HOW often have you described a particularly gruelling job interview – or indeed parental questioning as a possibly-errant teenager – as being ‘worse than the Spanish Inquisition?’
The very name has passed into general memory as synonymous with relentless interrogation, cruelty, torture and even burning at the stake – a reputation fuelled by countless stories, plays and films. This interpretation of the Inquisition even earned the process the nickname: ‘Black Legend.’
In reality, however, it is very probable that this reputation is not entirely justified, but the famous Monty Python Life of Brian sketch was certainly correct in that:: “Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition. Our three weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...”
In Medieval Europe, heresy was a crime punished by capital punishment – and ironically, it was the state and not the church which decreed this. The rulers of the time all believed their power and authority came from God, and they therefore had good reason to beware heretics. But the common people, too, saw heretics as dangerous outsiders who could bring down divine wrath.
Although the ‘Inquisition’ began as a method of rooting out heretics – loosely translated as anyone who did not adhere to the Catholic faith -- as far back as the 12th century, it really got underway 200 years later and had little to do with Catholicism as such.
Anti-Semitism was rife at that time in Europe -- England and France expelled their Jewish populations in 1290 and 1306 -- and Spain, too, was awash with anti-Semitic feeling.
As a result, many Jews were forced to convert to Christianity – not only because they would otherwise face severe financial penalties, but also simply to survive. To distinguish them from long-established Christian families, new converts were labelled ‘conversos,’ and they were still viewed with hate and suspicion.
Rioting was already rife and the situation actually deteriorated because many of the ‘conversos,’ who had become much better off, continued to practice their religion in secret anyway, and so were seen to be keeping a foot in both camps, growing rich in the process. The feeling against them switched from being a purely religious issue to one of race as well – a scenario repeated down the ages and across the continents.
It was in response to particularly bad episodes of mob violence that the then-monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella, asked for – and were granted – a Papal Bull in 1478, asking for a special inquisition to ferret out ‘false conversos.’ In 1483, a state council was formed to administer the Inquisition, with the Dominican friar, Tomás de Torquemada, acting as its president.
In a classic ‘catch 22’ situation, the former Jews had placed themselves under the jurisdiction of the Catholic church by converting, but the very fact that they had supposedly converted was enough to suspect them of being heretics.
Given the reputation which it subsequently earned, another irony is that the Inquisition was also aimed at preventing the often-brutal punishments and unwarranted executions being meted out by the civil courts. If a person had been accused of heresy, a fair trial would have been almost impossible unless the local lord – who conducted the civil court – had specialist theological knowledge. This was extremely unlikely, so the ‘suspect’, therefore, was usually much better off being tried by the Inquisition instead.
It is recorded that very often, a man accused of something as trivial as stealing a pig would deliberately blaspheme in order that his case was taken out of the ordinary court and passed to the Inquisition.
Evidence and witness testimony were gathered before an arrest was made, and once in custody, the accused was given several opportunities to admit to any heretical behavior before the charges against him/her were identified. Torture was used only in a relatively small percentage of trials – and only as a last resort -- since the very threat of it was often enough to induce a confession or repentance.
It was also allowed only in cases which involved charges of religious heresy alone – these were relatively few – and the restrictions on torture in the inquisitorial courts were much more stringent than those in force in the secular ones.
Contrary to popular legend, most of those tried for heresy by the Inquisition were either acquitted or had their sentences suspended. Those found guilty of serious failings were allowed to confess their sin, do penance, and be restored to the bosom of the Church. The underlying assumption of the Inquisition was that, like lost sheep, heretics had simply strayed. If, however, an inquisitor determined that a particular sheep had purposely left the flock, there was nothing more that could be done.
Only the unrepentant or obstinate heretics were excommunicated and handed over to the secular authorities for almost-certain execution.
The ‘Black Legend’ reputation started to gain credence around 100 years later, when Spain’s financial and military strength started to worry her mainly-Protestant European neighbours such as northern Germany, the Netherlands and England.
Although they lacked Spain’s military might, they made full and very effective use of the ‘weapon’ represented by the printing press. Countless books and pamphlets poured from northern presses accusing the Spanish Empire of inhuman depravity and horrible atrocities in the New World. Opulent Spain was cast as a place of darkness, ignorance, and evil.
In fact, though, the medieval Spanish inquisition probably saved the lives of countless thousands of innocent (and probably not so innocent) people, who would otherwise have been roasted by secular lords or lynched by the common mob.
Indeed, for more than 300 years, the Spanish Inquisition was widely hailed as the best-run, most humane court in Europe but, thanks to a united and sustained smear campaign, a mythical new Spanish Inquisition had been designed and constructed by the enemies of Spain and the Catholic Church. It is this ‘legend’ which has been absorbed into history.