Records of the Spanish Inquisition, Translated from the Original Manuscripts

2. Certain persons of his acquaintance rebuking him for not confessing, he blasphemed God and the Saints with such fury and malice that he appeared like a demoniac. He wears no rosary. Some one threatening him with a punishment from the Inquisition, he replied that he did not care for the Inquisition, and that he would not confess; also, that he wanted nothing from God which the devil could give him.

3. On Passion Week, during the last Lent, some person was conducting him to the Jesuits of the aforesaid city of Tarragona, for the purpose of confession, out of charity towards him, and although it was in his power to comply with the precept in this instance, he refused, and fled from the church, to the great scandal of the confessor who was there to hear him, as well as other persons.

4. He is accustomed to deny God, and swear ‘by the head of God,’ and ‘the soul and body of Christ,’ repeating it commonly many times a day; also declaring that his living, and everything he gets, comes in the name of the devil and not of God. Some one rebuking him for this, he said that he believed what he pleased, and as to hearing mass on the days prescribed, he would take it upon trust; that the preachers said just what they chose, and did nothing but disturb the people.

5. He says that he does not fear God, and that if he knew there was a tavern in the other world, he should not care if he died, although his body were burnt.

6. I accuse him of having said that a man ought not to tell his sins to the confessor, and that it was nonsense for a man to tell anything but what he pleased. This being a proposition maintained by the false and reprobate sect of Martin Luther, and the prisoner belonging to France, a country where this sect prevails, it is to be presumed that he belongs to it.

7. Furthermore, it is to be supposed that the prisoner has committed many other offences against our Holy Catholic Faith, and uttered other blasphemies and heretical speeches, as well as known that other persons have done the same, all which he conceals like a bad Christian. Of this I intend to accuse him more formally. At present I do it in general terms, and although he has been exhorted by your Excellency to declare the truth, he has not done it, but has perjured himself.

For which reasons I request and supplicate your Excellency to admit my charges as proved, or such a portion of the same as shall suffice for the ends of justice in a definitive sentence, or whatever measure may be taken, and to declare my accusation fully proved, and the said Leonardo Phelipe guilty of the abovementioned offences, condemning him to the heaviest punishments by law thereto affixed, and executing them upon his person and goods, by turning him over to the secular arm of justice, as a punishment to himself and a terror to others. And I request that if necessary, he may be put to the torture, and that the same be continued and repeated till he confess the whole truth of himself and others.

And I formally swear that I do not present this accusation out of malice, but solely to accomplish the ends of justice, which I request at the hands of your Excellency.

Damian Fonolleda, Sec’y.

The above accusation having been presented and read, the said Leonardo Phelipe was formally sworn to declare the truth in answer thereto, and it being read over, article by article, he answered as follows.

To the head of the accusation he answered, that he was the same Leonardo Phelipe whom the Fiscal accused, but that he had not committed any offences against our Holy Catholic Faith, nor denied our Lord, although he had sometimes sworn by his name.

To the first article he answered, that he had always confessed like other Christians, and in Valencia had not suffered a year to pass without doing so, and that he had never been excommunicated on this account.

To the second article he answered, that he denied it, for it was not true that he had no rosary. He made use of one in his prison eleven times, and now exhibited the same in his hands; which I, the Secretary, testify.

To the third article he answered, that he denied it, for it was not true; and that during the said Passion Week, in the last Lent, he had confessed in the convent of St Francisco, in Tarragona; that he complied with the precepts of the Church, as he had stated in his first audience, and that this could be shown by the certificate of confession found upon him at the time of his imprisonment.

To the fourth article he answered, that he denied it, for it was not true.

To the fifth article he answered, that he denied it; that he trusted in God, and a heretic could not say such things.

To the sixth article he answered, that he denied it, for it was not true, and he could not imagine how such testimony could be borne against him.

To the seventh article he answered, that he had not committed any offence against our Holy Catholic Faith, nor knew that any other persons had committed offences, and that he had declared the entire truth and had not perjured himself.

To the conclusion of the accusation, he answered that even if he were put to the torture he could say nothing more.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the prisoner, and having been read, was declared by him to be correctly recorded. Not being able to write, I, the Inquisitor sign the same.

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

The said Inquisitor then ordered the prisoner to be furnished with a copy of the accusation, that he might on the third day make an answer thereto with the counsel and assistance of one of the lawyers who defend cases in this Holy Office, namely, Dr Francisco Magrinya, and the Rector of the Company of Jesus. He was allowed to select one of these persons and made choice of Dr Magrinya.

The Inquisitor then ordered him to be summoned, and the prisoner having been admonished to bethink himself, was remanded to prison.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.AUDIENCE TO COMMUNICATE THE ACCUSATION AND PROOF

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentyninth day of May, one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta presiding sole at his morning audience, ordered the abovementioned Leonardo Phelipe to be brought out of prison; which being done, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything relating to his cause which he was bound by his oath to divulge.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

He was then informed that Dr Francisco Magrinya was present, whom he had chosen for his advocate, and that he might confer with him about his defence. The said Dr Magrinya swore in verbo sacerdotis to defend well and faithfully the said Leonardo Phelipe so far as justice allowed, to inform him if his case was not a good one, to do all which a good advocate is bound to do, and to preserve secrecy in everything.

The confessions of the prisoner were then read, together with the accusation and his answers, and the prisoner conferred with his advocate who advised him as the best means of discharging his conscience and despatching his trial, to confess the truth without bearing falsewitness either against himself or any other person, and, if he were guilty, to beg pardon, by which he would experience mercy.

Answered, that he had declared the truth in his confessions, and denied the accusation so far as it went beyond this. He begged in consequence to be set at liberty, and to be mercifully dealt with, for what he had confessed. He declared, that after publication of the testimony, he should more formally present matter for his defence.

The Inquisitor then ordered this to be notified to the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office, upon which Mattheo Magre, the senior Secretary, acting as Fiscal, answered, that he accepted the confessions of the said Leonardo Phelipe, so far as they were favorable to the accusation, and no farther, denying all the rest. He requested that the proofs might be exhibited.

The Inquisitor declared that the cause should be judged definitively, and the proofs received salvo jure impertinentium et non admittendorum, according to the style of the Holy Office. The same was notified to both parties.

The Promoter Fiscal then stated that he produced anew and presented the testimony and proofs against the said Leonardo Phelipe, received and registered in the Holy Office. He requested that they might be substantiated and ratified in form, that all other necessary investigations might be made and the testimony published.

The prisoner then being exhorted to bethink himself and declare the truth, was remanded to prison, which I, the abovementioned Secretary certify.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.AUDIENCE FOR PUBLICATION

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the seventeenth day of June, one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta presiding sole in his morning audience, ordered the abovementioned Leonardo Phelipe to be brought out of prison; which being done, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything relating to his affair, which he was bound by his oath to divulge.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

He was then informed that the Promotor Fiscal of this Holy Office was about to demand publication of the testimony against him, before which it would be well for him to confess the whole truth, by which means his trial should be despatched with all brevity and mercy.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Straightway appeared the Secretary, Mattheo Magre, who officiated as Fiscal, and requested publication of the testimony against the said Leonardo Phelipe according to the style of the Holy Office. The Inquisitor then ordered the said publication to be made, concealing the names and other circumstances of the witnesses which might lead to a discovery of their persons, according to the instructions and style of the Holy Office.

[Here follows the publication, and the answers of the prisoner, corresponding with what has already been given.]

The Inquisitor then directed him to be furnished with a copy of the above publication, that he might, with the assistance of his counsel, reply thereto on the third day. Whereupon being admonished to bethink himself and declare the truth, he was remanded to prison.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.AUDIENCE TO COMMUNICATE THE PUBLICATION

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentysecond day of June, one thousand six hundred and thirty seven, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta presiding sole in his morning audience, ordered the above Leonardo Phelipe to be brought out of prison; which being done, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything relating to his affair, which he was bound by his oath to divulge.

Answered, that by reason of the troubles which arose in his house, he had sometimes broken out into swearing, saying, ‘the devil take me if this is not true.’

He was then informed that Dr Francisco Magrinya, his advocate was present, with whom he might communicate respecting the publication, and other matters of his defence. The publication and the answers of the prisoner, &c. were then read to the said Dr Francisco Magrinya, who drew up articles of defence upon a paper prepared by the Secretary. Here the audience closed, and the prisoner being admonished to bethink himself, was remanded to prison.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.AUDIENCE FOR THE DEFENCE

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentyfifth day of June, one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta presiding sole in his morning audience, ordered the above Leonardo Phelipe to be brought out of prison; which being done, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything relating to his affair, which he was bound by his oath to divulge.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

He was then informed that Dr Francisco Magrinya, his advocate, was present, and had arranged his defence, which he might examine. The said Dr Francisco Magrinya then read to him certain articles which he had drawn up in his favor, and this having been heard by the prisoner, he declared that he made a presentation of the same, and requested an examination of the witnesses named in the margin, and that the other investigations referred to might be made.

DEFENCE

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR—

Although Bernardo Phelippe, an inhabitant of the city of Tarragona has no necessity for any defence against the charges of the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office, yet the more clearly to show his innocence, and premising expressly that what he declares against the witnesses is not with an intention to injure or defame them, but solely to defend himself, onere superflux probationis rejecto, he offers the following:—

1. It is not true that he has abjured, sworn or blasphemed the head of God, or uttered any other blasphemies, which statement is the truth.

2. It is not true that he has neglected to hear mass on the Sundays and holidays appointed, or neglected to confess and take the sacrament every year, or been excommunicated on such account; which is the truth.

3. The witnesses who depose against him, turn all his oaths into swearing, ‘by the head of God,’ which is the truth.

4. Even though, (quod expresse negat) he may have at sometimes sworn ‘by the head of God,’ yet it was done in the heat of passion, and inasmuch as de jure prima motus non sit in homine, nothing bad can be imputed to him, which is the truth.

5. In addition to this, the above witnesses are single witnesses, disagree among themselves, and are not deserving of credit, inasmuch as non det fides testibus singularibus, which is the truth.

6. The prisoner, although a Frenchman, is still a good Christian, and not at all of suspicious faith. He hears mass on the Sundays and holidays appointed, as many can testify who have seen him; which is the truth.

7. He also confesses and takes the sacrament every year at Easter, and other times at the hands of the Guardian of the Convent of St Francisco and the Sacristan, as may be seen by his certificate of confession given at the last Lent, and which he now presents as a testimonial in his favor solely; which is the truth.

8. There is also the same reason for believing that he has confessed on every Easter, as can be seen by the books of confession kept by the Curates; which is the truth.

9. He who states one falsehood is not to be believed in any other assertion, and inasmuch as the witnesses against the prisoner affirmed that he did not confess throughout the year, but was excommunicated, and declared so, for not complying with the ordinances, and that he did not wear a rosary, all which has been shown to be false by his certificate, and the rosary found upon him; for this reason they cannot be believed, when they state that he does not hear mass, and that he swears and blasphemes; which is the truth.

10. The prisoner suspects that one of the witnesses against him is a young man of about twenty years of age, and a mortal enemy of the prisoner. This, added to the circumstance of his being a minor, should cause his testimony to be rejected; which is the truth.

11. The testimony of the other witness also should be rejected, as he supposes this person to be his wife, who leads a quarrelsome life with him, and bears him great enmity; which is the truth.

12. The prisoner supposes that the cause of the misfortune in which he now finds himself, is, his having given his wife a good beating on the festival of the Resurrection, on which account she probably has directed her malice against him, and suborned the other witnesses; which is the truth.

13. The same hatred is borne against him by Joseph Lleonart, his son, on account of the prisoner’s having pawned an anvil, at which his son was displeased; which is the truth.

14. The said Bernardo Phelippe is reputed throughout all the city of Tarragona to be an honest man and a good Christian, attending mass at the church with much punctuality on the days appointed, and confessing and taking the sacrament at the proper time, as proved by his certificate; which is the truth.

15. The said Bernardo Phelippe has never been imprisoned or punished by this or any other tribunal; which is the truth.

16. From all which it appears that the said Phelippe is free from all the offences charged upon him, and ought to be absolved and released from the prison in which he is confined, experiencing mercy, which also would be justice, vel alias omni meliori modo quod de jure sibi adaptari valeat, et verum.

17. Ponit quod omnia et singula sunt vera, super quibus jus diei et justitiam ministrari postulat, et verun.

F. Magrinya.

The Inquisitor ordered the above to be placed among the proceedings of the trial, and declared that he was ready to make the necessary investigations. Whereupon the prisoner, being admonished, was remanded to prison.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.TO THE CANON JOAN FERRER, COMMISSARY

Leonardo Phelipe, needlemaker, an inhabitant of this city, and now in the secret prison of this Holy Office, on account of an action brought against him by the Licentiate Don Andres Panyagua, Fiscal of this Inquisition, has presented in his defence the following articles or interrogatives, namely—

1. That the said Leonardo Phelipe, although a Frenchman, yet is a good Christian, and not in anything to be suspected of Lutheranism or any other heresy; that as such, he hears mass every Sunday and holiday prescribed, as can be proved by many witnesses.

2. That he also confesses and takes the sacrament every year, at Easter and other times, as can be shown by his certificate of confession received during last Lent, and which he exhibits in his defence.

3. That the wife of the said Leonardo Phelipe treats him badly, and bears him great hatred, and has brought him into this trouble because he gave her a good beating on the festival of the Resurrection last, which greatly increased her hatred towards him.

4. That the same enmity is borne towards him by Joseph Leonardo, his son, with whom he had an altercation on account of his having pawned an anvil against the inclination of his son, for which reason he concerted with his mother this proceeding against the prisoner.

5. That the said Leonardo Phelipe is reputed throughout all the city of Tarragona to be an honest man, and a good Christian, attending church punctually to hear mass on the days appointed, and confessing and taking the sacrament at the proper times.

On which account you will, on the reception of this, proceed to collect information respecting the matter contained in the above interrogatives, in favor of the said Leonardo Phelipe, examining the witnesses named in the margin opposite each article, which is to be done in the presence of the Notary, with the other legal formalities, and according to the printed formula held by the commissaries. You will also take a copy of the register in the church records referred to in the second article. All which being done, you will forward the proceedings, sealed, with all brevity to our hands.

For the above undertaking we grant you full power and commission in form. God preserve you.

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

The Inquisitor presiding alone.

Miguel Rodriguez.

Barcelona, June 25th, 1637.

In the city of Tarragona, on the eighteenth day of July, one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, before the illustrious Juan Ferrer, Presbyter Canon of the Holy Church of Tarragona, Commissary of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, and by particular commission from the most illustrious Inquisitors Apostolical of the Principality of Catalonia, appeared according to summons, and swore formally to declare the truth, a person calling himself Father Pablo Morer, Guardian of the Monastery and Convent of St Francisco in Tarragona, of age, as he stated, fortysix years or thereabout.

Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his being summoned to appear.

Answered, No.

Questioned, if any one had attempted to persuade him to speak in favor of any person imprisoned by the Holy Office.

Answered, No.

Questioned, if he knew the Fiscal of the Holy Office, or Leonardo Felipe of the city of Tarragona imprisoned by the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Answered, that he knew neither of them.

He was then informed that the said Felipe presented him as a witness in his defence, in a case brought against him by the Fiscal of the Holy Office. He was directed to give attention while certain questions were put to him, and declare the whole truth.

To the second question he answered that he knew nothing of the matter, respecting which he was questioned, as he was not acquainted with the person. To the last question, he answered that what he had stated was the truth, and it being read, was declared by him to be correctly recorded. He promised secrecy and signed his name.

Pablo Morer.

Before me—

Miguel Gibert, Not’y of Tarragona.

In the city of Tarragona, on the day, month, and year above specified, before the illustrious Juan Ferrer, Presbyter, Commissary, &c. appeared according to summons and swore to declare the truth, a person calling himself Father Nicholas Gil, of the convent of St Francisco in this city, of age, as he stated, fortyfour years or thereabout.

Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his being summoned to appear.

Answered, No.

Questioned, if any one had attempted to persuade him to speak in favor of any person imprisoned by the Holy Office.

Answered, No.

Questioned, if he knew the Fiscal of the Holy Office, or Leonardo Felipe, needlemaker, of this city, now in imprisonment by the Holy Office.

Answered, that he had no knowledge of the Fiscal, but knew the said Leonardo Felipe, and had held dealings with him.

He was then informed that the abovementioned Leonardo Felipe presented him as a witness in a case brought against him by the said Fiscal. He was directed to give attention while certain questions were put to him, and declare the whole truth.

To the second question, he answered that he remembered to have heard the confession of the said Leonardo Felipe once only during last Lent, but could not remember whether he gave him a certificate or not.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent, and having been read, was declared by him to be correctly recorded. He promised secrecy and signed his name

Pr. Nicola Gil.

Before me—

Miguel Gibert, Not’y Public of Tarragona.

[Here follow the depositions in the same form with the preceding, of various other witnesses in favor of the prisoner, relating to matters alleged by him in his defence.]

AUDIENCE FOR CONCLUDING THE TRIAL

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentyseventh day of June, one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, the Inquisitors, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta and the Licentiate Don Blas Alexandra de Lezaeta presiding in their afternoon audience, ordered the abovementioned Leonardo Phelipe to be brought out of prison, which being done, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything which he was bound by his oath to declare.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Dr Francisco Magrinya, the prisoner’s advocate, being present, he was informed that the investigations requested by him, had been made, and if he wished the cause to be decided, it should be done, or if he wished other measures to be taken, to state them, and all should be done which justice permitted. Whereupon the said Leonardo Phelipe, by the advice of his counsel, answered that he concluded definitively, and begged a merciful sentence.

The Inquisitors then ordered the same to be notified to the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office, in order that a conclusion might be made on the third day. Whereupon the prisoner was remanded to prison.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

The above order for conclusion was forthwith notified to the Licentiate Don Andres Paniagua, Fiscal, by me, the Secretary,

Rodriguez.SENTENCE

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentyeighth day of July, one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, the inquisitors, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta, and the Licentiate Don Blas Alexandre de Lezaeta presiding in their morning audience, (the Ordinary not attending by reason of the Cabildo of Tarragona having neglected to appoint one to this office sede vacante, although notified to this end, and the term of eight days having expired) having examined the proceedings carried on in the Holy Office against Leonardo Phelipe, a Frenchman by birth, and a needlemaker by occupation, a native of the village of Agullon, in the bishopric of Genes, and an inhabitant of the city of Tarragona, now in the secret prison of this Holy Office,—