[828] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 595, fol. 1.

[829] Ibidem, Sala 40, Lib. 4, fol. 177.

[830] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 25, fol. 89.

[831] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 595, fol. 1; Lib. 69, fol. 69.—Taronji, Estado Social etc. de la Isla de Mallorca, pp. 241-2.

[832] Garau, La Fee triunfante, pp. 30-45, 49-50, 65-78, 111-22.—Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 68, fol. 258.

[833] Royal Library of Berlin, Qt. 9548.

[834] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Sala 39, Leg. 4, fol. 15, 23, 71.

[835] Matute y Luquin, Autos de fe de Córdova, pp. 212-16.

[836] Archivo hist. nacional, Inq. de Toledo, Leg. 1.

In Portugal there was greater activity. The list of autos in the “Historia dos principaes Actos,” pp. 278-81, 304-7, 328-31, shows for the twenty years, 1701-20,

[837] Bibl. nacional, MSS., B^b, 122.

[838] Archivo hist. nacional, Inq. de Toledo, Leg. 1.

[839] Royal Library of Berlin, Qt. 9548. The summary of penalties is:—

[840] The distribution of the cases was:—

It is probable that the year 1727 is not complete in this collection.—Royal Library of Berlin, Qt. 9548.

[841] Matute y Luquin, op. cit., pp. 253-73.

[842] Archivo hist. nacional, Inq. de Toledo, Leg. 1.

[843] Bibl. nacional, MSS., S, 294, fol. 375.

[844] Royal Library of Berlin, Qt. 9548.

[845] Archivo de Alcalá, Hacienda, Leg. 544² (Lib. 9).

The Inquisition of Portugal continued active. For the years 1721 to 1794, the last recorded, the statistics are (Historia dos principaes Actos, pp. 280-91, 306-11, 332-9):—

In this the superior energy and ferocity of the Lisbon tribunal is noteworthy; it relaxed no less than 66 persons in the years 1732-42. The last burning was of the unfortunate Padre Malagrida, in 1761 but, as late as 1760, Evora burnt four culprits.

As far as can be ascertained the total record of the Portuguese Inquisition, up to 1794, is 1175 relaxed in person, 633 in effigy and 29,590 penanced. The proportion of New Christians among these is impossible of ascertainment, but towards the last it diminished considerably, and, as in Spain, the jurisdiction included superstitious sorcery, blasphemy, bigamy, etc.

Under the ministry of the Marquis of Pombal, Dom José, April 8, 1768, deprived the Inquisition of censorship and, by successive edicts of May 2, 1768, June 16, 1773 and December, 1774, all distinctions between Old and New Christians were removed. An order of February 10, 1774, abolished the Inquisition of Goa, but the death of Dom José, in 1777, and the succession of Maria I drove Pombal from power, and it was revived in 1779, to be finally suppressed in 1812 (Vicente d’Abreu, pp. 6-7, 267-72, 274). In Portugal it was extinguished by the revolution of 1820.

In 1774 a new Regimento was issued by the inquisitor-general, Cardinal da Cunha, in the preface of which the Jesuits are accused of having perverted the forms of procedure, causing all the evils with which it had afflicted the land. The new code removed many of the abuses of the old and King José, in the decree approving it, repeated the accusation of the Jesuits, holding them responsible for the ferocious and sanguinary corruptions, incompatible with the principles of natural reason and religion, which had rendered the Inquisition a horror to all Europe and had created within the monarchy an independent and autocratic body of ecclesiastics.—Regimento do Santo Officio da Inquisição, pp. 3 sqq. 31, 37, 39, 42, 55, 62-3, 71, 89, 144-5, 149, 154-5. (Lisboa, 1774).

English versions of both Regimentos—that of 1640 and that of 1774—are given by da Costa Pereira Furtado de Mendonça in the Narrative of his Persecutions (London, 1811). He lay for three years, 1802 to 1805, in the prison of the Lisbon tribunal and, if his account is to be relied upon, the reforms of Pombal had already become obsolete.

[846] Archivo hist. nacional, Inq. de Valencia, Leg. 100.

In 1783 Inquisitor-general Beltran instructed the tribunals that no one was to be arrested for Judaism without first submitting to him all the papers. At the same time he called for reports of all cases of Judaism there pending, to which Valencia replied that it had none.—Ibidem, Cartas del Consejo, Leg. 16, n. 5, fol. 59; Leg. 4, n. 2, fol. 136.

[847] Novís. Recop., Lib. XII, T. i, ley 4.

[848] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Leg. 1473.

[849] Proceso contra Diego Rodríguez Silva (MS. penes me).

[850] Archivo hist. nacional, Inq. de Valencia, Leg. 11, n. 3, fol. 183.—Bibl. nacional, MSS., V, 377, cap. XXII.

[851] Archivo hist. nacional, Inq. de Valencia, Leg. 10, n. 2, fol. 112.

[852] De Lamberty, Mémoires pour servir, VIII, 379.

[853] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Leg. 552, fol. 52.

[854] Archivo hist. nacional, Inq. de Valencia, Leg. 4, n. 3, fol. 222.

[855] Ibidem, Leg. 100.

[856] Amador de los Rios, III, 552-3.

[857] Novís. Recop., Lib. XII, Tit. i, ley 5.

[858] Amador de los Rios, III, 557.

[859] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 435².

[860] MS. penes me.

[861] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Leg. 1473.

[862] Ibidem, Lib. 559.

[863] Lindo’s History of the Jews, p. 377.

[864] Amador de los Rios, III, 561-2.—Paredes, Curso de Derecho político, p. 666 (Madrid, 1883).

[865] Elkan N. Adler, in Jewish Quarterly Review, April, 1901, p. 392.

[866] P. Angel Tineo Heredia, Los Judíos en España, pp. 44, 48 (Madrid, 1881).

[867] The long-drawn tragedy of the Moriscos can only be outlined within the compass of a chapter and I must refer the reader, who desires greater detail, to my “Moriscos of Spain, their Conversion and Expulsion” (Philadelphia 1901). Since that volume was issued Padre Pascual Boronat y Barrachina has published two octavo volumes on the subject—“Los Moriscos españoles y su Expulsion” (Valencia, 1901) in which his industry has accumulated a very copious mass of original documents; of these I have here freely availed myself.

[868] Yanguas y Miranda, Diccionario de Antigüedades del Reino de Navarra II, 433 (Pamplona, 1840).

[869] Fray Jayme Bleda, Corónica de los Moros, p. 877 (Valencia, 1618).

[870] Pulgar, Crónica de los Reyes Católicas, II, lxxvii.—Archivo gén. de la C. de Aragon, Regist. 3684, fol. 96.—Padre Fidel Fita (Boletin, XV, 323-5, 327, 328, 330; XXIII, 431).

[871] Fernández y González, p. 421.—Coleccion de Documentos, VIII, 411.—Marmol Carvajal, Rebelion y Castigo de los Moriscos de Granada, pp. 146-50 (Biblioteca de Autores españoles, Tom. XXI).

[872] Coleccion de Documentos, XI, 569; XIV, 496.—Janer, Condicion social de los Moriscos, p. 127.

[873] Printed in Appendix to the author’s “Moriscos,” p. 403.

[874] Marmol Carvajal, p. 153.—Salazar de Mendoza, Crónica del gran Cardenal de España, p. 251 (Toledo, 1625).

[875] Marmol Carvajol, p. 152.—Pedraza, Hist. eccles. de Granada, fol. 174, 186-7.

[876] Gomesii de Rebus gestis a Francisco Ximenio, Lib. IV, fol. 65; Lib. V, fol. 128; Lib. VII, fol. 219.

[877] The principal authority for all this is Marmol Carvajal (Rebelion y Castigo, pp. 153-6), but there are also accounts by Gomez (De Rebus gestis, Lib. II, fol. 30-33); Zurita (Hist. del Rey Hernando, Lib. III, cap. xliv); Galíndez de Carvajal (Coleccion de Docum. XVIII, 296); Bernaldez (Hist. de los Reyes Catholicos, p. 145); Pedraza (Hist. ecles. de Granada, fol. 193, 196).

[878] Clemencin, Elogio de la Reina Isabel, pp. 291-3 (Madrid, 1821).—Archivo de Simancas, Patronato Real, Inq., Leg. único, fol. 26.

[879] Zurita, Galíndez de Carvajal, Marmol Carvajal, Bernaldez, ubi sup.

[880] Nueva Recop. Lib. VIII, Tit. ii, ley 8.

[881] When, or on what terms, this exemption was granted to the Moriscos of Granada I have been unable to ascertain, but it is referred to repeatedly in subsequent documents as a matter of common knowledge.

[882] Boronat, Los Moriscos españoles, I, 113.

[883] Nueva Recop., Lib. VIII, Tit. ii, ley 4.—Cf. Fernández y González, p. 219.

[884] Galíndez de Carvajal (Col. de Documentos, XVIII, 301-4). Zurita, while quoting Carvajal, disputes this, but admits that the conversion was not voluntary.—Hist. del Rey Hernando, Lib. IV, cap. 54.

[885] Col. de Documentos, XXXVI, 447.

[886] Bravo, Catálogo de los Obispos de Córdova, I, 411 (Córdova, 1788).

[887] Gomesii de Rebus gestis Lib. III, fol. 77.

[888] Danvila y Collado, Expulsion, p. 74.

[889] Concil. Hispalens., ann. 1512, Cap. 2 (Aguirre, V, 363).

[890] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 3, fol. 72.

[891] Mariana, Hist. de España, Ed. 1796, Tom. IX, Append, p. lvi.

[892] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 4, fol. 97; Lib. 9, fol. 2, 13, 29; Lib. 940 fol. 69, 131, 185.

[893] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 939, fol. 89.—Danvila y Collado, p. 98.

[894] MSS. of Library of Univ. of Halle, Yc, 20, T. I.—Bibl. nacional, MSS., D, 111, fol. 127; PV, 3, n. 20.—Procesos contra Mari Serrana, Mari Naranja, Mari Gómez la Sazeda (MSS. penes me).

[895] Archivo de Simancas, Inq. de Valencia, Leg. 205, fol. 3.

[896] Bleda, Corónica, p. 905.

[897] MSS. penes me.—MSS. of Library of Univ. of Halle, Yc, 20, T. I.

[898] MSS. of Library of Univ. of Halle, Yc, 20, T. I.

[899] Pedraza, Hist. ecles. de Granada, fol. 236-8.

[900] Sandoval, Hist. de Carlos V, Lib. XIV, cap. 18.—Guevara, Epístolas familiares p. 543.

[901] Sandoval, ubi sup.—Dormer, Añales de Aragon, Lib. II, cap. vii.—Archivo de Simancas, Lib. 926, fol. 80.

[902] Dormer, ubi sup.—Bleda, Corónica, p. 566.—Marmol Carvajal, p. 158.—Nueva Recop., Lib. VIII, Tit. ii, leyes 13, 15, 17.

[903] Dormer, Bleda, Marmol Carvajal, loc. cit.—Relazioni Venete, Serie I, Tom. V, p. 37.

[904] Rule, History of the Inquisition, I, 172 (London, 1874).

[905] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 926, fol. 80-2, 86-7.—Gachard, Retraite et Mort de Charles-quint, II, 356.

[906] Mendoza, Guerra de Granada, p. 71 (Bibl. de Autores españoles, T. XXI).

[907] Danvila y Collado, Expulsion, p. 172.

[908] Marmol Carvajal, p. 160.—Cabrera, Felipe Segundo, pp. 293, 429 (Madrid, 1619).—Memoria de Mondéjar, pp. 14-16 (Morel-Fatio, L’Espagne an xvi^e et xvii^e Siècle).—Mendoza, p. 71.—Pedraza, fol. 239.

[909] Cabrera, p. 393.—Pedraza, fol. 238.

[910] Cabrera, pp. 394, 466.—Pedraza, fol. 238-9.

[911] Memoria de Mondéjar (Morel-Fatio, p. 17).—Marmol Carvajal, p. 167.—Cabrera, p. 465.—Pedraza, fol. 239.

[912] Marmol Carvajal, pp. 161-2.—Pedraza, fol. 239.

This prohibition of bathing, even by Christians, is a curious illustration of the civilization of the period. It had degenerated since the Fuero of Teruel, granted in 1176, by Alfonso II of Aragon, which prescribed that the public bath should be used by men on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays, by women on Mondays and Wednesdays, and by Jews and Moors on Fridays. On Sundays the bath was closed and no water was heated.—Forum Turolii: Transcripcion de Francisco Aznar y Navarro, p. 142 (Zaragoza, 1905).

[913] Marmol Carvajal, pp. 166, 168.—Cabrera, p. 465.—Pedraza, fol. 240.

[914] Marmol Carvajal, p. 167.—Pedraza, fol. 241.

[915] Relazioni Venete, Serie I, T. V, p. 145.

The Córtes of 1570 petitioned Philip to repeal the prohibition of using arquebuses in the chase, pointing out that the war in Granada had shown the scarcity of the weapon in Spain and the lack of men that could use it. They also referred to the difficulty experienced in arming the levies and suggested that the cities and towns should be permitted to provide armories at their own cost under such restrictions as the king might prescribe. To these petitions the royal replies were equivocal. It is all highly significant of the suspicions entertained by the monarch as to the loyalty of his subjects.—Córtes de Córdova del año de setenta, fol. 6, 12 (Alcalá, 1575).

[916] Córtes de Córdova del año de setenta, fol. 13 (Alcalá, 1575).

[917] Dépêches de M. de Fourquevaux, I, 354 (Paris, 1896).

[918] Marmol Carvajal, p. 277.—Mendoza, p. 92.

[919] Marmol Carvajal, pp. 341, 364.—Col. de Documentos, XXVIII, 156.

[920] Bibl. nacional, MSS., G. 50, fol. 240.

[921] Relazioni Venete, Serie I, T. VI, p. 407.

[922] Nueva Recop., Lib. VIII, Tit. ii, ley 22.

[923] Janer, p. 256.

[924] Obras de Cervantes, p. 242 (Ed. Ribadeneyra).

[925] Córtes de Madrid del año de setenta y tres, Peticion 96 (Alcalá, 1575).

[926] Janer, p. 272.—Boronat, I, 626.

[927] Janer, p. 270.—Bleda, Corónica, p. 905.—Nueva Recop., Lib. VIII, Tit. ii, ley 24.

[928] Relazioni Venete, Serie I, T. V, p. 451.

[929] Ximenez, Vida de Ribera, p. 379.

[930] Janer, p. 272.—Boronat, I, 318.—Bleda, Corónica, p. 921.—Guadalajara y Xavierr, Expulsion de los Moriscos, fol. 122-3 (Pamplona, 1613).—Cabrera, Relaciones, p. 355.

[931] Sandoval, Lib. XII, § xxviii.

[932] Danvila y Collado, pp. 75, 76.—Constitutions y altres Drets de Cathalunya, p. 34 (Barcelona, 1688).

[933] Fernández y González, p. 441.—Bleda, Corónica, p. 641; Ejusd. Defensio Fidei, p. 156.

[934] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 1.

[935] Ibidem, Lib. 926, fol. 76.

[936] Ibidem, Lib. 3, fol. 132.

[937] Ibidem, Lib. 3, fol. 245.

[938] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 1.—Múñoz, Diario Turolense, ann. 1502 (Boletin, 1895, p. 10).

[939] Ibidem, Lib. 14, fol. 80; Lib. 940, fol. 69, 131, 185.

[940] This work was subsequently prohibited. Nevertheless Salvatierra, Bishop of Segorbe, in 1587 asked Philip II to permit its reprinting for the benefit of priests laboring among the Moriscos.—Boronat, I, 614.

[941] Archivo hist, nacional, Inq. de Valencia, Leg. 98.

In the Appendix will be found a table of all the cases of heresy tried by the Valencia tribunal from 1455 to 1592. In the fifteenth century the culprits must have been almost exclusively Judaizers. Then in time Moriscos were mingled with them, but the blanks in the fifth, sixth and seventh decades, during which the Moriscos, as we shall see, were exempted from the Inquisition, show that Judaizers had virtually disappeared, except those punished in 1544, 1545 and 1546, for retraction of confession (See Vol. II, p. 584).

There is also an imperfect table of the cases of relaxation. An examination of these tables will show the varying activity of the Inquisition of the period.

[942] Danvila y Collado, La Germanía de Valencia, pp. 146, 471.—Pet. Mart. Angler. Lib. XXXIII, Epp. 659-61.

[943] MS. Informacio super Conversione Sarracenorum.—I possess the original document.

[944] MS. Informacio.—Danvila y Collado, Germanía, p. 184.

[945] MS. Informacio.—Danvila, Germanía, pp. 473, 474.—Archivo hist. nacional, Inq. de Valencia, Leg. 299, fol. 400.—Loazes, Tractatus super nova paganorum Regni Valentiæ Conversione, col. 12 (Valentiæ, 1525)

[946] Danvila y Collado, Germanía, p. 489.

[947] Guevara, Epistolas familiares, pp. 639-42.

[948] Cap. 13 in Sexto, Lib. V, Tit. ii.

[949] Hostiensis Aureæ Summæ Lib. III, de Baptismo § 11; Lib. V, de Judæis § 5.—S. Th. Aquinat. Summæ P. III, Q. lxviii, Art, 8 ad 4; Q. lxix, Art. 9 ad 1.—S. Bonaventura in IV Sentt. Dist. IV P. 1, art. 2, Q. 1.—S. Antoninæ Summæ P. II, Tit. xii, Cap. 2, § 1.—Summa Sylvestrina s. v. Baptismus IV, § 10.

[950] Albertus Magnus in IV Sentt., Dist. VI, Art. 10.—Duns Scotus in IV Sentt. Dist. IV, Q. 4, 5.—Summa Angelica S. V. Baptismus VI, §§ 6, 12.

The facility with which, in this matter, the Church adapted its theories to accomplished facts is well exhibited by Cardinal Toletus (Summæ Casuum Conscientiæ Lib. II, cap. xxi). After explaining that, in adult baptism, three prerequisites are necessary—intention, faith and sorrow for sins committed—he proceeds “Hæc autem non eodem modo sunt necessaria. Intentio namque ita est necessaria ut si desit actualis vel virtualis, non sit baptismus. Unde fit ut qui renuens invitus baptizatur, non sit vere baptizatus; si tamen interius consensit, quamvis metu et vi, tunc baptizatus est et recepit characterem, sed non gratiam; cogendusque est ut maneat in fide Christiana.” Thus the coerced convert was burdened with the responsibilities of baptism while denied its spiritual benefits.

[951] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Sala 40, Lib. 4, fol. 97.

[952] Danvila y Collado, Expulsion, p. 88.

[953] MS. Informacio.

[954] Loazes, Tractatus, col. 1, 17, 45, 60-1, 62.

[955] Sandoval, Lib. XIII, § xxviii.—Sayas, Añales de Aragon, cap. cxxvii.—Danvila y Collado, Expulsion, pp. 90-1.

[956] Sandoval, Sayas, loc. cit.—Bleda, Corónica, p. 647.