Read Online EXECUTIONERS (True Crime) by Anne Williams, Phil Clarke, Liz Hardy - Free Book Online Page A
Tags: nonfiction
Ads: Link
the details were shrouded in secrecy. The suspected heretic would be arrested and imprisoned and kept in the dark – both literally and figuratively – while being forced to guess what charges had been brought against him. The accused would not be granted any opportunity to question their accusers during the trial, however they were afforded the chance to name those they believed possessed a ‘mortal hatred’ against them. If this list of enemies included their accuser then the charges – whatever they were – were dismissed and the prisoner would be given their freedom. The named foe would then face the possibility of life imprisonment for his grudge-bearing testimony.
This general obscurity promoted self-incrimination. The majority of inquisitors wished for heresies to be self-confessed without resorting to other more severe means, yet despite the threat of torture or even death, freely declared confessions were rare. It was far more common for the accused to remain stubborn and steadfast. While chaired by the Chief Inquisitor, the trial was required to be conducted in collaboration with the local bishop and they were both obliged to consult the Boni Viri – a number of experienced laymen and clergymen considered honest and true – to come to an informed decision as to the guilt of the charged. Anything up to 80 of these wise men were summoned to decide the fate of the prisoner, who could soon find himself facing execution.
Those prisoners who tenaciously denied any religious transgression and refused self-condemnation would force the inquisitor’s judicial hand. The next step to elicit the truth was torture, which was made lawful on 15 May 1252, when Pope Innocent IV issued a papal bull entitled Ad Exstirpanda. Physical torment had been used on prisoners in the past but only by secular authorities and never the Inquisition. The bull authorising enforced confession through violence would be regularly affirmed throughout the thirteenth century by successive popes such as Alexander IV on 30 November 1259 and Clement IV on 3 November 1265. Naturally, the more devout and spiritual officials within the Church regulatory sector called for restrictions. They demanded there be no bloodshed, mutilation or death from these truth-extracting acts and that the torture sessions should be limited to only one. For the less principled inquisitors, this was an obstacle that was easily overcome. The single session would merely be suspended when the physical torments proved fruitless and when they returned to the pain-racked prisoner the agony would resume within what was officially, the same session.
Despite the restrictions requiring a bloodless torture session, the inquisitors still found many forms of torture to draw out a confession of heresy. Before resorting to any physical violence, the inquisitors would traditionally start with simple threats, intimidating the prisoner with thoughts of the unbearable pain that could await them at the stake. If this was unproductive, then the supposed heretic would be confined in a cell and often starved of food and water. The last non-violent method employed was the use of tried men; previously accused and investigated individuals who had experienced the pressure of an inquisitor. These first-hand accounts of inquisitorial justice were intended to persuade the prisoner to confess and if this failed to pay dividends, the preacher turned persecutor would have no choice but to make use of the gruesome contraptions that were at his disposal.
There were several established methods of physical torture used throughout the reign of the Papal Inquisition in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries against the more doggedly determined deniers. These included the strappado and the rack; two ominous-looking devices which stretched and pulled the limbs to such a degree that dislocation often occurred. If stretching could be endured then thumbscrews and brodequins or stivalettos were introduced. These
This general obscurity promoted self-incrimination. The majority of inquisitors wished for heresies to be self-confessed without resorting to other more severe means, yet despite the threat of torture or even death, freely declared confessions were rare. It was far more common for the accused to remain stubborn and steadfast. While chaired by the Chief Inquisitor, the trial was required to be conducted in collaboration with the local bishop and they were both obliged to consult the Boni Viri – a number of experienced laymen and clergymen considered honest and true – to come to an informed decision as to the guilt of the charged. Anything up to 80 of these wise men were summoned to decide the fate of the prisoner, who could soon find himself facing execution.
Those prisoners who tenaciously denied any religious transgression and refused self-condemnation would force the inquisitor’s judicial hand. The next step to elicit the truth was torture, which was made lawful on 15 May 1252, when Pope Innocent IV issued a papal bull entitled Ad Exstirpanda. Physical torment had been used on prisoners in the past but only by secular authorities and never the Inquisition. The bull authorising enforced confession through violence would be regularly affirmed throughout the thirteenth century by successive popes such as Alexander IV on 30 November 1259 and Clement IV on 3 November 1265. Naturally, the more devout and spiritual officials within the Church regulatory sector called for restrictions. They demanded there be no bloodshed, mutilation or death from these truth-extracting acts and that the torture sessions should be limited to only one. For the less principled inquisitors, this was an obstacle that was easily overcome. The single session would merely be suspended when the physical torments proved fruitless and when they returned to the pain-racked prisoner the agony would resume within what was officially, the same session.
Despite the restrictions requiring a bloodless torture session, the inquisitors still found many forms of torture to draw out a confession of heresy. Before resorting to any physical violence, the inquisitors would traditionally start with simple threats, intimidating the prisoner with thoughts of the unbearable pain that could await them at the stake. If this was unproductive, then the supposed heretic would be confined in a cell and often starved of food and water. The last non-violent method employed was the use of tried men; previously accused and investigated individuals who had experienced the pressure of an inquisitor. These first-hand accounts of inquisitorial justice were intended to persuade the prisoner to confess and if this failed to pay dividends, the preacher turned persecutor would have no choice but to make use of the gruesome contraptions that were at his disposal.
There were several established methods of physical torture used throughout the reign of the Papal Inquisition in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries against the more doggedly determined deniers. These included the strappado and the rack; two ominous-looking devices which stretched and pulled the limbs to such a degree that dislocation often occurred. If stretching could be endured then thumbscrews and brodequins or stivalettos were introduced. These
Similar Books
