Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

An interesting discussion was brought up in another thread, and we're moving it over here, about the Inquisition, and how bad it really, actually, was.

This WILL be including situations where Inquisitors were prosecuting people using secular means, such as courts, armies, etc, as these frequently overlapped.

The inquisition killed a lot of people, but medieval society did that anyway. it was nothing unusual of itself.

The real damage was that it shut down independent thought in the Iberian peninsular, and caused an atmosphere of fear that pervaded all castes of society. it made Spain in particular a very backward place.

The memory of the excesses of the Inquisition also fueled the Protestant movement and the counter-reformation both. But the benefits didn't really reach those countries which had been mentally paralysed by fear of it.

To some extent Spain never fully recovered from the cultural effects of the Inquisition and the fundamentalism it furbished stymied Spain's attempts at Empire building despite an early start. especially as the fundamentalism was exported to the New World to an extent that the more stable French and English colonies avoided.
So the Inquisition influenced the development of the New World also.

There were Inquisitions in England and France, but these were carefully limited. the French monarchy used the Inquisition to its own ends, wheras the Inquisition dominated Spain. England escaped the formal Inquisition by the conversion to protestantism, though there were persecutions under Edward VII and Mary Tudor. Later pesecutions occured on a very similar pattern to the Spanish inquisition through the witch hunts. However English society had learned the lessons of the Inquisition and after some initial ugly procedures enough people stood up to the witch finders that they couldn't denounce them all as heretics and were forced to abandon their policies.

It did horrendous harm to the advancement of human (especially Western) civilization.

Scientific growth was eviscerated. Philosophy was suffocated.

 TheMeanDM wrote:
It did horrendous harm to the advancement of human (especially Western) civilization.

Scientific growth was eviscerated. Philosophy was suffocated.

Conversely those European nation states that observed the Inquisition particularly England, Denmark, Sweden, Scotland and France, mentally bolstered themselves, and empowered local societies to deny the culture of fear Inquisitors and their like used to fuel their self appointed powers. This in turn helped revive and intensify the renaissance.

Really the Inquisition is a hugely overblown topic.

But going by the historical records, the famous Spanish Inquisition only saw 44,674 cases, between 1478AD and 1834AD. Of which only 826 resulted in executions. 1.8%. Another 778 people were executed in effigy. Yeah, about half of the total executions weren't even actual executions. The vast overwhelming majority of people who were investigated by the Inquisition either received no punishment, fines, some form of corporeal punishment, or simply jail time.

Between 1530 and 1630, its estimated there were 1000 executions. 10 per year. That's a laughably tiny number.

 Grey Templar wrote:

Between 1530 and 1630, its estimated there were 1000 executions. 10 per year. That's a laughably tiny number.

That only covers the ones though that they prosecuted directly in church courts. If you look at the number of charges brought by the inquisition in secular courts, the number grows.

Factor in the number of people who died in things like the suppression of the Cathars, Waldensians, and Picards, which was overseen by the Inquisition but carried out by secular forces, and the number gets much larger. Heinrich Kramer, author of Malleus Maleficarum, was one Inquisitors set upon the Picards. You can imagine his approach to the issue.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
An interesting discussion was brought up in another thread, and we're moving it over here, about the Inquisition, and how bad it really, actually, was.

This WILL be including situations where Inquisitors were prosecuting people using secular means, such as courts, armies, etc, as these frequently overlapped.

The Spanish Inquisition was more a political tool for the Spanish monarchs at the time. In fact, it was founded by Ferdinand and Isabella, and used local Catholic clergy with political ties to the throne.


The Medieval, or Papal, Inquisition was more spiritual in nature and followed the procedures formalized by Gregory IX. Thus, couldn't be controlled by temporal authority in Spain.


As for the Papal Inquisition (the only official Inquisition), the legacy of torture and horrific capital punishment has been way overblown, mostly due to anti-Papal propaganda during the Reformation and so-called Age of Reason.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

Between 1530 and 1630, its estimated there were 1000 executions. 10 per year. That's a laughably tiny number.

That only covers the ones though that they prosecuted directly in church courts. If you look at the number of charges brought by the inquisition in secular courts, the number grows.

Factor in the number of people who died in things like the suppression of the Cathars, Waldensians, and Picards, which was overseen by the Inquisition but carried out by secular forces, and the number gets much larger. Heinrich Kramer, author of Malleus Maleficarum, was one Inquisitors set upon the Picards. You can imagine his approach to the issue.

As was mentioned previously, the punishments carried out and the methods were not themselves unusual in the time period. The secular courts themselves weren't known for being kind or gentle either, assuming you actually went before a court and didn't just have justice immediately carried out by the local bailiff or even the mob.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
As for the Papal Inquisition (the only official Inquisition), the legacy of torture and horrific capital punishment has been way overblown, mostly due to anti-Papal propaganda during the Reformation and so-called Age of Reason.

The same one that put 200 heretic priests on the pyre in a single day?

The same papal inquisitors who said "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius"? You know, from whence we get the modern saying 'Kill them all, let God sort them out'?

One rather jolly fellow reported back to the Pope, during the suppression of the Cathars "Today your Holiness, twenty thousand heretics were put to the sword, regardless of rank, age, or sex."

These are not anti-Papal propaganda, but matters of record. The French were being particularly studious as most of the lands in southern France were being forfeited to the crown, and the King did not want to be cheated by the Pope.

I'm not well read on the subject to know much about it. However, it's worth saying that there were relatively few people around in those days too.

I'm mostly watching this for educations sake.

 Orlanth wrote:
The real damage was that it shut down independent thought in the Iberian peninsular, and caused an atmosphere of fear that pervaded all castes of society. it made Spain in particular a very backward place.

The irony is that it is the same Spain which would later give birth to the Jesuits who are responsible for many advances in science and rational thought.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
As for the Papal Inquisition (the only official Inquisition), the legacy of torture and horrific capital punishment has been way overblown, mostly due to anti-Papal propaganda during the Reformation and so-called Age of Reason.

The same one that put 200 heretic priests on the pyre in a single day?

The same papal inquisitors who said "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius"? You know, from whence we get the modern saying 'Kill them all, let God sort them out'?

One rather jolly fellow reported back to the Pope, during the suppression of the Cathars "Today your Holiness, twenty thousand heretics were put to the sword, regardless of rank, age, or sex."

These are not anti-Papal propaganda, but matters of record. The French were being particularly studious as most of the lands in southern France were being forfeited to the crown, and the King did not want to be cheated by the Pope.

The Albigensian Crusade had more to do with politics and Innocent III's personal grudges, than any suppression of heresy. And the official Papal Inquisition hadn't even been founded when that whole mess started. The Church was still operating under the episcopal inquisitions , which were more informal, had less accountability to the Pope, and used mob violence as a tool.

Starting with Innocent III's death in 1216 A.D., to 1233 A.D. when Papal Inquisition took over the hunt for the Cathars, the worst of the tribunal abuses slowly stopped. Only those who refused to repent were turned over to civil authorities for the civil crimes of heresy and rebellion. That's where most of your later executions came into it, including the execution of those 200 priests. They refused to recant. Those that did were usually spared, forced to wear the yellow cross. The nobles involved lost their property and titles, and/or were imprisoned.


And by the way, while attributed to him by Caesarius of Heisterbach, there is no historical evidence that Abbot Arnaud Amalric uttered the phrase "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius ".

Jonathan Sumption wrote a very good history of the Albigensian Crusade, covering the involvement of the Inquisition as well as the military campaigns.

They were pretty horrible. I mean, they made people sit in comfy chairs. How do you deal with that? Its a chair that's comfy, you just can't.

 Breotan wrote:

The irony is that it is the same Spain which would later give birth to the Jesuits who are responsible for many advances in science and rational thought.

And the 30 years war, which stifled a lot of those things.

(Longer post in the works, have to go to work)

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
As for the Papal Inquisition (the only official Inquisition), the legacy of torture and horrific capital punishment has been way overblown, mostly due to anti-Papal propaganda during the Reformation and so-called Age of Reason.

The same one that put 200 heretic priests on the pyre in a single day?

The same papal inquisitors who said "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius"? You know, from whence we get the modern saying 'Kill them all, let God sort them out'?

One rather jolly fellow reported back to the Pope, during the suppression of the Cathars "Today your Holiness, twenty thousand heretics were put to the sword, regardless of rank, age, or sex."

These are not anti-Papal propaganda, but matters of record. The French were being particularly studious as most of the lands in southern France were being forfeited to the crown, and the King did not want to be cheated by the Pope.

That was horrible, but it wasn't any different from standard warfare in that time, and the Albigensian Crusade was more politically motivated rather than having real religious reasons behind it. The "Crusaders" fought against Catholics as much as Cathars, the war being primarily about the King of France trying to wrest control over Toulon from the King of Aragon. There was of course a religious element to the war (as is true of many wars of the era, given the integration of church and state), but it is nothing that makes the (Papal) Inquisition stand out as more brutal than secular authorities.

Also, it is likely that the reports of the casualties of the Siege of Béziers being 20,000 are overblown, given that the entire population of the town was no more than 14,500 at the time.

In general, as a court and tool of persecution, inquisitions tended to be more moderate and limited than secular courts.

Yeah, the Spanish Inquisition was like the 40k one.
The Inquisition in general tried to save your soul, to make you recognize your fault in order to save you from Hell.
They weren't the monsters everyone think they are.
Except some guys or some special events.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

That was horrible, but it wasn't any different from standard warfare in that time,

Actually it differed in several key areas. No attempt was made to ransom prisoners, for example. or even take them. Remember that the knights of France were fighting for honor and financial gain. The complete destruction of cities gave them little of either.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
There was of course a religious element to the war (as is true of many wars of the era, given the integration of church and state), but it is nothing that makes the (Papal) Inquisition stand out as more brutal than secular authorities.

They continued for more than 30 years after the French won the war. According to an estimate by Rainerius Sacconi at the time that over 4 million cathars were slain.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Also, it is likely that the reports of the casualties of the Siege of Béziers being 20,000 are overblown, given that the entire population of the town was no more than 14,500 at the time.

Your forgetting to factor in that, per usual war in the middle ages, the countryside would have poured into the city for protection. Béziers population might have been 14,500 under normal circumstances, but in a heavily populated area like southern France was at the time, 20k isn't unreasonable.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

In general, as a court and tool of persecution, inquisitions tended to be more moderate and limited than secular courts.

Nicholas Eymerich tried to prosecute the entire city of Valencia for Heresy, and the violence was so bad that King John I of Aragon intervened and had him banished (again). I'm still trying to find a copy of his Directorium Inquisitorum in English, since my Latin is not THAT good.

He as noted as the first inquisitor to get around the Church's prohibition against multiple torture sessions by claiming it was really all just one long session.

 Breotan wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
The real damage was that it shut down independent thought in the Iberian peninsular, and caused an atmosphere of fear that pervaded all castes of society. it made Spain in particular a very backward place.

The irony is that it is the same Spain which would later give birth to the Jesuits who are responsible for many advances in science and rational thought.

The Jesuits were started by a bunch of students from the University of Paris from Spain, Portugal, Savoy, and France. Spain really had no more significance for the formation of the order than any other country.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
The real damage was that it shut down independent thought in the Iberian peninsular, and caused an atmosphere of fear that pervaded all castes of society. it made Spain in particular a very backward place.

The irony is that it is the same Spain which would later give birth to the Jesuits who are responsible for many advances in science and rational thought.

The Jesuits were started by a bunch of students from the University of Paris from Spain, Portugal, Savoy, and France. Spain really had no more significance for the formation of the order than any other country.

Six according to Wikipedia, all but one Spanish with the group's leader a Spanish knight and a former military man. I'd say Spain was pretty significant.

I don't know what Wiki says, but of the three significant founders of the Jesuits I know of, one was from Spain, one was from Savoy, and the third was from Navarre, and equating Navarre to Spain at the time we're talking about is the same as equating Savoy to Germany. Navarre wasn't subject to crown rule (despite officially being part of the Kingdom of Castile) until the 19th century and maintained home rule throughout the Early Modern period. Basque country in general was home ruled, and many of the early Jesuits were Basque not Spanish.

I remember arguing with a guy who thought inquisition should be brought back. To protect oppressed Christians in America of course.

But most of the Christians in America are heretics by the standards f the Inquisition, aren't they? :p