 304 and 463. 40 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 5 (10 septembre1538), reg. 7 (10 mai 1539) and (1 juillet 1539); B 31, fo. 521; B 92 j, fo. 64. A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 70. 41 A.D.H.G., reg. 23 (14 octobre 1546), reg. 45 (21 mars 1553), reg. 50 (12 octobre1554), (16 octobre 1554) and (23 octobre 1554), reg. 54 (5 juillet 1555), reg. 74 (10 avril 1560). FrancescoPegna, familiarwith Italian Inquisitorial practice, thought the condemned'stongue mightbe cut offif necessaryto avoid blasphemous offenseto those in attendance.Eymeric, DirectoriumInquisitorum, 331. 42 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 5 (10 septembre1538), reg. 6 (12 septembre1538), reg. 7 (10 mai 1539) and (1 juillet 1539), reg. 8 (27 juin 1540), reg. 21 (31 avril 1546), reg. 23 (14 octobre1546), reg. 24 (16 novembre1546) and (6 decembre1546), reg. 25 (3 juin 1547) and (7 juin 1547), reg. 26 (9 aout 1547), reg. 27 (3 mars 1548), reg. 32 (23 janvier 1550), reg. 33 (13 mars 1550) and (8 mai 1550), reg. 37 (14 aofit1551), (17 aofit1551) and (27 aofit1551), reg. 38 (2 septembre1551), reg. 39 (23 decembre1551), reg. 41 (22 mars 1552), reg. 43 (30 juillet 1552), reg. 48 (18 avril 1554) and (21 avril 1554), reg. 49 (9 juin 1554) and (6 juillet 1554), reg.50 (1 aout 1554), (6 septembre1554) and (13 octobre1554), reg. 51 (16 novembre 1554), reg. 54 (5 juillet 1555), reg. 57 (22 fevrier1556), reg. 67 (22 decembre1558), reg. 74 (10 avril 1560); B 31, fo. 521; B 92 j, fo. 11 and 64; B 92 1, fo. 147. 4 Ibid., B, Toumelle, reg. 54 (5 juillet 1555); ms. 132, fo. 239.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PUNISHMENT 121 twenty-twocondemned heretics. Were theydenied a more compassionate death?Standard practice is not obvious. The ItalianInquisition, for instance, reservedstrangulation for relapsed and penitentheretics." Remorse en- gendered controlledmercy. French justice may well have made a similar sortof distinction. The custom, howsoever limited,does raise questions concerningthe courageous sufferingspublicized by the sixteenth-centurymartyrologies. JeanCrespin's Histoiredes martyrsreports that in 1545 the Parlementof Toulouse sentenced Fransois d'Augi to burn for heresy.At the moment of execution,d'Augi, . . . "was heard cryingin a loud voice fromthe midstof the flames:'Courage, my brothers;I see the opened heavens and the Son of God who prepares to receive me.'"5 The archives of the Parlementsuggest distinctlydifferent circumstances for d'Augi's death. The decree orderinghis executionis dated 31 July1552, some seven years afterthe date assigned by Crespin. A notationat the conclusion of the decree clearlystates that d'Augi was to be strangledprior to burning,46 renderingimpossible his heroic words. Did the Parlementsubsequently change its mindabout strangulation?Was the executionerlax in observing the court's command? Perhaps the martyrologistCrespin embellished a good story?Or was he simplymisinformed? The latterexplanation assumes greaterplausibility upon consideration of other accounts in the Histoiredes martyrs.The storyof a Protestant group arrestedin 1543 at Beaucaire is probablya lateraddition by Simon Goulart.It mentionsseven individuals,all of whom were allegedlyburned at Toulouse. The judicial records,on the other hand, indicate that the Parlementbrought only four persons to trial.Another five escaped detention pending adjudicationof the matter.More importantly,of the fourwhose cases went to court,only two were condemned to the stake and one of the two burned at Beaucaire.47Although these examples do not negate the validityof other tales contained in the Histoiredes martyrs,they do suggestoccasional inaccuraciesin the martyrologies.They were not,in all fairness,designed to be descriptionsof legal practiceand theiruse forthis purpose requiresconsiderable caution.48

44"Haereticus relapsus . . . si poeniteat,prius stranguletur,et postea comburatur. Carena, Tractatus,68. 45Crespin, Histoire des martyrs,1: 517. The authors of the Histoireecclestiastique, Baum and Cunitz, 1: 70, repeat the account. 46 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 43 (30 juillet 1552). 47Ibid., reg. 13 (10 avril 1543). Crespin,Histoire des martyrs,3: 840-841. Cf. the events as reportedin Menard,Histoire de Nfmes,4: 168-169. 48 The literaturesurrounding a criticalapproach to the early Protestantmartyrologies is large. Among others,see: RobertFoncke, Duitse Vlugschriftenvan de Tijd overhet Proces en de Terechtstellingvan de Protestanten,especially, 54-59; Leon-E. Halkin, "Les martyrologes et la critique.Contribution a l'etude du Martyrologeprotestant des Pays-Bas," Melanges historiquesofferts d MonsieurJean Meyhoffer, 52-72; Leonard C. Jones,Simon Goulart, 1543- 1628; etudebiographique et bibliographique,and F. Pijper,Martelaarsboeken, especially 5-33.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 122 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

The courts,for their part, had littledesire to conferthe martyr'scrown49 and thoughit is difficultto gauge, theydo not appear to have been over- zealous and extremein theexecution of heretics.The Parlementof Toulouse and affiliatedtribunals in Languedoc sought a total of 1074 persons for suspicionof heresybetween 1500 and 1560. Sixty-two,slightly less than 6 percent,died at thestake. All were condemnedby theParlement. Similar, but less complete documentationexists for the Parlementsof Paris and Bordeaux.It permitsa limitedcomparison and places the problemin better perspective.At Paris, the chambre ardente named 557 heresy suspects between May 1547 and March 1550. Of thatnumber, thirty-nine persons (7 percent) burned. The Parlementof Bordeaux, which had a smaller geographicjurisdiction than eitherParis or Toulouse and whose archives are far less complete,sought 477 suspected hereticsbetween 1541 and 1559. Eighteenindividuals, less than 4 percent,eventually perished in the executioner'sfires. Justice in heresy causes at Toulouse was not more exactingthan at Paris;punishment at Bordeauxwas marginallyless severe.50 Furthermore,studies of sixteenth-centurycriminal justice at the Parlements of Paris and Rouen suggestthat executionfor heresy was no more (and oftenless) frequentthan forperjury, theft and sorcery.The incidenceof capitalpunishment was considerablyhigher for brigandage, homicide and infanticide.5'The use of the death sentencefor heresy was neithersingular nor extremewhen compared to its applicationfor other felonies. Absent fromthis inventory of penalties and punishmentsare the penances traditionallyassociated with religious error. The medievalInquisition had initiated,and the sixteenth-centuryItalian and Spanish tribunalscon- tinued,the practiceof prescribingthe sanbenito,a type of scapular with crossessewn on it. The penitentwore the garmentpublicly and was often assigned a special humble role in religiousceremonies. The Inquisition favoredsalutary penances too. Fasts, prayers,pilgrimages, and frequent receptionof the sacramentsof Penance and the Eucharistwere the most common.52The abandonment of these penances by the French courts, civil and religious,is but an additional indicationof the dominance of secular justice in the trialand punishmentof heresy. The punishmentas well as the prosecutionof heresywere not without theircosts. The ceremonyof the amende honorable,the degradationof a cleric,and the executionof a recalcitrantor relapsed hereticrequired elab- orateand expensivepreparations. The Inquisitionat Carcassonne paid the merchantJehan La Font thirtysols tournoisfor wood used in the con- structionof a platformupon which Gabriel Amalins was degraded. The carpenterwho built the structurereceived two livres. The Parlementof

"The extensive cautions of Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 514ff., against creating martyrsmay be takeitas representative. 50The arretswhich have been examined are published in Patry,Debuts de la reformeand Weiss,La chambreardente. Close examinationof the bloodyreputation accorded the Parlement of Toulouse is containedin Mentzer,"Calvinist Propaganda," 268-283. 51Dewald, "Rouen," 294-299. Schnapper,"Parlement de Paris," 252-284. 52 Carena, Tractatus,319. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 506.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PUNISHMENT 123

Toulouse disbursedtwo livresfor the escortwhich assisted at the burning of Pierre de La Serre. It included the captains of the watch, the sous- viguierand several sergeants.Olivier Galy, a mastercarpenter, received fivelivres, seven sols, and seven denierstournois for furnishing powder, sulphur,resin, wood and an iron chain.53 The expendituresin executionof sentenceand the costs of the criminal actionwere theoreticallyborne by the crown.It was the accused, however, upon whom these financialmatters were actually settled.The court sequestered an accused heretic'sreal and personal propertyat the time of his arrest.From these assets, the magistratesdeducted the expenses for the accused's subsistenceand maintenancein prisonduring the trial.Ber- trandFreignien, awaiting the dispositionof an appeal in 1558, petitioned the Parlementto sell a portionof his possessions for nourishmentand upkeep. He requestedpermission to dispose of goods valued at sixtylivres, but the tribunal,which controlledthe sequesteredassets, would not au- thorizesale in excess of twenty-fivelivres.54 If the case against the accused was not proven,the courtreturned his goods and property.55Culpability, on the otherhand, generatedadditional deductionsto offsetthe outlaysfor execution of sentenceand courtcosts. The condemned hereticwas responsiblefor the costs of the trial(frais de justice) and royal statutesprovided that theybe drawn fromhis assets.56 Indeed, the decreesof finalsentence occasionally mention the requirement that the convictedperson satisfythese expenses.57Yet the requirement did not preclude leniencyupon the part of the court.The Parlementof Toulouse held BertrandBordes, a licencie accused of hereticalspeech, liable forthe costs of the action,but only up to fiftylivres. It decreed that the expenses in the trialof threemen sentencedto the amende honorable in 1552 be met fromwhatever goods and propertythey possessed. But thethree were not to be imprisonedif satisfaction was less thancomplete.58 The completeconfiscation of a convictedheretic's property was closely

5 B.N., ms. fr.,quittances et pieces diverses,vol. 135, no. 1913 and 1914; vol. 138, no. 2339 and 2341. Bourgeois,"Documents inedits,"24 549-551 and 25 (1876), 106-108. For otherexamples: A.M., Toulouse, CC 2397, fo. lbv?, lcvy and no. 24, 27, 36; CC 2398, no. 191 and 217; CC 2400, fo. 141av?, 141bv? and 141f. 54 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 67 (31 decembre 1558). Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 649-651. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 668-671. 5 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 26 (9 novembre 1547), reg. 41 (27 janvier 1552), reg. 43 (30 juillet 1552), reg. 51 (19 janvier 1555); B 92 1, fo. 23. 56 Ibid.,B 1904, fo. 92-92v?; C 2279, fo. 422v?. Esmein,La procedure criminelle,244. Imbert, La practiquejudiciaire, 334-338 and 569-570. Isambert,Recueil general, 13: 201. 5' For convictedheretics made to pay the costs of justice,a) when sentenced to prison: A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 55 (5 septembre 1555), reg. 68 (22 fevrier1559); b) when banished: reg. 26 (7 octobre 1547), reg. 28 (24 juillet 1548), reg. 31 (24 septembre1549), reg. 38 (22 septembre1551) and (16 octobre1551), reg. 40 (8 fevrier1552), reg. 41 (24 mars 1552), reg. 50 (27 octobre1554), reg. 54 (6 juillet 1555), reg. 57 (27 mars 1556), reg. 60 (12 octobre1556), reg. 61 (24 decembre1556), reg. 63 (2 juin 1557), reg. 64 (21 aofit1557), (27 aout 1557) and (31 aofit1557), reg. 67 (23 decembre 1558), reg. 68 (22 fevrier1559); B 92 1, fo. 58; c) when sentencedto amende honorable:reg. 39 (9 decembre1551), (10 decembre 1551) and (23 decembre 1551), reg. 40 (5 fevrier1552). 58 Ibid., reg. 24 (5 fevrier1547), reg. 39 (9 decembre 1551) and (10 decembre 1551).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 124 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC relatedto these concerns.Confiscation by the crown was frequentlyad- mittedas a collateralpenalty for grave offenses-arson, brigandage, forgery, homicide,theft-and especially for lese majesty. Roman law permitted confiscationof goods for treason and thus the punishmentapplied to heresy which the commentatorsequated with lese majesty against the Divinity.The exact degree of criminalitywhich warrantedconfiscation in instancesof heresyis difficultto determine.The tribunalsof Languedoc attached a confiscatoryclause for sentences of capital punishmentand service in the galleys. It also accompanied perpetual imprisonmentand perpetualbanishment.59 Its applicationin cases of lesser punishmentwas farmore irregular.60 The common method for disposal of confiscatedgoods was a simple auction.61The civil,rather than ecclesiastical, authorities handled the matter. During the medieval period, the proceeds were divided into threeequal allotmentsfor the temporallord, the Inquisitionand the Roman Church. The goods of condemned hereticsbecame the exclusive propertyof the royal fiscby the sixteenthcentury. The developmentoccurred in Spain where the Catholic monarchscontrolled and supportedthe Inquisitionas well as in Francewhere royal justice dominated heresy prosecution. Receipts fromconfiscation of heretics'property in Languedoc went to the receveur ordinaireof the royal domaines. Afterthe basic courtexpenses had been met, the remainingfunds collected throughconfiscation were allocated fora varietyof projects,including royal constructionand the pursuitof other heretics.And, as previouslynoted, a portion went to the person who had originallydenounced the condemned heretic.62 Confiscationwas an especially onerous punishmentbecause its effect was not limitedto the convictedcriminal-the practicedisinherited the convictedheretic's relatives. The Parlementexecuted Jehan Jeum, a priest of Bellegarde,for heresy in the early 1550s. Accordingto Jeum'swill of 17 October1540 and a codicildated 29 April1551, a partof his possessions were leftto the father,Jaques Jeum. When the courtconfiscated the condemned heretic'sproperty, the elder Jeumsued for a quartershare. The

5 For convictedheretics subject to confiscation,a) when imprisoned:Ibid., reg. 8 (21 aoiut 1540), reg. 46 (17 octobre 1553), reg. 55 (5 septembre1555), reg. 68 (22 fevrier1559); b) when banished: reg. 16 (1 avril 1545), reg. 21 (14 avril 1546), reg. 61 (24 decembre 1556), reg. 64 (21 aofit1557), reg. 68 (22 decembre 1559). 60 Aufreri,Decisiones capellae Tholosanae,60 and 168. Damhouder,Practique, fo. 66v?-67. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 654-655. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 668-669. Papon, Recueild'arrests, 1344. PierreTimbal, "La confiscationdans le droitfranpais des XIIIe et XIVe sieles," 54-61. 61 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 39 (23 decembre 1551), reg. 50 (4 aout 1554), reg. 69 (10 mai 1559), reg. 72 (6 dcembre 1559). 62 Ibid., reg. 39 (22 decembre1551) and (23 decembre1551), reg. 40 (5 fevrier1552), reg. 49 (5 mai 1554) and (16 juin 1554), reg. 50 (1 aofit1554) and (4 aofit1554), reg. 63 (3 juin 1557) and (4 juin 1557),reg. 69 (15 mai 1559); B 92 1, fo. 195. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, pp. 656-661. Imbert,La practiquejudiciaire, 671-672. Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 123-133. Forfurther treatment of the denouncer'sshare, see chapterVI, The Preliminaries of the Trial.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PUNISHMENT 125

Parlementdenied the claim and sold the goods at auction. The loss of inheritancealso weighed heavily upon the heretic'schildren. The moral problemof inffictinga life of povertyupon innocentchildren was widely recognizedand the courtsoccasionally softened the blow. The Parlement reserved one-thirdof the goods and propertyconfiscated from Claude Dimenchein 1547 forhis wifeand children.It grantedsimilar consideration to the familyof Fransois Guynibauld several years later.63 Justicedid not demand confiscationof the dowry originallyprovided by the heretic'swife, unless she knew of his heresyprior to the marriage. Thus the magistracyexempted the spouse's dowry when it seized the possessions of Estienne Angelin in 1551. A strikingaffirmation of the dowry's immunityarose when Michel Souchet, a notaryof Privas, was summonedto appear beforethe bench on suspicionof heresy.Rather than comply,he fled. Souchet was subsequentlydeclared contumaciousand triedin absentia. The tribunalfound him guiltyand handed down a sentence of perpetualbanishment along withconfiscation of goods. Although Souchet's wife was deceased, he did have two small childrenwhom he leftbehind at Privas. CatherineLadrecte, the maternalgrandmother, acted on behalfof the minors.She securedroyal letters permitting a civilpetition in orderto regain a share of the confiscatedproperty. Ladrecte presented the court with a copy of the marriagepact between her daughter and Souchet. It listed the dowry which Ladrecte and her husband, since deceased, had donated. The Parlementof Toulouse ruled that those items enumeratedin the contractas having been given by the bride's parents would not be seized, but reservedfor the two children.64 As the Michel Souchet case suggests,confiscation also affectedpersons who fledto avoid prosecutionfor heresy. The ordinanceof Villers-Cotterets (1539) specifiedthat criminal parties in default,after having been properly summoned, would have theirpossessions seized. Heresy tribunalshad long proceeded in absentia againstpersons who took flightin the face of accusation. Whereas the medieval Inquisition,as well as its Roman and Spanish successorsof the sixteenthcentury, allowed suspects a full year to submit to justice, the courts of Languedoc moved to condemnation withina few weeks. Fugitiveswere banished fromthe realm and often burnedin effigy.The offender'snameand crimewere affixedto thelikeness lestthe reality of the ceremonyescape the communalobservers. Conviction by defaultalso visitedits effectupon the familyof the delinquent,for the courtusually seized his goods and property.The Parlementcondemned in absentiafive former residents of Villefranche-de-Rouergueon 27 October

63 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 26 (9 aou't 1547), reg. 40 (16 janvier 1552), reg. 45 (21 mars 1553), reg. 61 (24 decembre 1556). A recentexploration of the thornyethical question of disinheritinginnocent children is Kenneth Pennington,"'Pro Peccatis Patrum Puniri': A Moral and Legal Problem of the Inquisition,"137-154. 6 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 39 (23 decembre 1551), reg. 41 (31 mars 1552). Eymeric, DirectoriumInquisitorum, 662-663. Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 125.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 126 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

1554. It decreedthe confiscationof theirassets, their perpetual banishment fromFrance, and the burningof "effigiesmade in appearance and dress" to resemblethe fivecriminals.65 Success in obtaininga pardon or reprievefrom sentences rendered in heresycauses was rare and the circumstanceslimited. Powerful local in- fluenceand superiorsocial positionappear to have been vitalprerequisites. When the parlementaireAntoine de Lautrec and his wife Antoinettede Vabres fledToulouse forGeneva in 1553, the Parlementconvicted them of heresyin absentia and orderedtheir property confiscated. Marguerite du Mayne, the motherof Antoinette,and Bernardde Vabres, her brother and the Seneschal of Toulouse, immediatelypetitioned the court. They argued thatde Vabres had been taken to Geneva againsther wishes and, on 6 February1554, the Parlementgranted them three months within which to presentAntoinette. Her failureto appear in the prescribedtime limitwould mean executionof sentence and hence the loss of a valued portionof the family'swealth.66 Remissionwas not a royal pardon; it was a point of procedure.Pierre Chabot,a doctorof laws, obtainedroyal letters which remitted the sentence of banishmentand confiscationrendered against him by default.The re- scriptled to a fulltrial before the Parlement.The tribunalfinally obliged Chabot to performthe amende honorable and pay a fineof fiftylivres. Lettresde grace et remissionhad a similartempering effect in the cause of Jacques Cocombris,a licencie in law. They secured his release from prison and the restorationof his property.Yet the courtdid deduct four hundredlivres for the costs of justice and anotherhundred applicable to charitableworks.67 The Parlement of Toulouse did not exonerate,but simplymitigated the punishment.

* * *

Judicialprocedure for the prosecutionof heresy in sixteenth-century Languedoc did not differfrom that employed in other criminalactions. Althoughboth secular and ecclesiasticalmagistrates participated in the judgmentof heresy,all observed the proceduralrules set forthin royal ordinance.Royal legal practicein France adopted and, at the same time, modifiedthe Roman-canoninquisitorial system. Changes particularlyob- vious to the student of the Roman and Spanish Inquisitionswere the confrontationof witnesseswith the accused and the denial of a defense

65A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 50 (27 octobre 1554). Pegna, in his commentaryupon Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 528-534, suggeststhat "buming in effigy"was a fifteenth- centurydevelopment. Isambert, Recueil gen6ral, 12: 605. Simancas,De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 136-136v?. 66 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 47 (19 decembre 1553). A.M., Toulouse, layette(6 fevrier 1554). Szapiro, "Lautrec," 341-342. 67A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 45 (27 mars 1553), reg. 50 (3 septembre1554) and (12 octobre1554), reg. 59 (29 juillet 1556). Schnapper,"Parlement de Bordeaux," 44-46.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions PUNISHMENT 127 attorney.The French"extraordinary" procedure, characterized by the information,interrogation, confrontation, limited defense and torture,was the common experience of all criminaldefendants. The courts did not judge heresy under a special or more rigorousprocess. Restraintin the applicationof tortureand the invocationof the death sentence,compared to theiruse in the prosecutionof other serious crimes,tends to confirm thisview. Criminalprocedural for the adjudicationof heresywas neither peculiarnor singular.In the contextof the sixteenthcentury, it was legal justice; and moral objections might more fruitfullyconcentrate on the definitionof heresy ratherthan the manner of its judgment. Thus the focusof thisstudy now shiftsto a considerationof royallaws and judicial practicewhich definedas criminalreligious belief differentfrom that of the established Church. What were the statutesand how were they in- terpreted?By whom were theypromulgated? To whom were theyapplied? And, finally,what was theireffect?

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Part 3.

The Law and Its Application

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions XI. Heresy Statutes

ecular laws governingthe crimeof heresywere not unknown prior Sto theReformation. As earlyas thesixth century, Justinian's Code incorporatedseveral provisions touching upon religiouserror. During the medieval period,however, the greatestportion of heresystatutes was contained in canon law. French criminallaw did not embrace a sizable corpus relatingto religiousoffenses until the sixteenthcentury. The en- actmentof these measures by the royal governmentcorresponded ap- proximatelyto the rise of FrenchProtestantism and the increasedactivity of secular courtsin the adjudication of heresy.The laws were simple in theirconstruction and, forthe most part,were directedagainst overtacts which mightdisrupt public tranquillityand threatenpolitical and social accord. Few secular juristswere adequately schooled in the complexities of doctrinaldispute and subtletiesof hereticalintent. And, forpolitical as well as religiousreasons, the crown desiredstatutes which its magistrates mightreadily interpretand therebymaintain ordered unity within the kingdom. Priorto 1539, mixed "ecclesiastical"tribunals composed of two clerical and two secular judges triedaccused hereticsin Languedoc.1 These and otherreligious courts empowered to hear heresycauses had littledifficulty in basing their decisions on the prescriptionsof canon law. The legal maneuverssurrounding the trialof Nicolas de Beaumontalias Arnoultin 1523 involved an elaborate discussion of certainpoints in ecclesiastical law. Boththe Inquisitionand the archiepiscopalcourt of Toulouse claimed exclusive authorityto prosecute de Beaumont, an accused sorcerer.The essential debate between the two jurisdictionswas whether heresy, as definedby the canons of the Church,included sorceryand necromancy.2 Ecclesiasticalmagistrates, and especiallythe Dominicaninquisitors, were well-versedin theology and fully capable of detectingand identifying religiouserror. The inquisitor,official and two counsellorsof theParlement posthumouslycondemned Gondisalvyde Molina at Toulouse in 1511 for having "irreverently"placed in a napkin a consecratedhost administered to him on his deathbed.3The diocesan judge of Auch issued a warrant

1 The compositionof these tribunalsat Toulouse included the inquisitor,the episcopal vicargeneral (or a suitablesubstitute) and two counsellorsof the Parlement.See chapterIV, The Royal Tribunals. 2 A.D.H.G., 112 H 6, Extraitdes registresdu Parlement,janvier 1522 (o.s.). 3Ibid., B 14, fo. 774v? and 795v?; ms. 132, 239-241. Lafaille,Annales de Toulouse,1: 313- 314. Desecrationof the host was a charge commonlyleveled against persons of Jewishand Marrano background(such as de Molina). P. Browe, "Die Hostienschandungender Juden im Mittelalter,"167-197. 131

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 132 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC forthe arrestof Jehande Verdusan and Raymond de Orto in 1532. The two men allegedlyclaimed thatChrist had conferredthe power to forgive sins solely upon Saint Peter and that this facultyhad not passed to his successors.They also questioned the utilityof fastand abstinenceduring Lent and denied the value of prayerfor souls in purgatory.4During the same year,Jean de Boyssone,a law professorat the Universityof Toulouse, fellunder suspicionof heresy.In orderthat he mightdispel all doubt, de Boyssone abjured publiclya series of erroneouspropositions. The listing, draftedby officersof the Inquisitionand officiality,was very nearly a compendiumof ideas properto early reformers. 1. One mustmaintain as a pointof Faithonly that which is containedin Holy Scripture. 2. The Articlesof Faithadded by theRoman Church must be rejected. 3. One mustaccept only the first four councils. 4. The See of Romehas beenvacant for five hundred years. 5. Purgatorycannot be provenfrom any passage of HolyScripture. 6. The pope does nothave thepower to excommunicatenor to forbidanything underpain of mortal sin, with the exception of that which is expresslyprohibited by Scripture. 7. Indulgencesare onlyan abuse. 8. Prayersaddressed to thesaints are superfluous. 9. Thereis no freewill. 10. We are notjustified by good works,but by thesole Faithof Jesus Christ.5 Althoughthere is no assurance that de Boyssone actually advocated the positionsof which he purgedhimself, they do indicatethe extentto which religious authoritieswere concerned with what might be described as ideological dissent. By comparison,many of the secularlaws pertainingto religiousoffenses dealt more with the concretepublic manifestationsof reformedreligious ideas thanwith the ideas themselves.One of the earlieststatutes appeared in 1539, the year which marked the full involvementof royal justice in thetrial of heretics. It forbadeschoolmasters (maistres d'escoles) from reading and interpretatingpublicly the Scripturesand, in particular,the Epistles of Saint Paul withoutexpress permission from diocesan authorities.The crownsubsequently extended the requirement for prior episcopal approval to include all preachingand religiousinstruction. Violations were referred to the royalcourts for appropriate legal action.6Already in 1537, the vicar general for the diocese of Montauban had blocked the appointmentof Michel de Affinibusas a regentof the schools at Montauban because he allegedlyinterpreted one of thePauline Epistlesincorrectly. Nearly a decade later,magistrates of the diocese of Albi arrestedAnthoine Amasi, a local

4A.D.H.G., 1 G 642, Inquisitionde 1532. 5 Lafaille,Annales de Toulouse,2: 77-78. 6A.D.H.G., B 32, fo.313v?; B 33, fo.36v?; B, Toumelle,reg. 50 (27 octobre1554). "Documents ineditset originaux,"202. Isambert,Recueil general, 13: 60.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HERESY STATUTES 133 schoolmaster,for having lecturedto his studentson Sacred Writwithout the bishop's approbation.The Parlementthen triedAmasi and banished him fromthe provincefor one year. And, in 1559, Jehande La Rogeraye was apprehended at Montauban and chargedwith recitingthe Psalms in the schools withoutpermission from the episcopal officers.Fortunately forde La Rogeraye,he escaped detentionbefore his case could be transferredto Toulouse forjudgment.7 Anotherproblem forthe civil authoritieswas the secretmeetings and assembliesof adherents to reformedChristianity. Numerous laws prohibited these gatheringsand the edict of Chateaubriand (1551) even promised immunityfrom prosecution to persons who would reveal theirexistence. Yet the difficultypersisted. The municipalconsuls of Pamiersfound themselves charged with negligence in 1550 because they failed to prevent these conventicles.The Parlementfined Pierre Chabot when he neglected to reporta religiousassembly which he had witnessed.And it imposed a minorpenalty on two persons fortheir seemingly inadvertent attendance at an evening gatheringwhere an accused and subsequentlyconvicted heretichad spoken. Several parlementairesinterrogated Adrian Panatier, a residentof Pamiers, in February 1560. They discussed, among other things,his alleged participationin privatereligious meetings where the Psalms were sung in French. Shortlythereafter, the juge-mage for the Seneschalsy of Nimes-Beaucaire,the juge ordinaire of Nimes and the criminaljudge forthe Bailiwickof Vivaraisreported armed religiousgath- eringsat Nimes and Annonay. Fearfulof civil strifeas well as religious unrest,the Parlementof Toulouse immediatelycommissioned a president and two counsellors to probe the matter.It also alerted Guillaume de Joyeuse,the lieutenantof the Governorof Languedoc, and commanded the Seneschal of Nimes-Beaucaireand Bailiffof Vivarais to act promptly forthe preventionof futureassemblies. Simultaneousaccounts of armed reformedgatherings around Lombez to the west of Toulouse evoked a similarresponse. The Parlementdispatched two of its members,Guerin d'Alzon and Etienne de Bonald, to investigateand bringthe responsible partiesto justice.8 Secular as well as ecclesiasticaljudges entertaineda presumptionof heresywhich arose ex patria.Persons affiliatedwith states or citieswhere thereform had successfullytaken root caused deep concern.Volrat Vratzoff, describedas a German,was arrestedat Lectourein late 1551. Appearing before the Parlement,the royal attorneygeneral argued that the many lettersfound among the accused's belongingscontained proof of widespread

7A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 26 (16 septembre1547). A.M., Montauban, 1 BB 6, fo. 47- 48; 1 BB 22 (12 juin 1559), (13 juin 1559) and (9 octobre1559). Devals, "Ecoles pubiiques," 105-108. Histoireecclesiastique, Baum and Cunitz,1: 373-374. Meras, "Michel de Affinibus," 324-326. 8 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle,reg. 34 (23 aofit1550), reg.45 (7 mars1553), reg.50 (13 septembre 1554), reg. 73 (1 fevrier1560), reg. 74 (19 avril 1560) and (20 mai 1560); B 1904, fo. 92. Isambert,Recueil general, 13: 202.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 134 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC conspiracy(plusieurs intelligences) on the part of reprobatereligious sects. The charge was undoubtedlydifficult to substantiatefor within a few monthsthe courtreleased Vratzoffon simple recognizancebond. Hector de Volnerot,another German, apprehended in 1554, fared considerably worse. Convicted of transportingheretical books withinthe kingdomof France,de Volnerotwas banished fromFrance in perpetuityand the volumes found in his possession were burned.9 Individualsassociated with Geneva were subjectto similar,if not greater scrutiny.The Parlementsentenced Michel de Chaseaumolin, a native of Pontoise,to burn forreason of heresyin 1551. It furtherstipulated that priorto executionthe condemned would be questioned whetherhe had been sent from Geneva to disseminatereligious error.The high court sentencedAnthoin Savinhac to public fustigationnot long afterwards.At the same time,it prohibitedhim fromgoing to Geneva, thus suggesting that previous travelto the citywas at least partiallyresponsible for his arrest.Fransois d'Augi, a tannerfrom the Bourbonnaisregion who had lived in Geneva fornearly ten years,and PierreSeptsoubz, a native Ge- nevan, were apprehendedand chargedwith heresyat Annonay in 1552. Though the courtreleased Septsoubz on recognizancebond, it sentd'Augi to the stake. The municipalmagistrates of Toulouse convictedthe native Genevan Claude Bessonnetduring the followingyear. Bessonnet'scrime was perhaps more the factthat he was fromGeneva than adherence to hereticalbelief because he was soon freeon bail pending the disposition of an appeal lodged with the Parlement.The Toulousan capitouls again demonstratedtheir zeal in 1555 when theysought the executionof four studentswho had become imbued with Calvin's views while in Geneva. The studentsappealed to the Parlementand theirwillingness to recant, coupled with theirobvious youth,resulted in a substantiallessening of the sentence.The courtdid no morethan place themin parentalcustody.'0 The crownexpressly drafted a numberof statutesto preventthe spread of Calvinismfrom its Genevan base. The edictof Chateaubriand,published in 1551, containeddetailed provisions.It forbaderoyal subjectsfrom cor- respondingwith, sending money to, or otherwisefavoring persons who had leftthe kingdomto reside in Geneva. The movable and fixedgoods of Frenchmenwho tookrefuge there were subjectto sequestration.Bearers of lettersand books fromGeneva were to be prosecutedas "hereticsand disturbersof public peace and tranquillity."Proscriptions contained in subsequent laws were equally strict.The edict of Compiegne confirmed

9A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 39 (24 decembre 1551), reg. 40 (27 janvier 1552), reg. 45 (14 avril 1553). Sixteenth-centuryItalian and Spanish inquisitorsrecognized similar sorts of "presumptions."Carena, Tractatus,p. 249. Simancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 189- 190. 10 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 37 (14 aouit1551), reg. 39 (10 decembre1551), reg. 42 (24 mai 1552) and (28 juin 1552), reg. 43 (30 juillet 1552), reg. 45 (28 fevrier1553), reg. 52 (9 Fevrier1555), reg. 53 (31 mai 1555). A.M., Toulouse, BB 274, fo. 175; layette48 (11 avril 1558); layette90 (15 fevrier1555).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HERESY STATUTES 135 existingpractice when it made the veryact of goingto Geneva punishable by death.1" The Parlementof Toulouse applied these statuteswith mixed success. On 19 December1553, it institutedproceedings against Antoine de Lautrec, one of its own counsellors, de Lautrec's wife, his niece, and Pierre d'Airebaudouze, an archdeacon of Nimes and Uzes. They had fled to Geneva and thereforewere indictedfor heresy. The courtagain citedthem as hereticsand fugitivesfrom justice in a judgmentdated 6 February1554. This second decree also listedeight new Genevan exiles,five from Nimes and threefrom Toulouse. Referringto the "notoriousscandal" that their actionhad createdamong "simple people" and theirdefiance of the Chris- tian religion,the Parlementsentenced these refugeesto burn in effigy.It furtherordered the confiscationof theirproperty and actual execution should theybe apprehended.This threat,however, did not preventeither de Lautrec or d'Airebaudouze fromreturning to southernFrance in the early1560s. De Lautrecserved briefly as an adviserat the courtof Navarre, while d'Airebaudouze became a pastor at Lyons and later Nimes.12 A less prevalentaspect of the civil magistrature'sdesire to maintain religiousunity and therebyavoid popular turmoilwas the occasional identificationof heresywith the indigentand criminalelements in society.A "brazen man" (affronteur)with long hair and a beard, dressed in Biblical costumeand carryinga staff,attracted great attention among the common people (peuple simpleet ydiot)at Toulouse in 1553. Municipal officials, fearfulof religiousand social discontent,had his beard and hair cut and then expelled him fromthe city.Jean Burel reportsin his Me'moiresthat about thesame timetwo strangerswere caughtattempting to steal a chalice froma churchat Le Puy. They were tried,condemned and executed.One was hanged,the otherdecapitated. Though themode of executionsuggests condemnationfor thievery, they were nonethelesscharacterized as "Lu- theransand heretics."13 Despite slightly differentobjectives, secular and religious officials usually found it in theirbest intereststo cooperate forthe extirpationof heresy.On 23 March 1543, the Facultyof Theology at the Universityof Paris issued a seriesof Articlesof Faithwhich reaffirmednumerous tenets challengedby the reformers.Francis I gave the articlesadded forcewhen, four monthslater, he published them along with royal lettersrequiring theirobservance. The Parlementof Toulouse registeredboth the letters and articleson 19 November.An indicationof the seriousnessof the issue

al A.D.H.G., B 1904, fo. 92v?-93. Isambert,Recueil general, 13: 203-204 and 494-497. 12 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 47 (19 decembre1553). A.M., Toulouse, layette47 (6 f,vrier 1554). Geisendorf,Livre des habitants,1: 12, 26, 28, 29 and 79. RobertM. Kingdon,Geneva and theComing of the Wars of Religion in France1555-1563, 32-33, 45-48, 60 and 72; and Genevaand the Consolidation ofthe French Protestant Movement 1564-1572, 44. Menard,Histoire de N&'mes,4: 355-356. Mentzer,"Calvinist Propaganda," 276-277. 13 A.M., Toulouse, BB 269, fo. 71; BB 274, fo. 150. Jean Burel,M6moires de JeanBurel, bourgeoisdu Puy,8.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 136 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC is providedby an incidentwhich occurred within three years. The inquisitor of Toulouse demanded the apprehensionof a certainPrior of Vasus after investigationrevealed that he had ridiculedthe Articlesof Paris and refused to believe that the crown had approved them.14 Thoughthere is littleindication that the royal courts based theirdecisions specificallyon the Parisian Articles,many trials did center on offenses expresslymentioned in the document.Articles eleven throughsixteen, for instance,reaffirmed various pious practicesrelating to the VirginMary and the saints.They are man's intercessorstowards God and are capable of performingmiracles. One should honorthem, pray to them,and perform good workssuch as visitingtheir shrines and kneelingbefore their statues as well as the crucifix.Opposition to these religiousobservances did not go unpunishedin the seculartribunals. The Parlementof Toulouse arrested FloriMartin in 1546 because he allegedlymade a crucifixon which a fox held the head of Christbetween his teeth.The imagery,whether Mani- chaean or folkloricin inspiration,was deemed inappropriate.The tribunal issued a warrantshortly thereafter for Ramond Chaussoyn when it learned that he had scorned the practiceof honoringthe crucifix.The judge of the Lauragais imprisonedGregoire de Nassia and Jaques Panyer because theyspoke "rashlyand indiscreetly"of the venerationof the saints. The Parlementsentenced the pair to performthe amende honorable and banished Panyerfor a periodof threeyears. The municipalconsuls of Realville arrestedRamond Danyel on a similarcharge and the punishmentimposed by the Parlementwas identicalto thatsuffered by Panyer. The execution of Pierred'Alemans and ArnauldEsculier resulted, at least partially,from theiriconoclastic rampage at Montech. They defaced and destroyednu- merouscrucifixes and sacred statues.The seneschal and capitoulsof Tou- louse triedseveral personsin 1560 forhaving mutilatedreligious artwork. And magistratesin the seneschalsyof Nimes-Beaucaireproceeded against BaptistePelissier after he told a woman of Montfrin:"Since you believe in the VirginMary, you believe in my ass."15 Anotherof the Articlesof Paris reaffirmedthe existenceof purgatory and again the civil authoritieslent support.The lieutenantgeneral of the seneschalsyof Rouerguetried Bernard Palis afterhe expresseddoubt con- cerningpurgatory. Secular justicealso upheld clericalcelibacy. The Parle- mentcondemned to the stakeEstienne Margoti, a priestwho had married; and it punished, though less severely,two priestsof Realville for their "dissolutenessand concubinage."16

14 A.D.H.G., B 1903, fo. 60v?-62; 112 H 6, Inquisitionde 1546. Isambert,Recueil general, 12: 820-821. 15 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 20 (15 mars 1546) and (26 mars 1546), reg. 26 (7 octobre 1547) and (8 octobre 1547), reg. 27 (16 janvier 1548), reg. 74 (27 avril 1560). Puech, La Renaissancea' Nimes,53. 16 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 7 (1 juillet 1539), reg. 26 (6 octobre1547). A.M., Toulouse, CC 2397, fo. lcv? and no. 27. Etienne Cabrol, Annales de Villefranchede Rouergue1: 643- 644. The Inquisition"vehemently" suspected of heresy priestsand monks who married.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HERESY STATUTES 137

The Parlementof Toulouse more than once maintainedthe obligation to fastand abstain frommeat duringLent and on otherspecified days. It accused several residentsof Marvejols due to theirridicule of abstinence frommeat on Fridaysand duringthe Lenten season. Ramond Danyel's arrestby the consuls of Realvillefollowed his rash statementsconcerning the venerationof the saints and the practiceof fasting.The governorof Montpellierinstituted proceedings against Guillaume de Sault and Guil- laume Pay foreating meat duringLent. And one aspect of the Parlement's preliminaryinvestigation against Jehan Robertconcerned the allegation thathe had violatedthe Lentenprohibition against meat. Secular diligence may have reached its zenith when the Parlement,upon discoveringthat PierreGuyrauld could reciteneither the Pater Noster nor Ave Maria, enjoined the bishop of Uzes to instructGuyrauld and "other simple and ignorant persons of his diocese" in the prayersand symbolsof the Faith."7 The mostdogged combined effort of thetemporal and spiritualauthorities was directedagainst printedmaterials in the formof books, pamphlets, songsheetsand placards.Printed matter provided concise concrete evidence and, as such, constitutedthe single most commonlystated reason for heresy indictment.Forty persons apprehended prior to 1560 found the chargesagainst them to include possession of condemned literature.The statutesand laws governingthese offenses originated with both the Church and the civil government.The Sorbonne had censured certain printed works fromthe verybeginning of the FrenchReformation and, in 1543, issued a generalcatalog of reprobate books. Followingthe Parisianinitiative and based largely on the earlier listingcompiled by the Sorbonne, the Toulousan inquisitorVidal de Becanis published an index of proscribed books and songs around 1548. The Frenchmonarchy supplemented the attemptto regulatethe book trade with its own legislation.The edict of Fontainebleau (1547) barred the printingand sale of any work dealing with Sacred Scriptureand the sale of any book importedfrom Geneva, unless it had been examined and approved by the Sorbonne. The edict of Chateaubriand(1551) bolsteredthese measures considerably. It banned the sale, importationand printingof unapproved books under pain of corporalpunishment and confiscationof property.Licensing arrangements obliged printersto indicateclearly their names and addresses,the date of publicationand the author.Biblical translations and scripturalscholarship were subject to additional,more stringentcontrols.18

Concubinage and sexual excesses by clericswere, on the otherhand, usually regarded as disciplinaryabuses. Carena, Tractatus,221-222. Eymeric,Directorium Inquisitorum, 365. Si- mancas, De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 170. 17 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 20 (26 mars 1546), reg. 26 (8 octobre 1547), reg. 28 (19 juillet 1548), reg. 49 (16 juin 1554), reg. 68 (6 mars 1559). 18A.D.H.G., B 1904, fo. 85v?-94. B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. XXV,fo. 206v?-212v?.Freville, "Un index," 1 (1852): 355-363, 437-448 and 2 (1853): 15-24. Lucien Febvre and Henri Martin,L'apparition du livre,423-424. Isambert,Recueil g6n6ral,13: 37-38 and 189-208. HeinrichReuss, Der Index der verbotenenBuicher, 1: 167-168. The place of printingin the

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 138 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

The Parlementof Toulouse made a genuineeffort to enforcecensorship throughoutLanguedoc. It orderedJean de Lancefocto submitthe original copies of his moralityplays forscrutiny by the inquisitor,archiepiscopal vicar general and several doctorsof Theology in 1542. Toward the end of the decade, the tribunalinstructed all civil and religious authorities withinits jurisdictionto visitall bookshops. Their collectivetask was the eliminationof censuredworks, especially vernacular editions of Scripture, fromthe sellers' shelves. Violationsuncovered in this devout,but doubt- lessly ineffective,mobilization were to be referredto the Parlementfor appropriatelegal action. Similar warnings concerningthe printingand sale of hereticalmaterials were issued to the membersof the book trade at Toulouse in 1556.19 The available evidence suggests that a major difficultywas the illicit transportof books fromoutside France. Some came fromGermany, as did those volumes which led to the arrestof Hector de Volnerotin 1551, but the bulk of reprobateliterature in southernFrance, especially after 1550, originatedin Geneva. The convictionof PierreLaborie, a bookseller of Villefranche-de-Rouergue,resulted from the sale of "suspect and reprobate" worksprinted at Geneva. And Guillaume d'Alencon's activityas a distributor(colporteur) of Genevan publicationsended withhis condemnation and executionat Montpellier.20 The discoveryat Toulouse in 1554 of a series of distributionnetworks forProtestant books illustratesthe magnitudeof the problem.While pa- trollingthe cityone evening,two municipalofficers encountered near the Place Arnaud Bernarda young boy with about a dozen books authored by Calvin,Luther, and otherreformers. Upon questioning,the boy revealed that his employer,Pierre Tournier, a masterbookseller of Toulouse, had sent him to deliver them to certainunnamed studentsat a prearranged place. The bookdealerevidently learned of themishap quickly, for although his possessions were seized, he escaped detention.Coincidental to these events, Pierre Navarre, a merchantfrom Morlaas, met PeyronelleMas- sanelle, a brother-in-lawto the booksellerTournier. In the course of their conversationNavarre realized that Massanelle was a disciple of Protes- tantismand soon denouncedhim to theToulousan capitouls.The merchant also informedthe authoritiesthat Massanelle had advised him to call on FrancoisPonisson, a priestat the churchof La Daurade who subsequently fledto Geneva. Anotherproposed contactwas AnthoinePerrin who lived on the rue des Filatiers.Perrin, it was said, could introduceNavarre to

Reformationis exploredin Elizabeth L. Eisenstein,The PrintingPress as an Agentof Change, 1: 303-450. For a recentdiscussion of the book trade and censorshipin France,see: Alfred Soman, "Press, Pulpit and Censorshipin France beforeRichelieu," 439-463. 19A.D.H.G., B 35, fo. 346; B 49, fo. 612v?; B, Tournelle,reg. 25 (6 mai 1547). 20 Ibid., B, Toumelle, reg. 39 (10 decembre1551), reg. 47 (11 decembre1553), reg. 50 (27 octobre1554). Philippe Corbiere,Histoire de l'eglisereformee de Montpellier,11-12. Guiraud, Re'formea' Montpellier,1: 120. Platter,Me'moires, 57-60. Kingdon,Geneva and the Coming, 93-105, examines the exportbook trade at Geneva.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HERESY STATUTES 139 the bookdealer Toumier and therebysecure literaturefor his spiritual enrichment.Both Massanelle and Perrin were arrested,tried and condemned forheresy. Not long afterwards,a studentnotified the Toulousan magistratesof additionalsuspect books storedin a house belongingto Odet de Savonnere, a mastercouturier who lived on the rue de Peyras. A thoroughsearch uncovered in a garretone small and two large bales of books imported fromGeneva. FrancoisLinhac, originallyfrom the town of Fraisse in the Condomois, lived in the house too and admittedthat the tomesbelonged to him. He had gatheredthe Latin and French works while in Geneva and planned to distributethem among the people of the Condomois. Tried and condemned by the Parlement,Linhac burned along with his books. For his part in the affair,Odet de Savonnere was assigned to life servicein the king's galleys. He died, however, priorto implementation of sentence.2' Only rarelydo the judicial registersnote the particulartitle which had incriminatedthe defendant.Among the possessions of Pierred'Alemans and ArnauldEsculier was what the courttermed La sommede l'Escripture. Probably an edition of the Sommede l'Escrituresainte firstpublished at Antwerpin 1523 by MartinLempereur, the work was forbiddenby de Becanis's Index LibrorumProhibitorum for Toulouse.22Three separate in- dictmentsduring the early 1550s focused upon a publicationentitled Le cate'chisme.Authorship was attributedto Calvin in only one instance,yet all seem to have been editionsof his Instructionet confessionde Foy,dont on use en l'eglisede Gene'vewhich initiallyappeared in 1537. De Becanis's Indexonce again censuredthe volume.23The otherrecorded title was the Anatomiede la messe,discovered in the cache belongingto FrancoisLinhac. It was a Frenchtranslation of an Anatomiadella messaby AgostinoMain- ardo, an apostate Augustinianwho became a ministerat Chiavenna in the Valtellina.24 Printedsongs, some solemnyet heretical, others openly derisive, as well as the singingof such verses frequentlygave rise to prosecution.De Be- canis's Indexcited fifteenprohibited songs, all in the vernacularand most with biblical themes. A defamatorylibel in the formof a song was, in part,the evidence againstnine residentsof Beaucaire imprisonedin 1543. The Parlementsternly admonished Ramond Gros and Alrais Donnedilhe fortheir association with personswho sang "scandalous songs" and sen-

21A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 50 (23 aofit1554), (29 aofit1554), (1 septembre1554) and (16 octobre1554). A.M., Toulouse, BB 175, fo. 134v?; BB 269, fo. 72-72v?; BB 274, fo. 162- 163. Geinsendorf,Livre des habitants,1: 48. Lafaille,Annales de Toulouse,2: 170-171. 22A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 27 (27 janvier 1548). B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. XXXV,fo. 210. Febvre,L'apparition du livre,416. Freville,"Un index," 442-443. Reusch, Der Index,1: 168. 23 A.D.H.G., B 92 1, fo. 58; B, Toumelle, reg. 40 (10 fevrier1552), reg. 52 (13 mars 1555). B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. XXXV,fo. 210v?. Freville,"Un index," 444-445. 24 A.M., Toulouse, BB 175, fo. 134v?-135. Jacques-CharlesBrunet, Manuel du libraireet de l'amateurde livres,1: 47 and 258-259. Reusch, Der Index,1: 374.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 140 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC tencedGuillaume Mutet, a couturierof Nizas, to performamende honorable forhaving uttered such verses.The consuls of Gaillac punished the scissor sharpenerJehan Drilhen in a like manner for the same offense.The interrogationof Paul Venetan,a baker fromCastres, concentrated on some songsheetsdiscovered in his house; and a certainBlondel went to the stake afterhe disrupteda religiousprocession at Toulouse by shoutinga "profanecanticle" of ClementMarot in 1556. Fouryears later, the principal allegationagainst Adrian Panatier was thathe had chantedthe Psalms in French,a practiceexplicitly outlawed by parlementaryedict.25 Printed and handwrittenplacards, pasquinades and rondeaux posed anothervexing problem. Anthoine Souchon posted inflammatoryplacards and rondeaux on the buildingsaround the main square at Marvejols and was arrestedfor his diligence. The judge of Verdun inquired into the sudden appearance of religiouslyinvective pasquinades at Gimontin 1553 and soon fixedthe blame on PierrePelouz, a licenciein law. The Parlement, in 1557, finedand banished Andre Guyralh for a period of three years because he penned placards contraryto the establishedFaith.26 Beyond the offensesheretofore described, other transgressions,not readilyassociated with heresy by the modern observer,were treatedas such in the sixteenthcentury. Striking among thesecrimes on the periphery of heresy was homosexuality,or sodomy in the language of the early modem juristwho viewed it as a crimeagainst nature and the violation ofa fundamentalrelationship. Roman law punishedthe crimen innominatum with death by fireand the Inquisition,which oftenassumed jurisdiction over the offense,proved equally severe. The inquisitorsof Aragon sent major offendersto-the stake, while lesser infractionstypically merited flagellationand banishmentor commissionto thegalleys. Justice in southern France was stern,too. The vicar general forthe archdioceseof Toulouse and several judges fromthe Parlementconvicted Anthoine Richardi, the Dominican lieutenantinquisitor, in 1539 and it cost him his life. The Inquisitionof Carcassonne pronouncedBernard Prat guiltyof sodomy in 1547. Prat appealed to the Parlementwhich granteda retrialin the court of the seneschal of Carcassonne, but again, the verdictwas guilty.Prat lodged a second appeal with the Parlement,but it was denied and, on 3 March 1548, thehigh court ruled that the convictedsodomite had incurred the "legal penaltyfor heresy," burning.27

25 A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 13 (10 avril1543), reg.39 (7 decembre1551) and (9 decembre 1551), reg.49 (16 juin 1554) and (3 juillet1554), reg. 73 (1 fevrier1560). "Documents inedits et originaux.Arret ab iratodu Parlementde Toulouse contreun heretique,1556," 13-14. B.N., CollectionDoat, vol. 35, fo. 211v?-212v?.Freville, "Un index," 16-19. 26 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 20 (15 fevrier1546), reg. 45 (25 fevrier1553), reg. 46 (12 aofit1553), reg. 64 (27 aofit1557). 27 The Richardiaffair is discussed in Chapter II, The Crisisof the Inquisition.Ibid., reg. 7 (10 mai 1539), reg. 27 (5 decembre 1547) and (3 mars 1548). Carena, Tractatus,116. Note that only Aragonese inquisitorshandled sodomy. In Castile it was a civil crime.Bartolome Bennassar,"Le modele sexual: L'Inquisitiond'Aragon et la repressiondes peches 'abomin- ables,"' in L'InquisitionEspagnole, XVe-XIXe siecle, 339-369. Karlen,"Homosexual Heresy," 44-63. Monter,"La sodomie," 1023-1033.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HERESY STATUTES 141

Necromancy,sorcery and witchcraftwere also loosely, and oftendis- putably,classed under the rubricof heresy.The Spanish juristDiego Si- mancas cautioned that the Inquisitiondid not possess jurisdictionover sortilegeunless it involvedheresy. Raymond Gosin, inquisitorat Toulouse duringthe 1520s, went fartherand argued that canon law definedmagic and sortilegeas heresy.He accordinglyclaimed power to prosecute the alleged magician Nicholas de Beaumont in 1523, to the exclusion of the Toulousan Officiality.Nearly ten yearslater, when Amaud de Badet faced trialfor heresy, his accusers reasoned thathe was guiltybecause, among otherthings, he had engaged in astrology.28 There naturallyremain a good number of cases for which the court recordsdo not specifythe particularact of heresy. Many persons were merelyaccused of hereticalblasphemy and indiscreetstatements (blas- phe'meset parollesscandaleuses et indiscre'tes).29Even morewere charged withmaking statements contrary to the Holy CatholicFaith and the Chris- tianReligion (parolles contraires a' la saintefoy catholique et religionchres- tienne).30The phrasesunfortunately represent little more than general legal formulaeand provide scant indicationof the nature and gravityof the defendant'soffense. Yet theyare furthertestimony of theroyal magistrates' anxiousconcern over public statements and acts in oppositionto traditional religiousbeliefs and practices. Statutelaw dealing withheresy in Languedoc priorto the religiouswars was largelya creationof theroyal government, subject to theinterpretations of its courts. Neither the precepts of canon law nor the doctrinaland disciplinaryinterests of the Church were forgotten.Rather, they were selectivelyreinforced and buttressedby a growingbody of secularcriminal legislation.The monarchythat promulgatedthese new laws and the ju- diciarythat enforced them understood the preservationof religiousunity to be a basic ingredientin the politicaland social well-beingof the state. As was so amply demonstratedduring the second half of the sixteenth century,religious differences could easily spill over into otherareas. The maintenanceof order and preventionof conffictwould seem, however, to depend upon effectiveand uniformenforcement of the law. Were the courtsand, in particular,the Parlementof Toulouse capable of this task? And, if so, were they successful?

28 A.D.H.G., 112 H 6, Extraitdes registresdu Parlement,le 17 janvier 1552 (o.s.). A.D., Aude, H 418. Simancas,De CatholicisInstitutionibus, fo. 197v'-198. The importantexploratory studies by AlfredSoman, "Proces de sorcellerie,"790-814 and "The Parlementof Paris," 31-44 discussmethodology and sourcesfor the examinationof criminaljustice and witchcraft in France. On the prosecutionof witchcraft,E. William Monter,Witchcraft in France and Switzerland:The Borderlandsduring the Reformation. 29 A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 11 (12 juin 1542), reg. 34 (8 novembre 1550), reg. 51 (22 decembre 1554), to cite but several examples. 30 Ibid., reg. 28 (18 juillet 1548), reg. 39 (9 decembre 1551), reg. 52 (9 fevrier1555), for instance.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions XII. THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE ACCUSED T he successor failureof the civiland religiousmagistrates in the eradicationof heresy,a highlyassociational crime,depended in large measure upon sustained and uniformenforcement. There is no intenthere to deny the effectivenessof selectiveprosecution based on a predeterminedand coherentpolicy. The actioncould be extremelypotent if directed,for example, against the leadershipwithin heterodox factions. On the otherhand, the intermittentapplication of heresystatutes or an unconsciousbias withrespect to certaingeographic areas and social groups could have quite the opposite effect.The unequal administrationof justice would not only permitsome hereticalpopulations to flourishunmolested, but could easily create an aura of martyrdomaround the victimsof this prejudicialtreatment. A preliminarygauge of judicial capacityto controlreligious opposition is an examinationof the geographicdistribution of persons accused of heresy.What was theirplace of residenceat the momentof accusationor arrest?If the enforcementof anti-heresylegislation was homogeneous throughoutLanguedoc, the incidence of accusations should roughlyre- semble the patternof the reformmovement as known fromother independent sources. Several prefatorycomments regarding the available documentationare appropriate.Though therecords of the episcopal tribunalsand Inquisition, as well as those fromthe courtsof the seneschalsies and municipalities, are uneven and fragmentary,the registersof the Parlementof Toulouse are fairlycomplete, especially for the period 1540-1560. The value of the latterdocumentation is greaterthan may appear at firstglance. As previously indicated,jurisdictional and proceduralrules for the adjudicationof heresy would have requirednearly all suspects to stand beforethe Parlementat one stage or another in their trial. The records of the Parlement thus compensate for the paucity of informationfrom other tribunalsand, as such, provide the basis forthis analysis. The archives of the various courtsof Languedoc reveal that between 1500 and 1560 at least 1074 personswere accused of heresy.Not all were found guilty,nor were all of them even broughtto trial.Some suspects, forinstance, fled to safetyupon learningof the issuance of a warrantfor theirarrest. Yet the list does provide a group associated with religious reform,if only in the eyes of the magistrates.It is unfortunatelyimpossible to determinefor all suspectsthe jurisdictionor townin which theyresided at the timeof summonsor apprehension.Adequate informationexists for

142

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE ACCUSED 143

922 persons, approximately86 percent of the total.' The observations advanced with respectto the geographicdistribution of accused heretics must then be understoodas general trendsand indicationswhich are, in addition,largely limited in theirapplicability to the Parlementof Toulouse. Similarcaution must be voiced concerningthe standardsof comparison, the independentand non-judicial sources which suggest the patternof the reformmovement. The Livre des habitantsde Gene'vefor the years 1549-1560 gives a partial listingof Protestantrefugees to that city.The motivesand causes behind this emigrationare, to be sure, not fullyun- derstoodand may vary widely. The list of habitants,moreover, is by no means a completeregister of refugeesto Geneva. Some persons chose not to become habitantsand women were almost totallyexcluded. Yet those who did inscribein the Livredes habitantsnormally gave theirtown of origin.And it is possible, within the confinesof the cautions outlined above, to compare the patternof emigrationfrom Languedoc to Geneva with the geographicdistribution of heresyaccusations. A second standard for comparison is the distributionof reformed churchesin Languedoc duringthe sixteenthcentury. The establishment of a churchshould reflectthe existenceof a Protestantpopulation sufficient forits support. Yet therelative size and strengthof thevarious congregations are difficultto determine.And the extent to which southern French Protestantsredistributed their numbers after 1560, when religiouswarfare forcedthem to seek safetywithin and withoutLanguedoc, is not fully known. The geographicpattern of the reformedchurches does, on the otherhand, providea generalindication of the relativeproportions of the Protestantpopulace distributedamong the varioussections of the province. An examinationof the geographicdistribution of accused hereticsis thus possible and useful,but only with completeawareness of the limitations of the attempt. The clusteringof accused hereticsaccording to the modem departements in which theirresidences were located broadly suggeststhe distribution. The totalsfor each departementwholly or partiallywithin the jurisdiction of the Parlementof Toulouse are as follows: Departement AccusedHeretics2

Ardeche 21 Ariege 47 Aveyron 29 Aude 64 Bouches-du-Rhone 2

1 In his analysis of criminaljustice before the Parlementof Bordeaux,Bernard Schnapper similarlynotes that the "place of infraction"is not uniformlymentioned in the records. Schnapper,"Parlement de Bordeaux," 4. 2 This and subsequenttables are based upon close examinationof the survivingdocuments fromthe criminalchamber of the Parlementof Toulouse.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 144 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Departement Accused Heretics2

Correze 1 Gard 164 Haute-Garonne 168 Gers 38 Herault 77 Haute-Loire 26 Lot 6 Lot-et-Garonne 1 Lozere 37 Pyrenees-Atlantiques 1 Hautes-Pyrenees 4 Tam 103 Tarn-et-Garonne 133 Figure3 graphicallyindicates the relationshipof these numbers. Three general concentrationsof accused hereticsare discernible-the largest around Toulouse, site of both the Parlement and the principal branchof the Inquisition.The zone includesthe Haute-Garonnein which Toulouse is located; the Tarn wherein lie Albi and the futureHuguenot bastionof Castres;and the Tam-et-Garonne,dominated by the celebrated Protestanttown of Montauban. On the peripheryof thisinitial conglom- erationare the Aude whose largesturban centersare Carcassonne and Narbonne; the Ariege with its principal seat at Pamiers; and the Gers where Auch and Lectoureare situated.A second broad band of pre-1560 Protestantactivity extends eastward along the littoralfrom Montpellier to the Rhone Valley. The Herault in which Montpellieris placed and the Gard with its Protestantmunicipalities at Bagnols, Beaucaire,Nimes and Uzes formthe region. A final concentrationof accused hereticsreaches inland into the rugged and ruralvalleys of the Cevennes. The Ardeche, the Aveyron,the Haute-Loire and the Lozere today circumscribethis mountainousarea. The remainingdepartements had only a few residents chargedwith heresy-the case with the Lot and the Hautes-Pyrenees;or no more than a fractionof theirterritory was within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Parlementof Toulouse. The Bouches-du-Rhone,the Correze,the Lot-et-Garonne,and the Pyrenees-Atlantiquescompose the latterdivision. An analogous patternis evidentin the towns of Languedoc. They are rankedaccording to the numberof personssummoned on heresycharges between 1500 and 1560. Town Accused Heretics

Toulouse 149 Nimes 70 Montauban 57 Pamiers 38 Uzes 29

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE GEOGRAPHYOF THE ACCUSED 145

z~~~~~~~~

INI 3:~~~~~rZ 0 cr-I'll

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 146 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Town AccusedHeretics

Puylaroque 29 Castres 28 Marvejols 25 Bagnols 24 Rabastens 20 Villefranche-de-Lauragais 16 Narbonne 15 Montpellier 14 Moissac 12 Beaucaire 12 Lectoure 11 Roquecourbe 11 Privas 10 Villefranche-de-Rouergue 10 Annonay 9 Montech 9

When the locationsare plottedon the map (Figure4), the emergingimage resemblesthat viewed in Figure 3. A primaryconcentration of accused hereticsoccurs in the regionsurrounding Toulouse. It extendsprincipally northand east,in the directionsof Montauban and Castres,and to a lesser degree south toward the Pyrenees.A secondarygrouping in Lower Lan- guedoc centerson Nimes and a tertiaryfollows the upland line of the Cevennes fromMarvejols to Privas to Annonay.3 Certainfeatures of the geographicarrangement of heresysuspects may be explained withreference to over-allpopulation distribution.Toulouse, with a totalpopulation between 40,000 and 50,000 by mid-century,was the largesturban area in Languedoc.4That therewas a preponderanceof accusations in and around Toulouse should not be a surprise.But an explanationbased solely upon generaldemographic characteristics of the province quickly cease to be useful. The next biggesttowns were from one-fourthto one-fifththe size of Toulouse. Montpellierhad a totalpopulation of between 10,000 and 12,000; Nimes may have been slightly larger.5Yet the incidenceof heresyaccusations varied enormouslyamong

3 The lattertwo "zones" resemblethose outlinedby Le Roy Ladurie in his descriptionof the Reformationin Lower and easternLanguedoc. Le Roy Ladurie,Paysans de Languedoc,1: 333-336. 4 Estimatesof the Toulousan population in the sixteenthcentury vary. TertiusChandler and GeraldFox, 3000 Yearsof Urban Growth, 122. PierreChaunu and RichardGascon, Histoire 6conomiqueet sociale de la France,1, i: 397. Jean Coppolani, Toulouse,etude de geographie urbaine,p. 97. RogerMols, Introductiond la d6mographiedes villesd'Europe du XIVe au XVIIIe siecle 2: 516-517. 5 Chandler, Urban Growth,116-117. Le Roy Ladurie, Paysans de Languedoc,1: 189-196 and 328. FerdinandLot, Recherchessur la populationet la superficiedes cites remontantd la periodegallo-romaine, 1: 374-375. Mols, Demographiedes villes,2: 41 and 516-517 and 3: 118. JosiahC. Russell, "L'evolution demographiquede Montpellierau moyen age," 345- 360. Line Teisseyre-Sallman,"Urbanisme et socit&: l'exemplede Nimes aux XVIle et XVIIIe siecles," 967 estimatesthat Nimes had a populationof 13,000 duringthe reignof HenryIV.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE ACCUSED 147

Annonay

Privas Marvejols

ols Moissac dulriue-Rouer ueg UUe Motuban Lectoure R|abastens Mor~echc oquecourbe ms Toulouse MontpgllierBeaucaire i)Toulouse; *Castres Villefranche-de- Je ~~~~~~~~Lauragais Narbonne er

FIG. 4. PrincipalTowns at which HereticsWere Sought. thesesecondary towns. Nimes accountedfor seventy suspects; Montpellier had only fourteen.Montauban and Narbonne, whose populations also fell withinthis second echelon, respectivelycontributed fifty-seven and fifteensuspects. Faced with these disparities,examination must turn to the demographyof southernFrench Protestantism. The lists of Protestantemigres from Languedoc to Geneva are a con- venientbeginning. Robert Mandrou has traced the originsof those individuals who registeredin the Genevan Livredes habitantsbetween 1549 and 1560.6 The differencesbetween his geographicanalysis and the distributionof heresysuspects are striking.The flow of refugeesfrom Lan- guedoc was substantial;it was among the strongestof all the French provincesand atteststo the vitalityof the region'sProtestant reform. Yet therewas an internalunevenness to the emigration.The habitantsfrom the westerntowns-Albi, Castres,Montauban, Pamiers and Toulouse- wereproportionally less numerousthan the emigres from the urban centers of easternLanguedoc-Ales, Anduze, Montpellier,Nimes and Uzes. The Cevenol towns of Annonay,Aubenas, Le Puy, Mende, Millau and Saint- Chely also contributeda relativelysignificant number of refugees to Geneva. The Rhone-Cevennes-Lower-Languedoc triangleof earlyProt- estantismdescribed by EmmanuelLe Roy Ladurie7dominated the religious migrationto Geneva, but not the geographicpattern of heresyaccusations. The proximityof a possible westerlysanctuary, Bearn and Navarre,

6 RobertMandrou, "Les franiais hors de France aux XVIe et XVIIe siecles," 662-675. ' Le Roy Ladurie,Paysans de Languedoc,1: 333-336.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 148 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC may partiallyaccount for the weaker representationof Protestantsfrom Toulouse and the adjacent area among the Genevan habitants.Were they more apt to fleethe shortdistance to the AtlanticPyrenees than make the arduous trekacross the entiretyof France to the Calvinist capital? Yet even thishypothesis is not in itselfsufficient account of the differencesin thegeographic origins of therefugees to Geneva and thesuspected heretics of Languedoc. The geographicpattern of heresyaccusations reflects the effectivereach of the courts(and mostnotably the Parlementof Toulouse) as well as the generalpopulation distributionand demographiccontours of the French Reformation.Montpellier, for instance, was a fairlylarge town (10,000- 12,000 people) considerablydistant from Toulouse and its judicial institutions.During the yearsbefore the Wars of Religion,it providedtwenty- nine habitantsof Geneva, yet only fourteenof its residentswere accused of heresy.8Conversely, only fiveindividuals from Pamiers, a smallertown in the Toulousan region,registered at Geneva, while thirty-eightresidents were indictedas heretics.And fifty-sevenpersons were accused at Mon- tauban (also near Toulouse), but only seventeenfled to Geneva. The data fromfive other towns at which therewere numerous indictmentspoint toward the same interpretation.

Town AccusedHeretics GenevanHabitants

Toulouse 149 22 Puylaroque 29 0 Castres 28 7 Nimes 70 54 Uzes 29 19

Heresyaccusations were considerableat Toulouse and nearbyPuylaroque and Castres. The eastern towns, such as Nimes and Uzes, provided far more Genevan refugees,but do not appear to have had a proportional numberof heresysuspects. Analysis of the strengthof early Protestantismbased on the number and locationof reformedchurches yields a patternanalogous to thatsug- gestedby the emigrationto Geneva. Adherenceto the Reformationagain seems to have been proportionallymore substantialin the easternreaches of Languedoc (Figure5).9 The churchesof the Rhone-Cevennes-Lower- Languedoc area outnumberedthose in the westernsection of the province. That heresyaccusations did not whollyreflect this development is evident in a comparisonbetween the area surroundingToulouse and the regions of Montpellier-Nimes and the Cevennes.

8 Figuresbased on Geisendorf,Livre des habitants,1. I Samuel Mours, Les eglisesr6formdes en France,51. Cf. a similarmap in JanineEstebe, "Une societe de refus,"in Philippe Wolffet al. Documentsde l'histoiredu Languedoc,215.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE ACCUSED 149

ON~~~~

/~~~~

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 150 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Accused ReformedChurches ReformedChurches Heretics before1560 in the 16thcentury Toulouse Region'? 553 10 140 Montpellier- Nlmes- Cevennes Region" 354 35 368

Though the numberof reformedchurches is greater,heresy suspects are noticeablyfewer in the Montpellier-Nimes and Cevennes regions.The preponderanceof accusationsin the area around Toulouse may be inflated by its gross population. But this considerationdoes not outweighthe evidence thatthe mostintense centers of reformedbelief were in the eastern sectorsof Languedoc. While the conclusionis by no means definitive,the Protestantsof Montpellier,Nimes, and Uzes, as well as thosein theCevenol towns, appear to have been less liable to prosecutionthan theirco-reli- gionistswho lived in proximityto Toulouse. Toulouse as the focus of legal oppositionto the Reformationresulted, in part,from the many courtswhich sat there.It was the site of both the Parlementand the principalcourt of the Inquisition.A seneschal court met withinits walls and even the municipal magistrates,the capitouls, repeatedlyexercised their judicial charge in opposition to Protestantism. Most of these tribunalshad limitedterritorial jurisdiction. The major ex- ceptionwas theParlement whose powerextended throughout the province. Yet even this sovereigncourt appears to have had greatesteffect in the area immediatelyadjacent to itsToulousan seat; itsroyal justice diminished and weakened in themore distant and remotezones. Werethe magistrates, by and large livingand workingin Toulouse, unable to provide adequate supervisionfor the fartherreaches of theirjurisdiction? Were local officials too oftensympathetic to the reformor, perhaps more accurately,lax in theiropposition to it?Did the mountainousterrain which separatesUpper and Lower Languedoc, and both from the C'evennes, affordthe early Protestantsa protectionbest exemplifiedby the De'sertce'venol which followed the revocationof the Edict of Nantes? The discussion of these questions must await the concludingchapter. It is sufficientat thispoint to say that,for whatever reasons, the geographic distributionof heresy suspects suggests an unequal enforcementof the laws against heresy. This geographicimbalance, in tum, points to the furtherproblem of the position of the accused hereticswithin the community.What were theiroccupations and social backgrounds?

10The Toulouse regionincludes the departements of Ariege,Aude, Haute-Garonne,Gers, Tam and Tam-et-Garonne.Mours, Eglisesreformees, 62-63, 78, 101-103 and 107. " The Montpellier-Nlmes-Cevennes regionincludes the departementsof Ardeche,Av- eyron,Gard, Herault,Haute-Loire and Lozere. Mours, Eglises reformees,59-61, 63, 73-77, 79-80, 86-87 and 197.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions XIII. SOCIAL AND OCCUPATIONAL STATUS OF THE ACCUSED

xaminationof the social status and occupationsof suspected heretics differsfrom the studyof theirgeographic distribution in one vital respect:judicial recordsnote the statusor functionof the accused withinthe communityfar less than they recordhis residence.Available documentationindicates that between 1500 and 1560 the tribunalsof Languedoc accused 1,074 persons.There is reliablesocial and occupational informationfor 424 individuals,slightly less than two-fifthsof the total (approximately40 percent).Pertinent data are available, yet they are far fromcomplete.' A furtherproblem, discussed in the previous chapter,is the effectivenessof and execution of heresy laws by the judiciary.The courtscould engage in selectiveprosecution and stillably combat heresy. A programaimed at the discoveryand indictmentof the principalsin the reformmovement, for instance, would hardlyyield a list of persons representativeof the general social and occupational pattern of French Protestantism.Though thereis no firmevidence that the courtspursued this sort of policy,those individuals in the forefrontof the Reformation could be expected to be more visible and articulateand thus more liable to accusation.Both of these problemspose intriguingquestions and, after examinationof the data, deserve furtherconsideration. Despite the limiteddocumentation, analysis of the backgroundof the accused hereticscan be approached in two basic ways: by studyingtheir proportionalrepresentation among various professionalgroupings and by comparingthe emergingpattern with the social and occupational distributionof adherentsto the reformedreligion which is to be had fromother independentsources. Differencesand similaritiescan be duly noted and analyzed. When classed accordingto similarsocial and occupational status,the 424 accused hereticsdivide into the followingcategories:

l The lack of informationmay be typical.Lucien Febvre,Inquisition en Franche-ComtL,152- 154, found occupationdata foronly 33 percentof the 304 accused hereticswhose trialshe examined in the Franche-Comte.Bernard Schnapper's more general study of sixteenth- centurycriminal justice at Bordeaux also noted incompleteinformation regarding the etat- civil of defendants.Schnapper, "Parlement de Bordeaux," 4. Examinationof the social and occupationalstatus of Toulousan Protestantsduring the Wars of Religion(after 1562) was undertakenin a recentarticle by Joan Davies, "Persecutionand Protestantism:Toulouse, 1562-1575," 31-51. J. M. H. Salmon, Societyin Crisis,87-89, analyzed the occupational backgroundof persons indictedfor heresy by the Parisian chambre ardente,1547-1550.

151

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 152 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Occupation Number Percentage Liberalprofessions 152 35.5% Religious 140 33% Artisans 72 17% Merchants 34 8% Noblesof unknownoccupation 24 6% Agriculturalworkers 2 .5% Accusedheretics for whom occupation is known 424 100% Totalnumber of suspects 1074

Priorto commentupon thedistribution pattern of thesesuspected heretics, it would be useful to consider similartypes of analyses based on non- judicial sources. Employinga tax census of Huguenotsat Montpellierin November1560, EmmanuelLe Roy Ladurie foundreliable social and occupationaldata for 561 of the 817 Calvinistslisted (approximately70 percent).2Their distribution is as follows:

Occupation Number Percentage

Artisans 387 69% Liberalprofessions 87 15.5% Merchants 24 4% Bourgeois 23 4% Nobles 13 2.5% Agriculturalworkers 27 5% Huguenotsof knownprofession 561 100% Generaltotal 817

Le Roy Ladurie observed a like distributionat Beziers in 1568. Among 141 heads of Huguenot famillies,the professionis known for 114 (ap- proximately81 percent):3

Occupation Number Percentage

Artisans 57 50% Merchants 26 23% Liberalprofessions 19 16.5% Agriculturalworkers 9 8% Notables(bourgeois and noble) 3 2.5% Huguenotsof knownprofession 114 100% Generaltotal 141

2 Le Roy Ladurie,Paysans de Languedoc,1: 343. Ibid., 1: 343 and 2: 777. Note that the figurespresented by Le Roy Ladurie forBeziers on p. 343 differslightly from those on p. 777. We have used the latter.Also be aware that we have made a minorchange in the classificationof libraires.Le Roy Ladurie has classed them as merchants,while we have included them among the liberal professions.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions STATUS OF THE ACCUSED 153

Finally,in an effortto move beyond the towns of Languedoc, Robert Mandrou's analysis of persons who fled to Geneva and registeredin the Livredes habitantsbetween 1549 and 1560 permitsinsight into the general social and occupationalbackground of Huguenots throughout France. Two thousandtwo hundredand fortyseven of the 4776 refugees(approximately 47 percent)who enrolledat Geneva indicatedtheir profession.4 They can be arrangedinto the followinggroupings:

Occupation Number Percentage Artisans 1536 68.5% Liberalprofessions 275 12% Merchants 180 8% Agriculturalworkers 77 3.5% Nobles 70 3% Divers 109 5% Refugeesof knownoccupation 2247 100% Generaltotal 4776

There are numberof obvious differenceswhen the professionalpattern of the accused hereticsof Languedoc is comparedto the Protestantgroups examinedby Le Roy Ladurie and Mandrou. Most obvious is the factthat neitherLe Roy Ladurie nor Mandrou needed to include "religious" as a category.Variances in the proportionalstrength of artisansand members of theliberal professions are onlyslightly less striking.Finally, the numbers and typesof merchants,nobles and agriculturalworkers pose minordif- ferencesworthy of note. One hundred and fortysuspects can be properlyclassified as religious or clerics.5The imposingfigure is not unexpected.Clerics were generally in the vanguard of religiousreform and theirconstant involvement with theologicalmatters made themlikely suspects for heresy tribunals. Of the one hundredand fortyindividuals accused, fifty-eight were diocesan priests and sixty-sixwere membersof a monasticorder. The remainingsixteen persons held various ecclesiastical titles such as archdeacon, chaplain, prebendaryand subdeacon. It is not possible to categorizethem as either diocesan priestsor membersof an order.Mendicants and regularcanons share on a fairlyequal basis thosesuspected heretics belonging to monastic orders.There were, forinstance, twelve Dominicans,eleven Franciscans, five Carmelites,two Trinitariansand one sisterof Sainte-Claire.Regular

4 Mandrou, "Les frangaishors de France," 665. On the FrenchProtestant emigration to Geneva see also: RobertMandrou, "Les protestantsfrangais refugies a Geneve apres la Saint- Barthelemy,"243-249; and Madeleine Wagner,"Les emigresdu Bas-Languedoc a Geneve de 1549 a 1560," 179-186. 'These figures,as well as those which follow, are based on close examinationof the criminalarchives of the Parlementof Toulouse. The specificreferences are citedin Raymond A. Mentzer,Jr., "Heresy Suspects in Languedoc Priorto 1560: Observationson theirSocial and Occupational Status," 561-568.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 154 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC canons includedtwenty Augustinians and six Benedictines(three men and threewomen). For nine of the monks thereis no mentionof a particular order.The prominenceof the Augustinians,Dominicans and Franciscans shouldnot be surprising.All threeorders, and in particularthe Dominicans, had largeand importanthouses in southernFrance. Furthermore, sixteenth- centuryLanguedoc was not the only time and place when Augustinians and Franciscansbecame embroiledin the issue of religiousheterodoxy. The artisanspresent a more perplexingproblem. They are by far the largestgroup in the sample populationsexamined by Le Roy Ladurie and Mandrou. Yet those individualsof artisanstatus rank a poor thirdamong the groupingsof accused hereticsin Languedoc. A possible explanation for this variance may be found in the 650 suspects for whom specific evidence of social and occupational status is wanting. This absence of informationsuggests that they were sociallyless significantand less prominent.Few among them could be expectedto rank among the nobilityor clergy,or even to hold membershipin the liberal professions.It seems morelikely that many of the accused hereticswhose occupationthe courts fail to mentionwere artisansand to a lesser extentagricultural workers. Close scrutinyof the artisanswith respect to theirparticular craft or trade lends supportto this hypothesis.The seventy-twoaccused artisans can be subdivided into seven major industries:

Craft Number

Leatherworkers 16 Textileworkers 14 Metal workers 13 Constructionworkers 12 Servants 11 Ceramic workers 3 Food workers 3 Total 72 The relativestrengths of the various craftsbear some resemblanceto the patternsobserved by Le Roy Ladurie and Mandrou in theirstudies. The mostprominent trades among the Huguenot artisansof Montpellierwere the textileindustry (135 persons), the leatherindustry (58 persons), and the metalcrafts (45 persons).Textile workers constituted the singlelargest groupingamong the sixty-oneHuguenot artisansat Beziers,and 51 percent of the refugeesfrom the Cevennes region to Geneva between 1549 and 1560 belonged to the leather crafts.6Mandrou's analysis of French artisanswho sought asylum at Geneva provides a distributionclose to that observed at Montpellier.Textile workers were by far the most numerous; membersof the leather,construction and metal trades were far behind:7

6 Le Roy Ladurie,Paysans de Languedoc,1: 341-343 and 348-349. 7Mandrou, "Les franqaishors de France," 665-666.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions STATUS OF THE ACCUSED 155

Craft Number Textileworkers 672 Leatherworkers 264 Constructionworkers 249 Metalworkers 228 Food workers 83 Ceramicworkers 37

In short,the textile,leather, construction and metal craftsmenwere prom- inentthroughout the FrenchReformation. Their observed strength among theaccused hereticsof Languedoc is notaccidental and theywould probably representthe greaterportion of those suspects for whom occupational informationdoes not exist. Given the limitsof available documentation, however,it is difficultto judge whetherthese numbersrepresent a special commitmentto Protestantism.Or do they simplyreflect artisan strength withinthe generalpopulation (excludingthe peasantry)?The few studies of the social compositionof southern French towns which have been undertakenare inconclusiveon this point.8 A second problemand one relatedto the apparentunder-representation of artisans among the suspected hereticsis the over-representationof membersof theliberal professions. The 152 accused hereticswho comprise thislatter group are moreprominent than theirfellow professionals in the samplingsof Le Roy Ladurie and Mandrou and probablyexhibit the limits of theirstrength among theheresy suspects of Languedoc. The 152 accused membersof the liberalprofessions represent 14 percentof the gross total (1074 persons). This percentageapproximates that found elsewhere in Languedoc. The 87 Huguenot professionalsat Montpellierconstitute 11 percentof the 817 personslisted in the tax census. And at Beziersin 1568, the 19 persons of liberal professionare slightlymore than 13 percentof the generaltotal (141 heads of Huguenot families).At the same time,the 72 accused hereticsidentified as artisansrepresent only 7 percentof the total(1074 persons).The figurevaries enormouslyfrom that found in the non-judicial sources. The 387 Huguenot artisans at Montpellierare 47 percentof the gross total (817 persons) and the 57 artisansat Beziers are more than 40 percentof the total(141 persons).This patternsuggests that heresycourts in Languedocwere fairly accurate in recordingand identifying an individual's "profession,"but they tended to ignore "inferioroccu- pations"such as thecrafts and trades.It also lends supportto thehypothesis thatmost of the 650 suspectsfor whom thereis no social or occupational data belong to the lower classes.

8 Studies of industryand the artisancommunity at Toulouse, forinstance, include: Janine Estebe,"Le marchetoulousain des etoffesentre 1519 et 1560," 183-194 and "La bourgeoisie marchandeet la terrea Toulouse au XVIe siecle (1519-1560)," 457-467; Gilles Caster,"Les cuirsbruts a Toulouse au XVIe si&le," 353-376; Raymond Corraze, "L'industriede la soie a Toulouse au seizieme siecle," 73-97, and "La corporationdes brodeurs toulousains au seizieme siecle," 131-159.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 156 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

The subdivisionswithin the accused membersof the liberalprofessions provide additional clues regardingtheir substantial representation. They can be divided into fiveprincipal categories:

Profession Number

Legalprofession 53 Education 49 Governmentofficials 23 Medicalprofession 16 Booktrade 11

The legal professionand educationare the mostconspicuous categories. Bothsubgroups demonstrated a highincidence of adherenceto the reform throughoutFrance. The tendencymay well have been exaggeratedamong theheresy suspects of Languedoc, however, because ofthe peculiar situation at Toulouse. The largesteducational and legal centerin southernFrance, it was the site of an importantuniversity with numerous colleges, a Parle- ment, a seneschalsy court,an Inquisition,an archiepiscopal court,and several lesser tribunals.Moreover, analysis of the geographicdistribution of accused hereticssuggests that the Toulousan authoritieswere especially ardentin the pursuitof suspectsin theirarea. Many of those sought and arrestedwere involved in the legal professionsand education.A warrant issued at Toulouse on 17 June1532, forexample, called forthe arrestof forty-onepersons on suspicionof heresy.9Eleven were students,especially studentsof law, at the university.Three were procureurs(attorneys) in the Parlement.One was a maitrede college; one a schoolmaster(maitre d'ecole); anothera licencie.There was even a doctor-regentat theuniversity among those cited. This distributionof professionalsis nearlythe reverseof thatdescribed by Mandrou for the Genevan refugees.Booksellers and printersheaded the list,while juristslagged farbehind:'0

Profession Number Booktrade 113 Medicalprofession 74 Students 50 Jurists 14

Were printingand the book trade particularlyweak in Languedoc? Or were theyunusually strongamong persons fleeingto Geneva? Certainly printingwas not a major industryin any of the meridionaltowns. The

I A.D., Aude, H 418, fo. 78v?-80. Doinel, Inventaire-sommaire,Aude, 375-376. 10Mandrou, "Les franqaishors de France," 665.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions STATUS OF THE ACCUSED 157 literaturewhich circulatedin the provincetypically came offthe presses at Lyon, Paris and Geneva. The differencein Mandrou's findingsmight best be explained in simple economicterms. Frenchmen in thebook trademay well have had previous association with Geneva because of its importanceas a centerof book production.And it would be easier forthem to secure employmentthere because of the city'sgrowing printing industry. On the otherhand, persons in the legal professionswould have had relativelylittle reason for prior contactwith Geneva and comparativelylittle chance of findinga position therein the legal field.Thus the differencesin the distributionof professionals mightbe ascribed to certainregional biases in theirspecialized activities.Languedoc and Toulouse offeredconsiderable opportunityin the legal professionsand education,whereas Geneva held attractionfor those in printingand the book trade. The thirty-fivemerchants, twenty-four nobles of unknown profession, and two agriculturalworkers who were accused of heresydo not permit extensive commentbecause of insufficientinformation and their small numbers.As noted by other historians,the participationof agricultural workersin the Reformationin Languedoc was extremelylow." It was, in this sense, an urban movement.Yet the single yeoman (laboureur) and sole shepherd.(bourreguie) found among the suspected hereticsare far fewerthan expected. Again, a fewmore are probablyamong thosesuspects forwhom thereexists no occupationalinformation. Conversely, the thirty- fivemerchants, twenty-four nobles of unknown profession,and fourad- ditionalnobles whose vocationis indicated(two governmentofficials and two ecclesiastics)probably representclose to their maximum numbers among all accused hereticsof Languedoc between 1500 and 1560. They stand as furthertestimony to the proclivityof the judicial magistratesfor identificationof the social and occupational elite. The place of women among the accused heretics,an appropriatecon- siderationprior to the conclusionof the presentdiscussion, was negligible. Though women are generallythought to have occupied an important position in the French Reformation,'2the fifty-ninefemale suspects in Languedoc constituteonly 5.5 percentof the total (1,074 persons). One explanationof thisunder-representation lies in the traditionalnotion, found in both ancient Roman and Germanic law, that women were naturally weak and had to be "protected."The theoryseemed to justifywomen's juridicalincapacity (never total,but certainlydebilitating) and the ever-

" Le Roy Ladurie,Paysans de Languedoc,1: 341-348. Peasants do not appear among the heresysuspects indictedby the chambreardente at Paris. Salmon, Societyin Crisis,87-88. 12 Recent studies of the place of women in the FrenchReformation include: Natalie Z. Davis, "City Women and Religious Change," 65-95; Nancy L. Roelker,"The Appeal of Calvinism to FrenchNoblewomen in the SixteenthCentury," 391-418, and "The Role of Noblewomen in the French Reformation,"168-195. Lucien Febvre identifiedeven fewer women (less then4 percentof the accused) in his studyof heresyproceedings in the Franche- Comte. Febvre,Inquisition en Franche-Comte,154.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 158 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC presenttutelage of father,husband, brother,and even king.'3 Criminal justice then tended to disregardwomen, except for the prosecutionof notoriouslyfeminine offenses such as infanticideand witchcraft.When a woman's name did appear in the criminalrecords, it was oftenin conjunctionwith her husband or some other "protector."Thirty-five of the fifty-ninefemale heresy suspects (almost 60 percent)are mentionedtogether with some male "protector:"the courtidentifies them as wives, widows, daughters,sisters and nieces. The practicemay well mean thatthe women were suspected more as accomplicesin the beliefs and activitiesof their husbands, fathersand uncles, ratherthan as hereticsin theirown right. Furthermore,the courtseems to have recognizedsocial prominencewithin thisgroup of accused women, formore than 15 percentwere eithernoble or membersof a religiouscommunity.'4 Thus the heresytribunals show some inclinationto ignorewomen, aside fromthe sociallyimportant and those identifiedin association with a male of the family. The formulationof any general conclusions regardingthe social and occupationalstatus of the accused hereticsmust necessarily be a cautious exercise since the status of 60 percent remains unidentified.Yet the absence of informationis itselfsuggestive of the heresycourts' attitude. Those persons whose positionthe courtsdid note were more prominent withinsociety. Clerics and membersof the liberal professionsare conspicuous in the judicial records.Merchants and nobles are highlyvisible, too. Artisans,known fromother sources to have been greatlyattracted to thereform, are identifiedto a farlesser extent in the criminalproceedings.15 Were the courtsmore concernedwith the adherence to Protestantismby membersof the highersocial groups? Or were they simplyshowing the customaryrespect accorded theirposition within society? Suffice it to say thatthe heresysuspects whom the courtsof Languedoc soughtwere es- sentiallyurban residents, their ranks nearly devoid of agriculturalworkers. And withinthis urban group,the judiciarytended to recognizesocial and occupationalprominence.

13 A helpfulsurvey of the questionis providedin Paul Ourliac and J.de Malafosse,Histoire du droitprive, 3, Le droitfamilial, 126-159. 4 There were six noblewomen and fourreligious, of which one was noble. 15Febvre, Inquisition en Franche-Comte,154, remarksupon the problemof non-identification of artisansamong the accused hereticsin the Franche-Comte.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions CONCLUSION

he combined effortof the secular and religious tribunalsdid not eliminateopposition to the establishedchurch in Languedoc. The magistratescould not even claim to exerciseminimal control over the movement'sspread. Rather,the provinceproved extremelyfertile for the growthand prosperityof Protestantism.Much of this success must doubtlesslybe attributedto the reformmovement itself and in particular to the highlyorganized nature of Calvinism.At the same time,some final observationsconcerning the failure of the judiciary to suppress beliefs contraryto the "true faith" are in order. The firstof these reflectionsbears on the question of laicization,the state's assumption of powers formerlyreserved to the religioussphere. The Frenchmonarchy significantly altered the nature of the juridicalre- action to heresyin the course of the half-centuryleading up to the Wars of Religion.The king and his magistratescorrectly perceived an intimate relationshipbetween religiousdivision and politicalturmoil. Accordingly, theydesired a moredirect role in heresyproceedings. Officers of the crown at firstlimited their participation to assistingecclesiastical judges. Then, beginningin 1539, the royal courtsbecame the principalforums for the judgment of heresy causes. While subsequent edicts readjusted the respective jurisdictionof secular and ecclesiasticaltribunals, royal justice essentiallyretained competence for cases entailingpublic scandal or popular disturbance,a cas privilegie. A second elementof laicizationis the enhanced positionof the statein the criminalprocess. The Frenchgovernment, like other Continentalre- gimes, fullyintroduced Roman-canon inquisitorialprocedure during the sixteenthcentury. The emphasis upon the state as prosecutorpermitted the procureurdu roi to exercisethe prosecutorialfunction in France. The procureur,a royaland public official,assumed the role of accuserin heresy litigation.The receptionof the inquisitorialsystem also meant the stan- dardizationof criminaltrial process throughoutthe realm, for all courts were obliged to follow royal practice.Monarchial ascendancy was such thatthe accused heretic,whether he stood beforea lay or religiousjudge, was triedaccording to proceduralrules established and adopted by the king's judiciary. The various edicts and ordinances promulgatedby the crown ought finallyto be noted for theireffect was a modificationin the meaning of heresy.The statutesproscribed in lengthydetail criminaloffenses which had politicaland social as well as religiousconnotations. Singled out for repeated mentionwere the sale and transportof prohibitedbooks, asso-

159

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 160 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC ciationwith the Protestant cities of Germanyand Switzerland,participation in secretreligious assemblies, and attendanceat unauthorizedpreaching or religiousinstruction. Thus, the monarchydecided which courtsshould tryheresy, fixed the trialprocedure, and even definedthe crimeitself. The consequences of the process of laicization mighthave been predictable.Esprit Rotier, inquisitor at Toulouse, dedicated to the youngking Charles IX an anti-Calvinisttract published in 1562. He addresses the monarchas "your naturalsubject" and "one of yourhumble officerswho has sworn an oath of fidelity."He argues in the introductoryparagraphs thatthe rulersof Francehave been speciallyblessed and favoredby God. The miraculoushealing powers which theyhave long possessed are ample proofof divinebeneficence. Unfortunately, the kingdomhas recentlybeen "invaded, disfiguredand troubled"by heresy."All good Catholics" rec- ognize thatthis calamity is not the faultof Charles IX. Yet it is theirhope that the boy monarch,like the young Josiaswho ascended the throneat the age of eight,will cleanse the realm of these abominations.Royal as- sistanceis vital to the task, because withoutthe king's "forcefuljustice, this hydra, with its many heads, cannot be dismembered and exter- minated."' Rotiertacitly acknowledged the inabilityof the judiciary,ecclesiastical or secular,to proceed against heresywithout royal approbation.The situation workedto the advantage of the Church earlyin the strugglewhen FrancisI and HenryII enactedstrict legislation against the reformed religion. By the early 1560s, however, the effectwas quite different.When the monarchymoved toward a programof greaterleniency, the magistrates also moderatedtheir treatment of Protestants.The edict of January1562 which grantedpartial toleration to the Huguenots was quicklyregistered by the Parlementof Toulouse on 6 February,less than a monthafter its publication.2Because the definitionand prosecutionof heresywas tied so closelyto the politicaland religiouspolicies of the crown,changes in these policies could and did alterthe legal response to heresy. Laicization does not in itself,however, account totallyfor the failure of the meridionaljudiciary to suppress heterodoxy.Prior to 1560, the governmentat Paris lent strongsupport for the eliminationof religious opposition.The parlementairesof Toulouse were equally stem and un- swervingin resistingthe Reformation.3 Only one memberof theToulousan court,the counsellorAntoine de Lautrec,was openly sympatheticto Prot- estantismduring the periodunder consideration. Several othersdid convert secretlyduring the late-1550s,but theywere few in numberand without significantinfluence over the court.On the otherhand, the Parlement's

I Rotier,Responce aux blasphemateurs,i-xiv. 2A.D.H.G., B 1906, fo. 44v?-47. The shiftswere even morepronounced during the 1580s. Cf. the situationat the Parlementof Rouen. Dewald, "Rouen," 298-299. 3 Mentzer,"Calvinist Propaganda," 268-283.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions CONCLUSION 161 rigorousloyalty to orthodox Catholicism did not always extend to the subordinatetribunals throughout Languedoc. The judicial officerswho hampered the endeavor to crush heresy can be divided into two generalcategories. Some few espoused Protestantism or were highlysympathetic to its ideas. The inquisitorLouis de Rochette and his lieutenantAntoine de Richardi,both burned as heretics,fall into thisgroup. And the courtof the seneschalof Nimes indictedJean Fraissinet, a minorjudicial officialfrom Saint-Jean-du-Gard, and sentenced him to minimalpunishment in 1553 forhaving createda scandal in the cathedral of Nimes. The tribunalapparently misjudged the truenature of Fraissinet's religiousloyalties, as he would establishresidency at Geneva by 1559.4 A second and more common patterninvolved magistrateswho themselves remainedfaithful to the Church,but who, fora varietyof reasons, were reluctantto pursue accused hereticsactively. Amaud de Badet, Do- minicaninquisitor at Toulouse, was chargedwith heresy in the early1530s because of his unwillingnessto prosecute an errantsect led by Jean de Caturce. De Badet does not seem to have been a memberof the group, but he was a lifelongfriend of de Caturce. Several decades later, the Parlementof Toulouse heard heresy charges against a handful of high- ranking judicial officers.The defendants included Jehan de Golard, Seneschal of Armagnac,his juge-mage Blaise Guinard,Pons Sicard, lieutenantof the Judgeof the Lauragais at Revel, and JehanLeynadier, baille of Montagnac.5Though the accused in each instancewas declaredinnocent or at most subjected to a light penalty,the suggestionof laxityin the prosecutionof heresyremained. Town councilmen,too, became embroiledin incidentsof thissort. When in 1532 the Parlementindicted an Augustinianfriar who had served as the Lentenpreacher at Nimes, the city'smunicipal council augmentedhis normalsalary so thathe mightbetter defend himself. The council was no doubt convinced of the friar'sorthodoxy. A similarincident occurred at Anduze in 1547. The man chosen to deliver the Lenten sermons was denounced forheresy by the priorof the local church.The actionenraged thetown council which had made theselection and itprotected the preacher untilpresented with an arrestwarrant signed by the inquisitor.Were the councilmembers flirting with Protestantism? Probably not. The morelikely explanationis thatthey resented the local prior'sinfringement upon their rightto choose the Lentenpreacher. The mattercould take a more serious turnand jeopardize the councilmenupon occasion. The municipalcouncil at Pamiers engaged a Carmelitemonk in 1549 to give the Advent and Lenten sermons.The Parlementof Toulouse soon became suspicious of

4A.D.H.G., B 31, fo. 36v?, 485v?, 510, 514 and 521; B, Toumelle, reg. 5 (10 septembre 1538), reg. 7 (10 mai 1539). Bost, "Les pasteurs," 564-565. Geisendorf,Livre des habitants, 1: 210. Puech, La Renaissancea' Nfmes,60-61. 'A.D., Aude, H 418. A.D.H.G., B, Tournelle,reg. 39 (17 decembre1551) and (24 decembre 1551), reg. 40 (21 janvier 1552), (17 fevrier1552) and (20 fevrier1552), reg. 41 (8 mars 1552) and (11 mars 1552), reg. 42 (1 juin 1552), reg. 48 (30 mars 1554).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 162 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC the preacher'sorthodoxy, and he fledto avoid arrest.The courtthen cited the councilmenfor negligence and complicityin the affair.6 The problemsassociated with detention were perhapsthe mostcommon of those which mightbe ascribed to bureaucraticineptitude and laxity. Henri de Lafont,lieutenant of the viguierof Albi, authorizedthe release of Guillaume Carvel fromthe episcopal prison at Toulouse in 1528. He did so on the basis of letters-patentwhich Carvel,an accused "Lutheran," had obtainedfrom the royalchancellery. To de Lafont'sapparent dismay, the Parlementsubsequently found nothing in the letters-patentwhich warrantedthe accused's release. De Lafontthus found himselfunder in- dictmentfor aiding a suspected heretic.Several years later,nine persons were arrestedon suspicion of heresy at Beaucaire. Pending transferto Toulouse fortrial, four of themwere internedin a local prisoncalled the tourcarree; the remainingfive were placed under guard in the chateau of Beaucaire. This lattergroup soon escaped detentionand fled Languedoc. The Parlementimmediately enjoined JehanPorcellet, lord (chastellain)of the chateau, to recapturethe fugitiveswithin two monthslest he incura fine of 4,000 livres toumois. Porcelletwas evidentlyunable to redeem himself,for the fiveescapees never came to trial.Finally, there is the case of Jehande La Rogerayewho was accused of Protestantismat Montauban in 1559. He mysteriouslyescaped fromprison within forty-eight hours of his arrest.The Parlementsupposed that he had assistance fromsympa- thizerswithin the municipalgovernment, but could not establishthe fact.7 Beyondthe negligenceand complicity,often unwitting, of some judicial officers,there is the matterof arrestwarrants issued by the courts.Were thesewrits not, in one sense, counterproductive?Decrees of personalsummons and bodilyarrest often came too late. Many suspectshad long since emigrated,anticipating detection. Or upon learningof a warrantfor their arrest,they wisely elected to go underground.A heresysummons issued at Toulouse in 1532 listed forty-onesuspects. Only one of the persons citedis known to have subsequentlystood trial.The Parlementpublished a warrantfor the arrestof eighteensuspected hereticsin 1551. One was apprehended and triedwithin a short time. Anotherevaded justice for nearlya decade, untilhis captureand prosecutionin 1560. The remaining sixteenfugitives simply disappeared fromthe court's sight. In all, more than threehundred persons sought on warrantsfor reason of heresybetween 1500 and 1560 failedto appear in court.They had eitherfled prior to the issuance of the warrantor hastened to safetyshortly thereafter.8

6A.D.H.G., B, Toumelle, reg. 34 (23 aofut1550). A.M., Nimes, LL 5, fo. 244-246v?. A.M., Pamiers,BB 104. Hugues, Eglisereformee d'Anduze, 41-46. Lahondes, Annalesde Pamiers,1: 460-461. Menard, Histoirede Nfmes,4: 117. 7A.D.H.G., B 22, fo. 292v?, 304-304v?; B, Tournelle,reg. 13 (10 avril 1543). A.M., Mon- tauban, 1 BB 22. Crespin,Histoire des martyrs,3: 840-841. Devals, "Ecoles publiques," 106- 108. Histoireecclesiastique, Baum and Cunitz,1: 373-374. Menard,Histoire de Nfmes,4: 168- 169. 8 A.D., Aude, fo. 78v?-80. A.D.H.G., B 28, fo. 180; B, Toumelle, reg. 38 (1 octobre1551), reg. 40 (5 fevrier1552), reg. 41 (18 mars 1552), reg. 43 (1 juillet 1552), reg. 74 (10 avril 1560).

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions CONCLUSION 163

Anotherconsideration is the patternof geographicdistribution for the accused heretics.The Parlementof Toulouse, the principalinstitution for the adjudication of heresy,appears to have been more sensitiveto the crimein the regions closest to its seat. The court's abilityto detect and prosecuteheretics in the fartherreaches of its jurisdictionwas somewhat reduced,even thoughthe distantareas were oftenheavily Protestant. The laicizationof the crime of heresy meant, in part,that the focus of prosecution became the Parlement.The arrangementworked well in thoseplaces where the high court could maintaintight control. It functionedless smoothly beyond the zone where the Parlementexercised firm supervision. Local judicial officialsin remotedistricts risked less chance of detectionif they were lax in the dischargeof theirduties or if they sympathizedwith the reformmovement. Withoutdepreciating the value of the various explanationswhich have been discussed,it mustbe admittedthat they do not fullyaccount forthe spectacular failure of the judiciary to check and quash heresy. Let us concentrateinstead on the totalnumber of heresyaccusations brought by the courtsof Languedoc. When analyzed accordingto the total for each decade, the figuresdisplay a smooth and fastlyaccelerating rate of ac- cusationswith a take-offpoint somewherein the 1530s (Figure 6).

1500-1510 - 0 1531-1540 - 121 1511-1520 - 4 1541-1550 - 257 1521-1530 - 8 1551-1560 - 684

The rapidlyincreasing number of heresy accusations would seem to be but a reflectionof the growthof Protestantism.Did thejudicial proceedings simplymirror the developing religiousissue? When the same figuresare plotted on an annual basis, a somewhat differentpattern emerges (Figure 7).9 Heresy accusations do not increase in a uniformmanner, but vary considerablyfrom one year to the next. The dominantcontours are readilydiscernible. The greatestannual number of accusations,208, came in 1554. Additionalbut farsmaller peaks occurred in 1532 (59 accusations), 1546 (63 accusations), 1551 (102 accusations), and 1559 (77 accusations). Interspacedbetween these years in which the heresyaccusations were high are multi-yearperiods in which the numbers were noticeablyreduced. The reasons behind the greaternumbers of accusationswhich markthe years 1532, 1546, 1551, 1554 and 1559 are not altogetherobvious. The prominenceof 1532 has muchto do withthe repression of Jean de Caturce's sect and the generalattack on the humanistcommunity at Toulouse. The 1551 peak may be relatedto the Edict of Chateaubriandwhich bolstered oppositionto Protestantism.Yet the timingis not quite correct,because the edictwas only promulgatedon 27 June,midway into the year. During thissame year,the Parlementof Toulouse transferredheresy causes from

9 Appendix II enumeratesthe heresyaccusations on an annual basis.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 164 MENTZER:HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

600

I I I

400- / I

/~~~~ /~~~~ /~~~ 200-/ /~ /~~~

100- /~~~

1501-10 1511-20 1521-30 1531-40 1541-50 1551-60 FIG. 6. Number of accused hereticscalculated by decade.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions CONCLUSION 165

200

150

100

25 -

10- 5-

1510 1520 1530 1540 1550 1560 FIG. 7. Number of accused hereticscalculated by year.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 166 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC the criminalchamber to the Grand'Chambre,evidence of the parlementaires' concern. Again, the decision came a bit late in the year, during November 1551. Mightit have been morethe resultthan the cause of the high numberof accusations?In 1554, the open espousal of Calvinismby Antoine de Lautrec,a counsellor on the Parlement,during the waning months of 1553 may have shocked the court into an all-out campaign against the Protestants.But can this event alone explain the spectacular 208 heresyaccusations, more than double the numberof any previousor subsequent year? Could it be thatthe peaks depictedin Figure7 are not exceedinglyhigh, but the troughsabnormally low due to incompletedocumentation? It appears unlikely.The Parlementwas the principal forumfor the trial of heresyafter 1539. Survivingcriminal records from the court are, in the main, completeand continuous.Missing recordsare a problem only for 1540-1541 and 1544-1545 and, to a lesser extent,for 1548-1549, 1553 and 1558.10 Even in those instanceswhere gaps do occur,the trendin the numberof heresyaccusations seems relativelywell-established by the data fromthe years precedingand followingthe lacunae. The patternof repeated peaks and troughssuggests that the court's reactionto heresywas cyclicalin nature.11Severe repressionaccompanied by the intensificationof arrestsand accusationstook place in 1532, 1546, 1551, 1554 and 1559. In each case, accusationsdeclined perceptiblyover the followingfew years. Eitherthe suspects had been apprehended or had fledto safetyelsewhere. Potential, but undiscoveredsuspects veiled theirreligious sentiments and beliefsin greatersecrecy. A combinationof all threefactors probably contributed to a reductionin accusationsfollowing a termof intenseactivity upon the part of the judiciary.Slowly, over the course of the nextseveral years,the Protestantswould begin to reappear, to advocate theirbeliefs more publiclyand to practicetheir religion more openly.Once again, the courtswould reactvigorously and the cyclewould begin anew. The cycle of suppression, concealment, gradual reappearance and suppressionindicates that the success of the courtsin controllingheresy was, at best, temporary.The reformmovement could be repressedfor a few years, only to reappear again. Furthermore,the problem never diminished.Protestantism continually attracted an ever largerbody of adherents.The judicial systemwas neitherdesigned nor equipped to deal with so pervasivea criminaloffense. So many persons stood in violation of the law that effectiveenforcement became impossible. A significant portionof the communityrejected the religiousvalues which the courts soughtto enforce.And the sanctionsimposed upon these "criminals"had only temporaryeffect. The judiciarycould do littleto restrainheresy after it became acceptable behavior fora sizable segmentof society.

10See the Introductionand especially Figure 1 for more precise informationconcerning documentationfrom the Parlementof Toulouse. " A similar cyclical patternfor the prosecutionof heresy in the province of Flanders between1521 and 1566 is describedby J.Decavele, De dageraadvan de Reformatiein Vlaanderen, 2: appendices I and II. Graph reproducedin GeoffreyParker, The Dutch Revolt,63.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions APPENDIX I

Social and Occupational Background of the Accused Heretics AGRICULTURAL WORKERS 2 Shepherd ...... 1 Yeoman ...... 1 ARTISANS 72 Ceramic Industry 3 Potter...... 3 ConstructionIndustry 12 Carpenter ...... 3 joiner . . 7 Mason ...... 1 Painter ...... 1 Food Industry 3 Baker (boulanger) ...... 1 Butcher ...... 1 Pancossier ...... 1 LeatherIndustry 16 Currier ...... 4 Packmaker ...... 1 Saddler ...... 1 Shoemaker ...... 7 Tanner ...... 2 Tawer ...... 1 Metal Industry 13 Armourer ...... 2 Cutler ...... 1 Goldsmith ...... 2 Locksmith . . 6 Scissors Sharpener ...... 1 Swordmaker ...... 1 Servants 11 Maid (chambrie're)...... 1 Servant(serviteur) ...... 10 TextileIndustry 14 Carder ...... 2 Chaussetier...... 6 Couturier ...... 3 Hatmaker ...... 1 167

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 168 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Taffetatier...... 1 Weaver ...... 1 LIBERAL PROFESSIONS 151 Book Trade 11 Booksellers(libraires) ...... 11 Education 49 Licencie...... 3 Maftred'ecole ...... 6 Maftrede colle'ge...... 1 Maftredes enfants ...... 2 Organist ...... 1 Pedagogue ...... 2 Professor ...... 1 Re'gentde'cole ...... 5 Student ...... 28 GovernmentOfficials 23 Baille ...... 2 Capitaine...... 2 Conseillerau Parlement...... 1 (noble) Gardedes sceaux ...... 1 Ge'ne'rala' la Courdes Aides ...... 1 Grainetiera' sel ...... 2 Greffierdes e'tats ...... 1 Juge-mage...... 1 Lieutenantdu juge ...... 3 Maftredes monnaies...... 1 Procureurau Parlement...... 4 Procureura' la Chambredes Comptes...... 1 Seneschal ...... 1 (noble) Sergeant ...... 2 Legal Profession 53 Bachelor of Laws . . 4 Basochien..... 3 Doctor of Laws ..... 4 Scribe ..... 1 Licencie'en droit...... 15 Notary ...... 23 Professorof Law ..... 2 Solliciteur . . 1 Medical Profession 16 Bachelorof Medicine ..... 1 Barber ..... 3 Doctor of Medicine ..... 1 Doctor(medecin) ..... 9 Licencieen medecine...... 1 Surgeon ..... 1

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions APPENDICES 169

MERCHANTS 34 Apothecary. 6 Banker ...... 1 Haberdasher. 1 Innkeeper. 2 Landlord (hote). 3 Retailer. 1 Wool merchant. 1 Other merchants.19 NOBILITY 28 Archdeacon. 1 Benedictine,woman. 1 Conseillerau Parlement. 1 Seneschal. 1 Noble of unspecifiedprofession ...... 24 RELIGIOUS 140 Membersof Orders 66 Augustinians ...... 20 Benedictines,men ...... 3 women ...... 3 (one is noble) Carmelites ...... 5 Dominicans ...... 12 Franciscans ...... 11 Sistersof Sainte-Claire ...... 1 Trinitarians ...... 2 Other monks ...... 9...... Priests ...... 58 Other Ecclesiasfics ...... 16 (one is noble)

APPENDIX II Number of Accused Heretics Per Annum 1511- 1 1512- 1513- 1514- 1515- 1511-1520- 4 1516- 1517- 1518- 1 1519- 1520- 2

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 170 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

1521- 1 1522- 1 1523- 1524-

1526- 1521-1530- 8 1527- 1528- 6 1529- 1530- 1531- 1 1532- 59 1533- 1 1534- 5

1536- 10 1531-1540-121 1537- 4 1538- 10 1539- 20 1540- 10 1541- 4 1542- 19 1543- 17 1544- 2 1545- 30 1541-1550-257 1546- 63 1547- 28 1548- 32 1549- 18 1550- 44 1551-102 1552- 84 1553- 53 1554-208 1555- 60 1551-1560-684 1557- 39 1558- 7 1559- 77 1560- 40

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Glossary of Terms Accaration:confrontation; in criminallaw, the act of settinga witnessface to face withthe prisoner,in orderthat the lattermay offerany objection he has to the witness,and that the witnessmay identifythe accused. Baile (baille,bayle): a local judicial magistratewho possessed limitedcom- petence. Basochien:a memberof the corporationof registrars,clerks, ushers and sergeantsof the courts(basoche). Capitoul:the title borne by each of the eightmunicipal consuls of Toulouse. Confrontation:see accaration. Conseiller:an associate judge (counsellor)of the parlement. Encours:The revenues derived fromgoods and propertyconfiscated for reason of heresy. Enquete(enqueste): an examinationof witnesses,taken down in writing, by or before a judge or his appointed assistants(engqueteurs), for the purpose of gatheringtestimony to be used in a criminaltrial. Greffier:the registraror clerkof a court.He kept the minutesand wrote out the judgments,orders and otherdecisions issued by the tribunal. Information:the act or instrumentwhich containedthe depositionsof witnesses against the accused. Inquisition:see enque^te. Instruction:the firstprocess of a criminalprosecution. It included the examinationof the accused, the preliminaryinterrogation of witnesses, collateralinvestigations, the gathered evidence, the reductionof the whole to order,and thepreparation of a documentcontaining a detailed statementof the case, to serve as a brieffor the prosecutingofficers and to furnishmaterial for the indictment. Juge-mage:the titlegiven to the principallieutenant (lieutenant ge'ne'ral) of the Seneschalsy of Nimes-Beaucaire. Monitoire:a public announcementor proclamationby an ecclesiastical judge to the faithful,compelling them under pain of excommunication to reveal whateverthey may know regardinga particularcrime or event as stated in the document. Official:the person to whom the bishop commitsthe exerciseof the contentiousjurisdiction within his see; the principalecclesiastical judge of a diocese. Officialite:Officiality; the bishop's court,presided over by the official. Pre'sident:the presidingjudge in the parlement.The chiefjustice was the premierpre'sident and his deputies were presidentsa mortier. Procureur:a solicitor;an attorneyqualified to argue beforethe bar. Procureurge'ne'ral du roi: the royal attorneygeneral in the parlement.He or his deputy served as chiefcriminal prosecutor. Tournelle:the chamberof criminaljustice in the parlement. Viguier:a judicial magistratesubordinate to the seneschal. 171

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. ARCHIVAL SOURCES AGEN ArchivesDepartementales de Lot-et-Garonne G 29, Enquete de 1538 ALBI ArchivesDepartementales du Tam H 275, Proces contrele prieurde Rabastens H 473, Extraictdes registresde Parlement,30 avril 1535 ArchivesMunicipales d'Albi AA 4, Proces-verbald'un procession BB 132, Lettred'un depute a Toulouse, 6 juillet 1539 CAHORS ArchivesDepartementales du Lot F 136, Chronique de l'abbe de Foulhiac CARCASSONNE ArchivesDepartmentales de l'Aude H 418, Extraictdes registresde Parlement,24 avril 1534 MENDE ArchivesDepartementales de la Lozere G 703, Statutssynodaux pour la ville de Mende, 1557 G 3085, Inquisitionsecrete, 9 mai 1557 MONTAUBAN ArchivesDepartementales de Tarn-et-Garonne G 209, Visiteau diocese de Montauban, 1551 ArchivesMunicipales de Montauban 1 BB 6, Deliberationsdu conseil 1 BB 22, Deliberationsdu conseil MONTPELLIER ArchivesDepartementales de l'Herault 38 H 19, Inventairedes archivesde l'Inquisitionde Carcassonne ArchivesMunicipales de Montpellier CC, Commandementde 1539 NIMES ArchivesMunicipales d'Anduze BB 1, Deliberations,1536-1550 ArchivesMunicipales de Nimes LL 5, Deliberationsdu conseil LL 8, Deliberationsdu conseil II 5, Lettrede Margueritede Navarre, 8 octobre 1543 PAMIERS ArchivesMunicipales de Pamiers BB 104, Deliberationsdu conseil, 1549-1550 PARIS ArchivesNationales J962 4, J966 and U 20 BibliothequeNationale CollectionDoat, vol. 31 and 35 Ms. francais,5124 Quittanceset pieces diverses,vol. 134 throughvol. 140 Ms. latin,8994

172

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BIBLIOGRAPHY 173

PRIVAS ArchivesDepartementales de l'Ardeche C 330, Proces-verbauxdes Etats de Vivarais C 1451, no. 59, Inquisitionsecrete RODEZ ArchivesDepartementales de l'Aveyron G 189, Lettredu roy pour fereprieres et processions TOULOUSE ArchivesDepartementales de la Haute-Garonne Parlementde Toulouse Registresd'arres et d'appointements(Grand'Chambre) B 11 (1498-1502) throughB 54 (1560-1561) Registresd'arrets des Grands Jours B 92 j (Le Puy, septembre-octobre1548) B 92 1 (Beziers,septembre-octobre 1550) Enregistrementdes actes du pouvoir royal B 1900 (1481-1515) throughB 1906 (1560-1565) Registresd'audience B 2025 (avril-mai 1539) B 20.. (fevrier-mars1538) Registresd'arrets criminels (Tournelle) reg. 1 (novembre1518-octobre 1525) through reg. 77 (decembre 1560-janvier 1561) 51 B 66, Registrede Monsieur le Procureur Etats de Languedoc, proces-verbaux C 2276 (janvier 1496-aofut1513) through C 2280 (septembre1555-mars 1560) Notaires Jean Giraudat,pres le crucifixdu Salin 3 E 4320 (1545) 3 E 4322 (1547) 3 E 4325 (1550) Archivesecclesiastiques Archevechede Toulouse 1 G 410 and 1 G 642 Fonds dominicain 112 H 6 ArchivesMunicipales de Toulouse BB 76, Registredu consistoirede la maison commune de Toulouse, 1534-1535 BB 175, Correspondance BB 269, Annales de Toulouse par PierreLouvet, 1295-1675 BB 274, Annales manuscrites,1532-1568 Pikces pour l'appui des comptes CC 2397 (1538-1539) throughCC 2400 (1539-1540) Cotisations FF 90 (1528-1537) Layettes47, 48 and 90

B. PUBLISHED SOURCES Aufreri,Etienne. Decisiones capellae Tholosanaeper Ioannem Corserium archiepiscopalis ibidem sedis quondamOfjicialem primum collectae, postea vero per StephanumAuffrerium. Frankfurt am Main, 1575. Stilussupremae Parlementi parisiensis atque tholosani.Rouen, 1513. Augustinus,Aurelius. De haeresibusad Quodvultdeum.Vol. XLII, 21-50 of PatrologiaLatina. Ed. J. P. Migne. 221 vols. Paris, 1844-1880. Beza, Theodore. Correspondance.Ed. Femand Aubert,Henri Meylan, Alain Dufour,Arnaud Tripet.Geneva, 1960-.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 174 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Bourgeois,Georges (ed.). "Documents ineditset originaux.Les inquisiteursde la foi et les proces d'heresie sous Francois ler," BSHPF, 24 (1875): 543-551; 25 (1876): 15-21, 106- 109. Bouteiller,Jean. Somme rurale, ou le grandcoustumier general de practiquecivil et canon.Paris, 1603. Burel,Jean. Memoires de JeanBurel, bourgeois du Puy. Ed. Chassaing. Le Puy-en-Velay,1875. Calvin, John.Ioannis Calvini Opera quae supersuntomnia. Ed. Baum, Cunitz, and Reuss. 59 vols. Brunswick,1863-1900. Carena, Cesare. Tractatusde OfficioSanctissimae Inquisitionis. . . Hac novissimaaddita fuit PraxisInquisitorum Francisci Pegnae. Bologna, 1668. Catellan,Jean de. Arrestsremarquables du Parlementde Toulouse.Toulouse, 1756. Corpus iuris canonici.Ed. Aemilius Friedberg.2 vols. Gratz, 1959. Reprintof 1879-1881 edition. Crespin,Jean, and Goulart,Simon. Histoiredes martyrspersecutez et mis d mortpour la verite de l'Evangile;depuis le tempsdes Apostresiusques d present(1619). Ed. Daniel Benoit.3 vols. Toulouse, 1885-1889. Damhouder,Joost. Practique iudiciaire is causes criminelles.Antwerp, 1564. "Documentsinedits et originaux.Arret ab iratodu Parlementde Toulouse contreun heretique, 1556," BSHPF, 7 (1858): 13-14. "Documents inedits et originaux.L'heresie lutheriennea Toulouse en 1540," BSHPF, 13 (1864): 202. Dolet, Etienne.Stephani Doleti Orationesduae in Tholosam.Lyon, 1534. Douais, Celestin (ed.). Documentspour servird l'histoirede l'Inquisition.Paris, 1900. Durandis, Gulielmus. Le Pontificalde GuillaumeDurand. Ed. Michel Andrieu. Vol. III of Le Pontificalromain au moyen-age.Vatican City, 1940. Erasmus,Desiderius. Opus EpistolarumDes. ErasmiRoterdami. Ed. P. S. Allen. 12 vols. Oxford, 1906-1958. Eymeric,Nicolas. DirectoriumInquisitorum . . . cum commentariisFrancisci Pegniae. Rome, 1587. Fallieres,M. O., and Durengues, Chanoine (eds.). "Enquete sur les commencementsdu protestantismeen Agenais," Recueildes travauxde la Societed'Agriculture, Sciences et Arts, 16 (1913): 213-386. Faurin,Jean. Journal sur les guerresde Castres.Ed. Charles Pradel. Vol. III of Piecesfugitives pourservir d l'histoirede France.Ed. Menard and d'Aubais. Montpellier,1878. Fontanon,Antoine (ed.). Les edictset ordonnancesdes roysde Francedepuis S. Loysjusques d present.4 vols. Paris, 1585. FrancisI. Cataloguedes actes de FrancoisIer. 10 vols. Paris, 1887-1908. Freville,Emile de (ed.). "Un index du XVIe siecle," BSHPF, 1 (1852): 355-363, 437-448; 2 (1853): 15-24. Gaches, Jacques.Memoires sur les guerresde religiond Castreset dans le Languedoc.Ed. Charles Pradel. Paris, 1879. Geisendorf,Paul-F. (ed.). Livredes habitantsde Geneve.2 vols. Geneva, 1957-1963. Genin,Franfois (ed.). Lettresde Marguerited'Angouleme, soeur de FrancoisIer, reine de Navarre. 2 vols. Paris, 1841-1842. Guenois, Pierre(ed.). La conferencedes ordonnancesroyaux. Paris, 1620. Gui, Bernard.Manuel de l'inquisiteur.Ed. and trans.Guy Mollat. 2 vols. Paris, 1964. Herminjard,Aime-Louis (ed.). Correspondancedes reformateursdans les paysde languefrancaise. 9 vols. Nieuwkoop, 1965. Reprintof 1872 edition. Histoireecclesiastique des eglisesreformees au royaumede France.Ed. G. Baum and Ed. Cunitz. 3 vols. Paris, 1883-1889. Imbert,Jean. La practiquejudiciaire, tant civile que criminelle,receue et observe'epar tout le royaumede France,enrichie . . . par M. PierreGuenois . . . et B. Automne.Cologne, 1615. Ioannis Monachus Picardus.Glosa aurea.Nobis priori loco supersexto Decretalium libro addita. Paris, 1535. Isambert,Franfois, et al. (ed.). Recueil generaldes ancienneslois francaisesdepuis l'an 420 jusqu'd la revolutionde 1789. 29 vols. Paris, 1821-1833. Jourda,Pierre (ed.). Correspondancede Marguerited'Angouleme, duchesse d'Alencon, reine de Navarre(1492-1549). Paris, 1930. Lafaille,Germain de. Annalesde la ville de Toulousedepuis la reunionde la comtede Toulouse d la couronne.2 vols. Toulouse, 1687-1701.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BIBLIOGRAPHY 175

La Roche-Flavin,Bernard de. Arrestsnotables du Parlementde Toulouse.Toulouse, 1682. . Treizelivres des parlemens de France.Geneva, 1621. Medicis,Etienne. Le livrede Podioou chroniquesd'Etienne Midicis, bourgeois du Puy.Ed. A. Chassaing. 2 vols. Le Puy-en-Velay,1874. Milles de Souvigny,Jean. Praxis criminis persequendi. Paris, 1541. Montpellier,University of. Cartulairede l'Universitede Montpellier.2 vols. Montpellier,1890- 1912. Monumentaordinis fratrum Praedicatorum historica. Louvain, Paris, Rome, 1896-. Murnerus,Paschal, pseud. Ad R. P. F. SpiritumRuterum, Aquitanicum fidei inquisitorem, epistola congratulatoria.1549. Muyartde Vouglans, Pierre-Fransois.Institutes au droitcriminel, ou principesgeniraux sur ces matieres,suivant le droitcivil, canonique, et la jurisprudencedu royaume.Paris, 1768. Ordonnancesdes rois de France,regne de FranqoisIer. Paris, 1902-. Papon,Jean. Recueil d'arrests notables des cours souveraines de France.Pont-a-Mousson, 1608. Percin,F. JoanneJacobo. Monumenta Conventus Tolosani ordinis FF. Praedicatorumprimi et vestustissimusmanuscriptis originalibus transcripta. Toulouse, 1693. Pithou,Pierre. Les libertezde l'eglisegallicane. Lyon, 1594. [Platter,Felix] Metmoires de Felix Platter.Trans. Edouard Fick. Geneva, 1866. Quetif,Jacques, and Echard,Jacques. Scriptores ordinis Praedicatorum. 2 vols. Torino, 1961. Reprintof Paris edition,1719-1721. Registerpontificum Romanorum, inde ab annopost Christum natum 1198 ad annum1304. Ed. A. Potthast.2 vols. Berlin,1874-1875. Rotier,Esprit. Adversus crucimastiges. De magna gloria quam Christus ex cruce sibi comparavit, ad solidandamfidem exictandamque charitatem hac presertim tempestate opus accommodatissimum.Toulouse, 1560. . De nonvertenda scriptura sacra in vulgaremlinguam, deque occidente litera, et vivificante Spiritudissertatio. Toulouse, 1548. . In praefatoresprognostiquosque futurorum eventuum, divinatricemaque Astrologiam Libri duo. Toulouse, 1555. . Parergisive Tabellaetres similitudiuum: quibus suis coloribusHaeretici, vera Ecclesia, vulgaresquesacrae Scripturae traductiones describuntur. Toulouse, 1549. . Responceaux blasphemateurs dela SainsteMesse. Avec la confutationdela vaineet ridicule Cenedes Calvinistesreveuie et augmentetepar le mesmesaucteur R.P.F.S. Rotier. L'istoire de Berengarius,son erreur et penitence. Toulouse, 1562. . Responsioad Epistolamcivium novae Babylonis, Gebennae scilicet. Toulouse, 1549. Rousseaud de La Combe, Guy du. Recueil de jurisprudencecanonique et beneficiale.3 pts. Paris, 1755. Simancas,Diego. De CatholicisInstitutionibus, inTractatus Illustrium . . . De IudiciisCriminalibus S. Inquisitionis.Ed. F. Pegna. T. XI, p. II, fo. 119-208v? of Tractatusuniversi iuris, et auspice GregorioXII. 20 vols. in 27. Venice, 1584. Vedel,Gabriel de. Observationssur les arriitsdu Parlementde Toulouse,recueillis par Messire Jeande Catellan.Toulouse, 1732. Weiss, Nathanael. "Documents ineditspour servira l'histoirede la reformesous Fran:ois ler; lettresd'abolition de Franfoisler, du 31 mars 1536," BSHPF, 34 (1885): 164-169; 38 (1889): 70-74, 238-243.

C. SECONDARY STUDIES Allard,Alberic. Histoire de la justicecriminelle au seiziemesiecle. Gand, 1868. Amiet,Louis. Essai sur l'organisation duchapitre cathedrale de Chartres (du XIe au XVIIIesie'cle). Chartres,1922. Arnaud, Eugene. Histoiredes protestantsdu Vivaraiset du Velay.2 vols. Paris, 1888. Bamford,Paul. FightingShips and Prisons: The Mediterranean Galleys of France in theAge of Louis XIV. Minneapolis, 1973. Baron,Salo W. A Socialand Religious History of the Jews. Vol. 10, On theEmpire's Periphery. 2nd ed. New York, 1965. Benedict,Philip. Rouen duringthe Warsof Religion. Cambridge, 1981. Bennessar,Bartolome, et al. L'InquisitionEspagnole, XVe-XIXe Siecle. Paris, 1979. Bloch, R. Howard. Medieval FrenchLiterature and Law. Berkeleyand Los Angeles, 1977. Blumenkranz,Bermhard. Histoire des Juifsen France.Toulouse, 1972.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 176 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Boisset,Jean, et al. "Les premierestraces de la reformea Saint-Jean-du-Gard,Anduze, et Le Vigan," BSHPF, 117 (1971): 637-642. Borrel,Abraham. Histoire de l'e'gliser6formt'e de NFmes.Toulouse, 1856. Bost,Charles. "Les pasteursd'une eglise des Cevennes au XVIe siecle (1561-1605), Lasalle (Gard)," BSHPF, 49 (1900): 561-581, 617-635. Boutruche,Robert, et al. Bordeauxde 1453 d 1715. Bordeaux,1966. Browe, P. "Die Hostienschandungender Judenim Mittelalter,"Rdmische Quartalschrift fur christlicheAltertumskunde und fur Kirchengeschichte, 34 (1926): 167-197. Brunet,Jacques-Charles. Manuel du libraireet de l'amateurde livre.8 vols. Paris, 1860-1878. Cabrol, Etienne.Annales de Villefranchede Rouergue.2 vols. Villefranche,1860. Caillet,Maurice. "L'oeuvre des imprimeurstoulousains aux XVIe et XVIIe siecles," Annales de l'Institutd'Etudes Occitanes, 1960: 32-48. Camus, Armand G. Lettressur la professiond'avocat. 2 vols. Paris, 1818. Cantaloube, Chanoine. La r6formeen Francevue d'un village ce'venol.Paris, 1951. Castan, Nicole. "La justice expeditive,"Annales: E.S.C., 31 (1976): 331-361. . Justiceet repressionen Languedocd l'ipoque des Lumieres.Paris, 1980. Castan, Yves. Honneteteet relationssociales en Languedoc(1715-1 780). Paris, 1974. Caster,Gilles. Le commercedu pastelet de l'e'piceried Toulousede 1450 environd 1561.Toulouse, 1962. . "Les cuirsbruts a Toulouse au XVIe siecle," Annales du Midi, 90 (1978): 353-375. Catalogueof BooksPrinted on the Continentof Europe,1501-1600 in CambridgeLibraries. Ed. H. M. Adams. 2 vols. Cambridge,1967. Cayla, Paul. Dictionnairedes institutions,des coutumeset de la langueen usage dans quelques pays de Languedocde 1535 d 1648. Montpellier,1964. Cayre,Abbe G. Histoiredes e've^queset archevequesde Toulouse.Toulouse, 1873. Chalande, Jules.Histoire des rues de Toulouse.3 vols. Toulouse, 1913-1929. Chandler,Tertius, and Fox, Gerald. 3000 Years of UrbanGrowth. New York, 1974. Chenon, Emile. Histoiregine'rale du droitfrancais public et privi des originesd 1815. 2 vols. Paris, 1926-1929. Chaunu, Pierre,and Gascon, Richard.Histoire e6conomique et sociale de la France.Paris, 1977. Christie,Richard C. EtienneDolet, theMartyr of the Renaissance.London, 1899. Clergeac,Abbe A. Chronologiedes archeveques,e'veques et abbis dans l'ancienneprovince eccle'siastiqued'Auch et les diocesesde Condomet de Lombez,1300-1801. Paris, 1912. Clos, Leon. Etudehistorique sur le capitoulattoulousain. Toulouse, 1887. Connac, Emile. "Troubles de mai 1562 a Toulouse," Annalesdu Midi, 3 (1891): 310-339. Coppolani, Jean.Toulouse, etude de giographieurbaine. Toulouse, 1954. Corbiere,Philippe. Histoirede l'eglisereformee de Montpellier.Montpellier, 1861. Corraze, Raymond. "Les armurierstoulousains au seizieme siecle," Me6moiresde l'Academie desSciences, Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres de Toulouse, serie 13, 7 (1945-1948):39-82. . "La corporationdes brodeurstoulousains au seizieme sikcle,"Mimoires de l'Academie des Sciences,Inscriptions et Belles-Lettresde Toulouse,serie 13, 6 (1944): 131-159. . "L'industriede la soie a Toulouse au seizieme siecle," Meimoiresde l'Academiedes Sciences,Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres de Toulouse, serie 13, 4 (1942): 73-97. . JacquesColomies, mattre imprimeur toulousain (1490-1570). Paris, 1940. Damaska, Mirjan. "The Death of Legal Torture,"The Yale Law Review,87 (1978): 860-884. Dardier, Charles. "Origines de la reformea Nimes jusqu'a l'etablissementd'un consistoire (1532-1561)," BSHPF, 29 (1880): 181-199. Daux, Abbe Camille. Histoirede l'eglisede Montauban.2 vols. Paris, 1881-1882. Davidson, Nicolas. "II Sant'Uffizioe la tutela del culto a Venezia nel '500," Studiveneziani (forthcoming). Davies, Joan."Persecution and Protestantism:Toulouse, 1562-1575," The HistoricalJournal, 22 (1979): 31-51. Davis, Natalie. Societyand Culturein EarlyModern France. Stanford, 1975. Dawson, JohnC. Toulousein theRenaissance. New York, 1923. Decavele, J.De dageraadvan de Reformatiein Vlaanderen.2 vols. Brussels,1975. Degert,Antoine. Proces de huite'veques franqais suspects de calvinisme.Paris, 1904. Deloume, Antonin.Vue de Toulouseau XVIe siecle. Les capitouls.Toulouse, 1899. Delormeau,Charles. "Le protestantismea Narbonneau XVIe siecle," Carcassonneet sa region. Actesdu XLIe congres de la Fide'rationhistorique du Languedoc miditerrane'en etdu Roussillon. 257-262. Montpellier,1970. Delteil, Frank."L'enquete sur les documentsconcemant les debuts de la reforme,"BSHPF, 105 (1959): 122-135.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BIBLIOGRAPHY 177

Desbarreaux-Bemard,Tibulle. "Guyon de Boudeville,imprimeur a Toulouse, 1541-1562," Me6moiresde l'Acadetmiedes Sciences,Inscriptions et Belles-Lettresde Toulouse,8eme serie, 1 (1879): 147-165. Devals Aine. "Les ecoles publiques a Montauban du Xe au XVIe siecle," Bulletinarchiologique de Tarn-et-Garonne,3 (1873): 81-119. Dewald, Jonathan."The 'PerfectMagistrate:' Parlementaires and Crimein Sixteenth-Century Rouen," ARG, 67 (1976): 284-300. . The Formationof a ProvincialNobility. Princeton, 1980. Dictionnaired'histoire et de giographieecclisiastique. Ed. Alfred Baudrillart,et al. Paris, 1912-. Dognon, Paul. Les institutionspolitiques et administrativesdu paysde Languedocdu XIIIe siecle aux guerresde religion.Toulouse, 1895. Doinel, Jules,et al. Inventaire-sommairedes archivesde6partementales ante'rieures d 1790.Aude. Archiveseccle'siastiques. Se'ries G et H. Carcassonne, 1900. Dossat, Yves. Les crisesde l'Inquisitiontoulousaine au XIII siecle(1233-1273). Bordeaux, 1959. Doucet, Roger.Les institutionsde la Franceau XVIe siecle. 2 vols. Paris, 1948. Droz, Eugenie. "Claude Baduel, traducteurde Bucer," BHR, 17 (1955): 347-350. Duke, Alastair."Salvation by Coercion: the Controversysurrounding the 'Inquisition'in the Low Countrieson the Eve of the Revolt," in ReformationPrinciple and Practice.Essays in Honorof A. G. Dickens.Ed. Peter N. Brooks,137-156. London, 1980. Dupont-Bouchat,Marie-Sylvie, Willem Frijhoff and RobertMuchembled. Prophetes et sorciers dans les Pays-Bas,XVIe-XVIIIe siecle. Paris, 1978. Dupont-Ferrier,Gustave. Les officiersroyaux des bailliageset sinichaussies et les institutions monarchiqueslocales en Franced la findu moyen-dge.Paris, 1902. Durand de Maillane, Pierre T. Dictionnairede droitcanonique et de practiquebe'nificiale. 6 vols. Lyon, 1787. Du Verdier,Antoine, and FranrcoisGrude, sieur de La Croix du Maine. Les bibliotheques francoisesde La Croixdu Maine et de Du Verdier,sieur de Vauprivas.Ed. Rigoleyde Juvigny. 6 vols. Paris, 1772-1773. Eisenstein,Elizabeth L. The PrintingPress as an Agentof Change.2 vols. Cambridge,1979. Esmein,Adhemar. Histoire de la procidurecriminelle en Franceet specialementde la procidure inquisitoiredepuis le XIIIe sieclejusqu'd nos jours. Paris, 1882. . A Historyof ContinentalCriminal Procedure. Trans. JohnSimpson. Boston, 1913. Estebe,Janine. "La bourgeoisiemarchande et la terrea Toulouse au XVIe siecle (1519-1560)," Annalesdu Midi, 76 (1964): 457-467. . "Le marche toulousain des etoffesentre 1519 et 1560," Annales du Midi, 75 (1963): 183-194. . Protestantsdu Midi, 1559-1598. Toulouse, 1980. Febvre,Lucien. Au coeurreligieux du XVIe siele. Paris, 1968. Notes et documentsdur la r6formeet l'Inquisitionen Franche-Comte.Paris, 1912. PhilippeII et la Franche-Comte.Paris, 1911. and Henri-JeanMartin. L'apparition du livre.Paris, 1958. Fiorelli,Piero. La torturagiudiziaria nel dirittocomune. 2 vols. Milan, 1953-1954. Fleury,Claude. Institutionau droiteccle'siastique. Ed. Boucher d'Argis. 2 vols. Paris, 1767. Foncke, Robert.Duitse Vlugschriftenvan de Tijd over het Proces en de Terechtstellingvan de Protestanten.Antwerp, 1937. Foucault,Michel. Surveilleret punir:naissance de la prison.Paris, 1975. Fournier,Paul. Les officialitesau moyendge. Paris, 1880. Gatrell,V. A. C., Bruce Lenman and GeoffreyParker (eds.). Crimeand the Law. London, 1980. Gaufres,Mathieu-Jules. Claude Baduel et la r6formedes 6tudesau XVIe siecle. Paris, 1880. . "ImbertPecolet," BSHPF, 33 (1884): 49-67. Gazzaniga, Jean-Louis.L'eglise du Midi d la fin du regnede Charles VII (1444-1461). Paris, 1976. Germain,Alexandre C. "Inventaireinedit concemant les archives de l'Inquisitionde Car- cassonne," Publicationsde la Sociite'arche'ologique de Montpellier,4 (1857): 287-308. Godefroy,Frederic. Dictionnaire de l'anciennelangue francaise. 10 vols. Paris, 1881-1902. Grand,Roger. "La prisonet la notiond'emprisonnement dans l'ancien droit,"RHD, 19 (1940- 1941): 58-87. Grendler,Paul F. The RomanInquisition and the VenetianPress. Princeton, 1977. Guggenheim,Ann H. "The Calvinist Notables of Nimes during the Era of the Religious Wars," The SixteenthCentury Journal, 3 (1972): 80-96.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 178 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Guiraud, Louise. Etudessur la rJformed Montpellier. 2 vols. Montpellier,1918. . Le procesde GuillaumePellicier, e'vtque de Maguelonne-Montpellierde 1527 d 1567. Paris, 1907. Haag, Eugene and Emile. La FranceProtestante ou vie des protestantsfrancais. 10 vols. Paris, 1846-1858. * 2d ed. Revised by Henri Bordier.6 vols. Paris, 1877-1888. Stops with "Gasparin." Halkin, Leon-E. "Les martyrologeset la critique.Contribution a 1'6tude du Martyrologe protestantdes Pays-Bas," Melanges historiquesofferts d MonsieurJean Meyhoffer. pp. 52- 72. Lausanne, 1952. Hauser, Henri. Etudessur la riformefranqaise. Paris, 1909. . Les sourcesde l'histoirede France,le XVIe siele. 4 vols. Paris, 1906-1915. Hugues, Jean-Pierre.Histoire de l'egliseriformie d'Anduze. Montpellier, 1864. Imbartde La Tour, Pierre.Les originesde la riforme.4 vols. Paris, 1905-1935. Jones,Leonard Chester.Simon Goulart, 1543-1628; itude biographiqueet bibliographique.Paris and Geneva, 1917. Jourda,Pierre. Marguerite d'Angouleme, duchesse d'Alencon, reine de Navarre(1492-1549). 2 vols. Paris, 1930. Karlen,Amo. "The Homosexual Heresy," ChaucerReview, 6 (1971): 44-63. Kingdon,Robert M. Genevaand theComing of the Wars of Religion in France 1555-1563. Geneva, 1956. . Genevaand theConsolidation of the French Protestant Movement 1564-1572. Geneva and Madison, 1967. Lacger, Louis de. "La primatieet le pouvoir metropolitainde l'archeveque de Bourges au XIIIe siecle," Revue d'histoireecclesiastique, 26 (1930): 43-65, 269-330. . "La primatied'Aquitaine du Vllle au XIVe siecles,"Revue d'histoire de l'Eglisede France, 23 (1937): 29-50. Lacoste, Guillaume. Histoireginirale de la provincede Quercy.4 vols. Cahors, 1883. Lahondes, Julesde. Annalesde Pamiers.,2 vols. Toulouse, 1882-1884. Laingui,Andre. La responsabilitipinale dans l'anciendroit (XVIe-XVIIIe si&le). Paris, 1970. Langbein,John H. ProsecutingCrime in theRenaissance: England, Germany, France. Cambridge, Mass., 1974. Tortureand the Law of Proof:Europe and Englandin theAncien Regime. Chicago and London, 1977. Lapierre,Eugene. Le Parlementde Toulouse.Paris, 1875. Laurent,Jean-Paul. "Grand Conseil," in Michel Antoineet al. Guide des recherchesdans les fondsjudiciaires de l'ancienre'gime, 29-60. Paris, 1958. Lea, HenryC. A Historyof the Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 3 vols. New York,1955. Reprint of the 1888 edition. Legegue, Raymond.La tragidiereligieuse en France,les dibuts(1514-1573). Paris, 1929. Lefebvre-Teillard,Anne. Les officialitesd la veille du Concilede Trente.Paris, 1973. Le Goff,Jacques (ed.). Hiresies et sociite'sdans l'Europepre-industrielle, lle-18e siecle. Paris and The Hague, 1968. Leroux,Alfred. "La primatiede Bourges,"Annales du Midi, 7 (1895): 141-154. Le Roy Ladurie,Emmanuel. Les paysansde Languedoc.2 vols. Paris, 1966. Limouzin-Lamothe,R. Bibliographiecritique de l'histoiremunicipale de Toulousedes origines d 1789. Toulouse, 1932. Loirette,Gabriel. "Catholiques et protestantsen Languedoc a la veille des guerresciviles (1560), d'apres un documentinedit," Revue d'histoire de l'Eglisede France,23 (1937): 503- 525. . "Le Parlementde Toulouse et la reformeen Languedoc a la findu regne de Francois ler (1542-1547)," Bulletinde la Societearcheologique du Midi de la France,2eme serie,46- 47 (1917-1925): 484-485. London, BritishMuseum: General Catalogue of PrintedBooks . . . to 1955. 263 vols. to date. London, 1959-. Lot, Ferdinand.Recherches sur la populationet la superficiedes cite'sremontant d la periode gallo-romaine.3 vols. Paris, 1945-1953. McDonnell,Ernest W. TheBeguines and Beghardsin Medieval Culture. New York,1969. Reprint of 1954 edition. Mahul, M. Cartulaireet archivesdes communesde l'ancien dioceseet de l'arrondissementad- ministratifde Carcassonne.7 vols. Paris, 1867. Maisonneuve, Henri. Etudessur les originesde l'Inquisition.2d ed. Paris, 1960.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BIBLIOGRAPHY 179

Mandrou, Robert."Les francaishors de France aux XVIe et XVIIe siecles," Annales:E.S.C., 14 (1959): 662-675. . Introductiond la Francemoderne; essai de psychologiehistorique, 1500-1640. Paris, 1961. . Magistratset sorciersen Franceau XVIIe si&cle.Paris, 1968. . "Les protestantsfrancais refugies a Geneve apres la St.-Barthelemy,"Schweizerische Zeitschriftfar Geschichte,16 (1966): 243-249. Martin,Victor. Les originesdu gallicanisme.2 vols. Paris, 1939. Marx,Jean. L'Inquisition en Dauphine.Paris, 1914. Masson, Paul. Les galeresde France(1481-1781); Marseille, port de guerre.Aix-en-Provence, 1937. Mazon, Albin(le DocteurFrancus). Notes et documentshistoriques sur les Huguenotsdu Vivarais. 4 vols. Privas, 1901-1904. Megret,Jacques. "Guyon Boudeville. Imprimeurtoulousain (1541-1562)," BHR, 6 (1945): 210-301. Menard, Leon. Histoirecivile, eccle'siastique et litte'rairede la ville de Ni'mes.7 vols. Nimes, 1874. Mentzer,Raymond A., Jr."Calvinist Propaganda and the Parlementof Toulouse," ARG, 68 (1977): 268-283. . "Heresy Suspects in Languedoc Prior to 1560: Observationson theirSocial and Oc- cupationalStatus," BHR, 39 (1977): 561-568. . "The Inquisitoras Heretic:the Pre-Reformationat Toulouse," WascanaReview, 9 (1974): 156-165. . "The Legal Response to Heresy in Languedoc, 1500-1560," The SixteenthCentury Journal,4 (1973): 19-30. Meras, Mathieu. "Michel de Affinibuset les originesde la reformea Montauban," Annales du Midi, 74 (1962): 324-327. Midelfort,H. C. Erik.Witch Hunting in SouthwesternGermany, 1562-1684. Stanford,1972. Mirot,Leon. Manuel de geJographiehistorique de la France.Paris, 1929. Molinier,Charles. L'Inquisitiondans le Midi de la France.Paris, 1880. Mols, Roger.Introduction d la de'mographiedes villesd'Europe du XIVe au XVIIIe siecle.3 vols. Louvain, 1954-1956. Monter,E. William.Witchcraft in Franceand Switzerland:the Borderlands during the Reformation. Ithaca and London, 1976. . "La sodomie a l'epoque moderneen Suisse romande,"Annales: E.S.C., 29 (1974): 1023- 1033. Mortier,E. Histoiredes maftresginiraux de l'ordredes freresPrecheurs. 8 vols. Paris, 1903- 1920. Mours, Samuel. Les iglises riformiesen France.Paris, 1958. Le protestantismeen Vivaraiset en Velay des originesa nos jours. Valence, 1949. Ourliac, Paul, and Gilles, Henri. La piriode post-classique(1378-1500); la problematiquede l'epoque; les sources.Vol. 13 of Histoiredu droitet des institutionsde l'eglise en occident. Dir. Gabriel Le Bras. Paris, 1971. Ourliac, Paul, and Malafosse, J.de. Histoiredu droitprive' 3 vols. Paris, 1957-1968. Pansier,Pierre. Histoire du livreet de l'imprimeried Avignondu XIVe au XVIe siecle. 2 vols. Avignon,1922. Paris,Bibliotheque Nationale. Catalogue gene'ral des livresimprime's de la BibliothequeNationale, auteurs.Paris, 1897-. Pariset,G. "L'etablissementde la primatiede Bourges,"Annales du Midi, 14 (1920): 145- 184, 289-328. Parker,Geoffrey. The Dutch Revolt.Ithaca, 1977. . "Some Recent Work on the Inquisitionin Spain and Italy," The Journalof Modern History,54 (1982): 519-532. Patry,H. (ed.). Les dibutsde la riformeprotestante en Guyenne,1523-1559. Arrits du Parlement. Bordeaux,1912. . "Les debuts de la reformeprotestante a Bordeaux et dans le ressortdu Parlementde Guienne," Revue historique,110 (1912): 291-321. . "Les debuts de la reformeprotestante en Guienne," BSHPF, 95 (1946): 164-168. Pennington,Kenneth. "'Pro Peccatis Patrum Puniri:' A Moral and Legal Problem of the Inquisition,"Church History, 47 (1978): 137-154. Pijper,F. Martelaarsboeken.'s-Gravenhag, 1924. Portal,Charles. "La reformeen Albigeois,enquete de 1536," Revue du Tarn,1904: p. 193- 207.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 180 MENTZER: HERESY PROCEEDINGS IN LANGUEDOC

Porte,Marie-Th&ese. Les debutsde la reformed Pamiers(1562-1565). Foix, 1930. Porteau-Bitker,Anne. "L'emprisonnementdans le droit laique du moyen-age," RHD, 46 (1968): 211-245, 389-428. . "Le systemede l'elargissementsous cautionen droitcriminel franpais aux XIIIe et XIVe siecles," Recueilde la Socite' JeanBodin, 29 (1971): 57-81. Puech, Albert.La Renaissanceet la reformea Nfmes.Nimes, 1893. Pullan,Brian. " 'A Ship withTwo Rudders:''Righetto Marrano' and the Inquisitionin Venice," The HistoricalJournal, 20 (1977): 25-58. Rabaud, Camille. Histoiredu protestantismedans l'Albigeoiset le Lauragais.Paris, 1873. Ramet,Henri. Le Capitoleet le Parlementde Toulouse.Toulouse, 1926. Ramierede Fortanier,Jean. Chartes de franchisesdu Lauragais.Paris, 1939. Reusch, F. Heinrich.Der Index der verbotenenBuicher. 2 vols. in 3. Bonn, 1883-1885. Roelker,Nancy L. "The Appeal of Calvinismto FrenchNoblewomen in theSixteenth Century," Journalof Interdisciplinary History, 2 (1972): 391-418. . "The Role of Noblewomen in the FrenchReformation," ARG, 63 (1972): 168-195. Romane-Musculus,Paul. "Genealogie des Toulouse-Lautrecbranche protestantede Saint- Germier(XVIe et XVIIe siecles)," Annales du Midi, 77 (1965): 99-107. Romier,Lucien. Les originespolitiques des guerresde religion.2 vols. Paris, 1913-1914. . Le royaumede Catherinede Medicis.La Franced la veille des guerresde religion.2 vols. Paris, 1922. Russell,Josiah C. Late Ancientand Medieval Population.Philadelphia, 1958. . "L'evolution demographique de Montpellierau moyen age," Annales du Midi, 74 (1962): 345-360. Salmon, J.M. H. Societyin Crisis:France in theSixteenth Century. New York, 1975. Santi, Louis de. "Rabelais a Toulouse," Revue du seiziemesiecle, 8 (1921): 42-62. Schnapper,Bernard. "La justice criminellerendue par le Parlementde Paris sous le regne de Fransoisler," RHD, 52 (1974): 252-284. . "Les peines arbitrairesdu XIIIe au XVIIIe siecle (doctrinessavantes et usages franpais)," Tijdschriftvoor Rechtsgeschiedenis, 41 (1973): 237-277; 42 (1974): 81-112. . "La repressionpenale au XVIe siecle: l'exemple du Parlementde Bordeaux (1510- 1565)," Recueilde me'moireset travauxpublie'par la societed'histoire du droitet des institutions des ancienspays de droite'crit, 8 (1971): 1-54. . "Testes inhabiles:les temoinsreprochables dans l'ancien droitpenal," Tijdschriftvoor Rechtsgeschiedenis,33 (1965): 575-616. Secret,Fransois. "Juifset marranesau miroirde troismedecins de la Renaissance," Revue des etudesjuives, 130 (1971): 183-194. Serr,Gaston. Une egliseprotestante au XVIe siecle:Montauban. Aix-en-Provence, 1958. Simon,Richard. Nouvelles observations sur le texteet les versionsdu Nouveau Testament.Paris, 1695. Smith,Preserved. Erasmus. New York, 1923. Soman, Alfred."Press, Pulpitand Censorshipin Francebefore Richelieu," Proceedings of the AmericanPhilosophical Society, 120 (1976): 439-463. . "Les proces de sorcellerieau Parlementde Paris (1565-1640)," Annales: E.S.C., 32 (1977): 790-814. . "The Parlementof Paris and the Great WitchHunt (1565-1640)," SixteenthCentury Journal,9 (1978): 31-44. . "Deviance and CriminalJustice in WesternEurope, 1300-1800: An Essay in Structure," CriminalJustice History: An InternationalAnnual, 1 (1980): 1-28. Strayer,Joseph R. "The Laicizationof Frenchand EnglishSociety in theThirteenth Century," Speculum,15 (1940): 76-86. Szajkowski, Zosa. "Population Problems of Marranos and Sephardim in France, fromthe 16th to the 20th Centuries,"Proceedings of the AmericanAcademy of Jewish Research, 27 (1958): 83-105. Szapiro, Emile. "L'entourage d'Antoinede Lautrecet les debuts de la reformea Toulouse," Annalesdu Midi, 77 (1965): 341-344. Tanon, Louis. Histoiredes tribunauxde l'Inquisitionen France.Paris, 1893. Tedeschi,John. "Preliminary Observations on Writinga Historyof the Roman Inquisition," in F. F. Church and T. George (eds.). Continuityand Discontinuityin ChurchHistory, 232- 249. Leiden, 1979. Teisseyre-Sallman,Line. "Urbanisme et societe: l'exemple de Nimes aux XVIIe et XVIIIe sieles," Annales:E.S.C., 25 (1980): 965-987.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BIBLIOGRAPHY 181

Thomas, Jules.Le concordatde 1516, ses origines,son histoireau XVIe siecle. 3 vols. Paris, 1910. Timbal, Pierre. "La confiscationdans le droit franpaisdes XIIIe et XIVe siecles," RHD, 22 (1943): 44-79; 23 (1944): 35-60. Verheyden,A. L. E. Le martyrologeprotestant des Pays-Bas du Sud au XVIe siecle. Brussels, 1960. Viala, Andre. Le Parlementde Toulouseet l'administrationroyale lai4ue, 1420-1525 environ.2 vols. Albi, 1953. Vic, Dom Claude de, and Vaissete, Dom J.Histoire ge'ne'rale de Languedoc.Ed. A. Molinier. 16 vols. Toulouse, 1872-1904. Vidal, Jacques.L'equivalent des aides en Languedoc.Montpellier, 1963. Vindry,Fleury. Les parlementariesfranqais au XVIe siecle. 2 vols. Paris, 1909-1912. Wagner,Madeleine. "Les eniugresdu Bas-Languedoc a Geneve de 1549 a 1560," Actes des XXXVIIe et XXXVIIIe congre's(Limoux-Nimes) (1964-1965) de la Fede'rationhistorique du Languedocmediterrane'en et du Roussillon.179-186. Montpellier,1965. Weiss,Nathanael. La Chambreardente. Etude sur la libertede conscienceen Francesous Franqois Ier et HenriII (1540-1550).Paris, 1889. Wolfe,Martin. The Fiscal Systemof Renaissance France. New Haven and London, 1972. Wolff,Philippe. Commerceset marchandsde Toulouse(vers 1350-vers 1450). Paris, 1954. Les "estimes"toulousaines des XIVe et XVe siecles.Toulouse, 1965. et al. Documentsde l'histoiredu Languedoc.Toulouse, 1969. et al. Histoirede Languedoc.Toulouse, 1967. et al. Histoirede Toulouse.3d ed. Toulouse, 1974. Zeller,Gaston. Les institutionsde la Franceau XVIe siecle. Paris, 1948.

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INDEX

Appeals,51-52,63-64, 103, 104-111; comme Geographicdistribution of accused heretics, d'abus, 46-47, 106, 111; disposition,110- 142-150, 163; major concentrations,144- 111; lettresd'appel, 106; lettresde relief, 146,147; relationshipto populationcenters, 104, 106-107; omissio medio provision, 146-147 104-105; proceduraldetails, 51-52, 107- Gosin, Raymond(inquisitor), 17, 18, 20, 25- 109 27, 30-31, 32-33, 37 Grand Conseil, 27, 30, 32, 52 Badet,Arnaud de (inquisitor),15-16, 18, 20- Guilt,admission of, 87-88 21, 25-34, 161 Bail, release on, 89-92, 110 Heresy: accusation patternover time, 163- Becanis,Vidal de (inquisitor),16-17, 26, 31- 166; Articlesof Paris, 79, 135-136; as- 32, 137, 139 trologyand magic, 29, 33-34, 37-38, 40, Beziers,Protestant community at, 152, 154, 79, 131, 141; definedby commentators,9- 155 10; fasts and abstinences,2, 39, 79, 84, Blasphemy,9, 54-55, 141 132, 137; humanism,28, 33; identification Blois, ordinanceof, 67, 75, 91, 100, 115 withindigent persons, 18, 135; laicization, Bordeaux,Parlement of, 2, 4, 101, 122 10-11, 46, 67, 159-160; Marranos,25-26; Boyssone,Jean de (jurist),132 presumptionex patria, 96, 98, 133-135; printedmaterials, 2, 33, 79, 94, 96, 134, Cas privilegie,34, 45-46, 64, 160 137-140; secret assemblies, 87, 133; so- Caturce,Jean de, 28-29, 87, 119, 161, 163 domy, 32, 140; statutesgoverning, 131- Confrontationof witnessesand accused, 69, 141, 159-160 71, 88-89 Crespin,Jean (martyrologist), 32, 48-49, 87- 88, 121 Imbert,Jean (jurisconsult), 100, 103 Criminalprocedure, 11, 67, 88, 126-127, 159; Information(inquisition), 68, 75-80 accusatorial,67, 71-72; as practiced by Inquest ex officio,95-96, 103 Roman and Spanish Inquisitions,68-71, Inquisitor:appointment process, 15-17, 25- 126-127; ordinaryand extraordinary,88, 34; salary, 17 90, 91; Roman-canoninquisitorial, 11, 67- Inquisition:in Aragon,140; in Dauphine, 2; 68, 72, 97, 126-127, 159 in Franche-Comte,3; in Languedoc, 2-3, 15; Roman,2, 11, 17, 37, 68, 69, 122, 125, 126-127; Spanish, 2, 17, 37, 68, 69, 122, Defense, 69, 93-96, 103 123, 125, 126-127 Delit commun,34, 45-46, 105 Inquisition,associated personnel of: associate Denunciation, 35, 68, 71-73; motivation,73; jurists,24, 102-103; clerkand notary,23- safeguards,73 24; juge des encours,21-22, 54; lieutenant Dominicans:Congregation of France,15-16, inquisitor,21, 26; procureurdes encours, 18, 26-30, 32, 47; firstinquisitors, 15 21, 22-23, 30; sergeant,24 Interrogation,68-69, 83-87; natureof ques- Ecclesiasticalcommissions, 27-28, 30,44,52, tions,83-87 107-108, 131-132 Episcopacy:conffict with Inquisition, 37-40, 107; official,35-36, 107; officiality,2, 35, Juged'appeaux, 21-22, 54 42-43, 106; requiredconcurrence with In- Jugeordinaire, 54-55 quisition,36; role in heresycauses, 35-36, 42-43; vicar-general,21, 36-37, 41-42; Languedoc: province, 6-8; reformed weakness in Languedoc, 40-42, 58 churches,143, 148-150 Lautrec,Antoine de (jurist),50-51, 126, 135, Geneva, FrenchProtestant refugees at, 153, 160, 166 154, 155, 156-157 Livredes habitantsde Genieve,143, 147, 153

182

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions INDEX 183

Marguerited'Angouleme, 17, 21, 31, 33 Procureurgeneral du roi,38, 51; rolein heresy Monitory,39-40, 58, 76 causes, 72, 80, 81, 93, 94, 96, 97 Montpellier,Protestant community at, 152, Public renown (fama), 72, 75, 76 154, 155 Municipalgovernment: role in heresycauses, Rochette,Louis de (inquisitor),25, 31-33, 44, 62-64, 105-106, 161-162 161 Muyartde Vouglans, Pierre-Franfois(juris- Rotier,Esprit (inquisitor), 16, 19-20, 32, 160 consult),10 Rouen, Parlementof, 2, 122

Schoolmasters,55, 57, 59-62, 132-133; reg- Objections to witnesses,89, 93-94, 95, 96, ulated by Parlementof Toulouse, 61, 132 103 Seneschal:diligence, 55; jurisdictionin heresy Occitan, 6-7, 18 causes, 52-54, 105; lieutenant,53-54 Occupationalstatus of accused heretics,151- Sentencing,102-103 158; agriculturalworkers, 154, 157; artisans, 154-155; clerics, 153-154; liberal Torture,69-70, 73, 94, 97-102, 103, 107, 127; professions,155-157; nobles, 154, 157; frequencyin heresycauses, 101-102; na- merchants,157 tureof questions,98-100; safeguards,69- 70, 100 Toulouse, capitoulsof, 21, 63, 106-107, 111, Papon, Jean(jurisconsult), 91 120, 134, 138 Paris, Parlementof, 2, 16, 41, 45, 101, 122; Toulouse, Parlementof: dispositionof ap- chambreardente, 2, 3, 45, 101, 122 peals, 110-111; geographicjurisdiction, 6; Penalties:amende honorable,87, 103, 113- Grand'Chambre,4, 45, 47-49, 166; Grands 114, 116-117, 118, 132; banishment,103, Jours,49-50, 100; investigatorycommis- 116; burningat stake, 70-71, 103, 118, sions, 1, 31, 61-62, 133; jurisdictionin 119-122, 127; condemnationin absentia, heresycauses, 44-46; organization,47-50; 81, 82, 125-126, 135; confiscationof prop- orthodoxy, 50-51, 160-161; Tournalle erty,22-23, 74, 103, 123-125, 134, 135; (criminalchamber), 4, 45, 47, 49, 166 costs of execution,122-123; degradation ofclerics, 119; exoneration,70,91-92, 112- Villers-Cotterets,ordinance of, 11, 67, 75, 89, 113, 126; fines,22, 70, 103, 114-115; fre- 104, 125 quency of burning,122; fustigation,103, 113-114; galley service,70, 118-119; im- Warrantsand summons, 59, 83, 125, 156, prisonment,70, 116-118 162; bodily arrest,81; personalsummons, Preachers,Lenten and Advent, 55, 57-59, 81-82 161-162 Women,frequency among accused heretics, Prison,escape from,82-83, 121, 133, 162 157-158

This content downloaded from 142.58.129.109 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:14:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions