Читать книгу Records of the Spanish Inquisition, Translated from the Original Manuscripts - Andrew Dickson White - Страница 3

TRIAL OF PEDRO GINESTA, NATIVE OF THE VILLAGE OF ST QUINTI, IN THE DIOCESE OF ST FLOR, FOR EATING BACON ON A PROHIBITED DAY

IN the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the fourth day of September, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, present, the Inquisitor Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta, officiating alone in his morning audience; having examined the information received against Pedro Ginesta, native of the village of St Quinti, diocese of St Flor, and Joan Mella, of the village of St Maurion, parish of Xauvinar, diocese of Clermont, in the kingdom of France, by occupation both braziers, the same being in custody of the Commissioner of Salas in the prison of Agna Villa,—ordered, that the abovementioned persons be transferred to the secret prison of this palace of the Inquisition,12 and that their trial be instituted in form; also ordered, that the Commissioner aforesaid be instructed to attest ad perpetuam the evidence of the witnesses, ascertain the identity of the persons whom they depose against, and whether the said prisoners be the persons whom they charge with having eaten bacon on St Bartholomew’s eve, notwithstanding the prohibition; also that the said prisoners, after the business of the deposition is despatched, be conveyed with care by the hands of the several Familiars, to the prison of this Inquisition.

For which purpose let the necessary measures be taken.

Before me—

Mattheo Magre, Sec’y.

In the town of Tremp, bishopric of Urgel, on the twentyfifth day of August, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, in the morning, before the Licenciate Joan Torroella, Presbyter Commissary of the Holy Office of the Inquisition in the town of Salas,—appeared according to summons and swore formally to declare the truth, a man who asserted his name to be Joan Compte, a native and resident of the town of Talarn, in the abovementioned bishopric, of age as he stated, fiftyfive years or thereabout.

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

Answered, that he neither knew nor conjectured.

Questioned, if he knew or had heard that any person had spoken or done anything which was, or appeared to be, contrary to our holy Catholic Faith, and evangelical doctrine preached and taught by the holy Catholic Roman Church, or against the just and free exercise of the Holy Office.

Answered, that he knew nothing of the matters respecting which he was questioned, except that on the eve of St Bartholomew last, being in the town of Timian in the abovementioned bishopric of Urgel, he went to the tavern of Pitieu, and saw there a man, by occupation a brazier, with a grey beard, which person was well known to the deponent, he having seen and entertained him in the town of Calan, where he exercised his trade and had labored for the deponent. The name of this person deponent did not know, never having heard it mentioned. At the same place was a young man whom the said brazier stated to be his journeyman. These two were sitting at table and eating soup, which, being despatched, deponent saw the said person empty an earthen dish of bacon and onions into a frying-pan, and the said brazier asked deponent if he would eat with him, to which he replied that it was the eve and fast of St Bartholomew, at which time it was forbidden by the church to eat such food. Notwithstanding this, the said brazier and his servant did, in the presence of the deponent, eat the said bacon and onions, a small portion of which was observed to remain in the dish. This remnant the said persons placed on a piece of bread and presented it in a plate to the hostess. This done, the brazier and his servant went away to the plaza of the town, and deponent remained in the tavern with the hostess abovementioned. This is the truth according to the oath of the witness, and being read in his presence, is declared by him to be correctly written. Witness declares that he does not make this statement out of malice to any one. Secrecy being enjoined upon him, he promised to observe it; and he being unable to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in his name.

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

In the town of Semiana, bishopric of Urgel, on the twentyeighth day of August, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, in the morning, before the Rev. Sr. Licentiate Joan Torroella, Presbyter Commissary of the Holy Office in the town of Salas, appeared according to summons and swore formally to declare the truth, a woman calling herself Geronima Aymara, wife of Pedro Aymar y Piteu, husbandman, native and resident of the town of Semiana, of age, as she stated, forty years or thereabout.

Questioned, if she knew or conjectured the cause of her being summoned to appear.

Answered, that she supposed it to be in order to learn whether some persons had eaten flesh in her house on the eve of St Bartholomew the Apostle, respecting which she could state, that on the time specified, two persons had been at her house, of whose names she was ignorant, but remembered that one was an old man and the other a youth, both by occupation braziers; the said youth asked witness to cook for them a dish of salted bacon which sat upon a table. Witness demanded in reply why they wanted to eat bacon on that day. The young man repeated his demand to have the bacon cooked for they meant to eat it. Witness answered that she was unwilling, as it was at such a time. The young man again demanded to have the bacon cooked, and told her to put onions along with it in the pot. Whereupon witness proceeded to cook the bacon, adding one dinero’s worth of onions, which she bought for that purpose. Having done this, she placed the victuals on the table before the said persons, and at this moment entered Juan Compte of the town of Talarn; as witness was baking on that day and was obliged to attend to her oven, she did no more than set the victuals on the table before the said persons, and being asked by Juan Compte for something to eat, answered that he must wait till she returned from the oven, which he did, and upon her return she found the above two persons at table, one of whom ordered her to take away what remained of the meat, and witness saw that there was left a bit of the bacon and a few mouthfuls of the onions she had cooked, the bacon being thrust into a piece of bread. After this the two persons aforesaid left the house, having been seen to eat their meal by the abovementioned Joan Compte, who was present all the time. Furthermore witness stated, that she believes she heard her husband say, on the evening of the Wednesday before, that he heard the above persons declare they meant to eat that piece of bacon, which they had procured, the next day, which was St Bartholomew’s, as aforesaid, and that her husband replied, they could not, as it was a fast. This is the truth according to the oath of the witness, and being read in her presence is declared by her to be correctly written. Witness further states that she does not make this declaration out of malice to any one. Secrecy being enjoined upon her, she promised to observe it; and she, not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name.

The Licentiate

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

In the village of Sanserin, parish of Semiana, in the morning, before the abovementioned Licentiate Commissary Joan Torroella, appeared according to summons and swore formally to declare the truth, a woman calling herself Isabel Ramoneda, wife of Pedro Ramoneda, husbandman, a resident of the said village of Sanserin, of age, as she stated, thirty years or thereabout.

Questioned, if she knew or conjectured the cause of her being summoned to appear.

Answered, that she supposed it to be for the purpose of ascertaining whether certain Gascons had eaten flesh in Semiana, on last St Bartholomew’s eve, concerning which, she could state, that on Thursday last, which was St Bartholomew’s day, there came to her house in the evening a Gascon, whom she believes to be named Pedro, an old man, and by trade a brazier. He had come, as he stated, from the town of Semiana; and standing at the door of the house of this witness, there passed by the servants of Francisco Rocabruna, apothecary of Semiana, when the said Gascon demanded of the lads whether they knew if the young man who had been apprehended at Semiana, was released, to which they replied, ‘No,’ and cried out ‘Ha! Lutheran, eat meat on a fast day!’ The lads having passed, he said to witness that he had been eating, and that he was sorry or not sorry, witness does not remember which of the two. No other person was present. This is the truth according to the oath of the witness, and being read in her presence is declared by her to be correctly recorded. Witness declares that she does not make this statement out of malice towards any one. Secrecy being enjoined upon her, she promised to observe it. She being unable to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name.

The Licentiate

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

In the village of Sanserin, on the same morning, appeared according to summons and swore formally to declare the truth, a man calling himself Juan Monco, husbandman, native and resident of the village abovementioned, of age, as he stated, twenty years or thereabout.

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

Answered, that he supposed it to be for the purpose of learning whether certain Gascons had eaten flesh in the town of Semiana on the eve of St Bartholomew last, concerning which he could state, that on the evening of the said day of St Bartholomew, being near the house of Pedro Ramonera, where there was a Gascon, whose name was unknown to the witness, which Gascon was an old man, corpulent, and by trade a brazier, there passed by the servant of the apothecary Rocabruna, of Tremp, whose name is unknown to witness. This servant of Rocabruna was heard by the deponent to say to the said Gascon, ‘Ha, Lutheran! eat flesh on a fast day!’ And deponent heard the said Gascon reply, ‘Yes, I have eaten,’—but does not know whether this was heard by the said servant of Rocabruna. This is the truth according to the oath of the deponent; and, being read in his presence, is declared by him to be correctly recorded. Deponent further states that he does not make this declaration out of malice to any one. Secrecy being enjoined upon him, he promised to observe it; and being unable to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in his name.

The Licentiate,

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

In the town of Semiana, at the same time, before me the said Licentiate and Commissary, Joan Torroella, appeared according to summons and swore formally to declare the truth, a man calling himself Pedro Aymar y Piteu, native and resident of the above town of Semiana, of age, as he stated, fiftysix years or thereabout.

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

Answered, that he supposed it to be for the purpose of learning whether certain Gascons had eaten flesh in his house on the day of St Bartholomew last, concerning which he had been informed by his wife that the two Gascons referred to, had stopped at his house, and eaten meat on that day. He furthermore stated that the said Gascons, whose names he knew not, as he had never seen them before, being at supper at his house the evening previous, which was Wednesday, one of the said Gascons being an old, and the other a young man, both braziers,—the old man said to the wife of the deponent that he meant to have some meat the next day, which was St Bartholomew’s, and wished her to cook some salted bacon. Whereupon deponent replied, they could not, as it was a fast. The old man answered that they meant to eat notwithstanding, which induced the deponent to believe that he had a license to eat meat, or had some infirmity; on which account he made no more remonstrances, and on the evening of the same day, returning home from his work, his wife informed him that the Gascons had eaten meat, and that the old man had gone away, and the young man was taken and carried to prison. This is the truth according to the oath of the witness, and being read in his presence is declared by him to be correctly recorded. Witness further states, that he does not make this declaration out of malice to any one; and secrecy being enjoined upon him, he promised to observe it. From his inability to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in his name.

The Licentiate,

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

On the seventeenth day of September, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, at three o’clock in the afternoon, Pedro Ginesta, of Auvergne, bishopric of St Flor, was by order of the Inquisitors put in the secret prison of the Inquisition and intrusted to the care of P. Fontanella, Alcayde of the said prison, who examined the prisoner and allowed him nothing prohibited by his instructions. The articles found upon him, were, two shirts, a pair of breeches, a purse, one dinero and three sueldos, which have been given in charge to the Camara de Pablo.

Pedro Fontanella.

FIRST AUDIENCE

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the eighteenth day of September, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, the Inquisitor, Doctor Domingo Abbad y Huerta being at his morning audience, ordered the prisoner to be brought from his cell; who, being produced, was sworn to declare the truth on the present as well as on all other occasions till the decision of his trial. He was also sworn to observe secrecy with respect to everything which he might see, hear, or learn, and everything which should befall him.

Questioned, what was his name, age, occupation, birthplace, residence, and the period of his arrestation by this Holy Office.

Answered, that his name was Pedro Ginesta, by occupation a brazier, native of the village of Orliach, bishopric of St Flor, in the kingdom of France, residing at Orcan, in Catalonia, having exercised the trade of a brazier in that country more than fourteen years, of age eighty years or thereabout, and that he was arrested by a Commissary of the Holy Office, yesterday, in the town of Salas.

Questioned, who was his father, grandfather, paternal and maternal, and wife; who were his uncles, brothers, and children; what were their occupations, birthplaces, and residences. [Here follows a long account of the prisoner’s relatives, in answer to the particulars specified.]

Questioned, what was the origin and descent of his ancestors and collateral relatives, and whether any one of them had been punished or put under penance by the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Answered, that all his relatives were old Roman Catholic Christians,13 and that no one of them had ever been punished or sentenced by the Holy Office up to the present day.

Questioned, if he was a baptized and confirmed Catholic, and made it a practice to attend mass, go to confession, and receive the sacrament at such times as are prescribed by the Holy Catholic Mother Church; at what time he last attended mass, and from whom he received the holy sacrament.

Answered, that he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, having by the grace of God been baptized in the church of Santanti, metropolitan of the suffragans of Caberna and other places, and that he knew himself to have been confirmed by a bishop named Panlaza in the city of Huerca in Arragon, or Poroteo, bishop of that kingdom, more than forty years since, in the cathedral; that he remembered the fact of the confirmation very well, being then of full age; that he hears mass every Sunday and holiday, except when he is travelling; that he confesses and communicates at every time fixed by the Holy Mother Church; that he has certificates to this effect; that he believes the last time he confessed was on Passion Week last, in the town of La Puente de Montania, to a priest of that church; that he does not remember the name of the person from whose hands he received the sacrament. The prisoner then made the sign of the cross, invoking the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and repeated the four prayers and general confession correctly in Latin, and stated that he knew nothing more of the christian doctrine.

Questioned, if he could write, or read, or had studied any science or faculty.

Answered, that he could neither write, nor read, nor had he studied any science or art.

Questioned, if he had ever left the kingdoms of Spain since his first arrival, or had any dealings with people of equivocal faith.

Answered, that he had exercised his trade of a brazier for more than sixty years, in the kingdoms of Catalonia and Arragon, visiting at times his home in France, where there are no Lutherans, nor any persons of equivocal faith.

Questioned, what were the events of his life.

Answered, that he was born, as above stated, in the village of Orliach, and remained with his father till twenty years of age assisting him in his profession of a brazier; that he had passed his life in France, Arragon, and Catalonia, his father having brought him while a boy into this country, where he died, and left him, sixty years since, in the town of Erla, near Gea, in Arragon, working all this time in various places, where he became well known; that his wife had never been in Spain at any time.

Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his imprisonment.

Answered, falling on his knees, weeping, and beating his breast, that he had committed an offence against our Lord by eating bacon on the eve of St Bartholomew in the village of Semiana, and that it was true he had been told on the day previous, by the hostess of the house where it was done, that the next day was a fast, but not remembering this intimation, he had, while the hostess was gone out of the house to her oven, eaten of the same in company with a certain youth of fourteen or fifteen years of age, a native of the bishopric of Clermont in France, who had come to work with him two days before; and that while they were eating, the hostess returned and again reminded him that it was the fast of St Bartholomew, and they ought not to eat it, upon which they immediately abstained from eating; that they were both arrested and brought on the road to Barcelona under guard of one man, the youth with his hands tied; that on arriving near a wood he escaped notwithstanding the exertions made by the guard, who raised the neighbourhood to search for him; and if in this he had offended our Lord, he begged for pardon and mercy.

The prisoner was then informed, that, in this Holy Office, it was not customary to apprehend any person without sufficient information that he had said, done, or witnessed the commission of something really or apparently offensive against God our Lord, or against his Holy Catholic faith and evangelical law, taught and preached by the Holy Mother Roman Church, or against the just and free exercise of the Holy Office; consequently he was to understand that he was imprisoned on account of some such information, and he was admonished on the part of God our Lord, and the glorious and blessed Virgin Mary, to recollect himself and confess his offences without concealing anything relating either to himself or any other person, and without uttering false testimony against any one; by doing all which, his trial should be dispatched with all brevity, and decided with that mercy which is shown by the Holy Office to all those who confess freely; otherwise, justice should be executed.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say, and the above being read to him, he declared it to be the truth according to the oath which he had sworn, and that he had nothing to alter or diminish from what is therein contained, and with this admonition, to bethink himself well, and declare the truth, he was remanded to prison.

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

SECOND AUDIENCE

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the nineteenth day of September, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, the Inquisitor, Doctor Domingo Abbad y Huerta being at his morning audience, presiding upon affairs of justice, ordered the above Pedro Ginesta to be brought out of prison, which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything relating to his affair which he was bound to divulge, with all truth, to discharge his conscience.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

The prisoner was then admonished on the part of God our Lord, &c. [The whole repeated as above.]

Answered, that he had nothing more to say; and being admonished to bethink himself well, and declare the truth, he was remanded to prison.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

THIRD AUDIENCE

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentieth day of September, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta being at his morning audience, ordered the above Pedro Ginesta to be brought from his prison, which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything relating to his affair which he was bound to divulge, in all truth, and to discharge his conscience.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

The prisoner was then informed that in the audiences which had already been given, he had been admonished on the part of God our Lord, &c. [The whole repeated as before.]

Answered that he had nothing more to say.

The prisoner was then notified that the Promotor Fiscal14 of this Holy Office had an accusation to bring against him, before which he would do well to declare the whole truth, as he had already been admonished, in which case, he would experience more fully the mercy which the Holy Office ever extends to those who confess freely; otherwise the Fiscal would attend and proceed to the accusation.

Straightway appeared Doctor Francisco Gregorio, Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office, and presented the accusation, signed by himself, against the said Pedro Ginesta, making oath that it was not done out of malice; which accusation was as follows:—

ACCUSATION

I, Doctor Francisco Gregorio, Fiscal of this Holy Office, appear before your Excellency, and accuse criminally, Pedro Ginesta, brazier, a native of the village of Orliach, bishopric of St Flor, in Ubernia, in the kingdom of France, resident in this principality, attached to the secret prison of the Inquisition, and now present,—stating that the said person, being a baptized and confirmed Christian, and enjoying the graces and benefits which such persons do and ought to enjoy, not having the fear of God before his eyes, but regardless of his own conscience and the justice administered by your Excellency, has committed offences against our Holy Faith, by saying and performing things which savour of the heretic Luther, in the manner following.

The said prisoner being in a certain part of the village of Semiana in the bishopric of Urgel on the fast of St Bartholomew last, in company with another certain person, did cause to be cooked a dish of bacon and onions; and, being reminded to take heed, for it was a fast, and such food was forbidden, replied by ordering the meat to be cooked, and in fact when the said meat was cooked, did proceed to eat the same, in company with the other person mentioned, and notwithstanding he was informed by another person while eating, that it was St Bartholomew’s day, and a fast, at which time it was not allowed to eat such food, the said prisoner continued to eat the remainder of the said bacon.

Furthermore, the said prisoner being of a nation infected with heresy, it is presumed that he has on many other occasions eaten flesh on forbidden days, after the manner of the sect of Luther, and committed many other offences against our Holy Faith, besides knowing that others have committed the same offences, and the said prisoner having been admonished by your Excellency to declare the truth, has not done it, but has perjured himself.

For which reasons I entreat your Excellency that full evidence being given to my accusation, or to such a part of the same as shall suffice for the ends of justice in the decision of the present case, your Excellency will declare my accusation proved, and the said Pedro Ginesta guilty of the above offences, imposing upon him the heaviest punishments fixed by statute upon the said offences, and ordering them to be executed upon his person and goods, as a penalty to himself and an example to others; and that the prisoner, if it be found necessary, be put to the torture, and that the same be repeated till he confess the whole truth both of himself and others.

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

Dr Francisco Gregorio.

This accusation having been presented and read, the said Pedro Ginesta was formally sworn to declare the truth in answer to every interrogatory relating thereto. The accusation being read over, article by article, he answered as follows:—

To the head of the accusation, he answered that he was the same Pedro Ginesta whom the Fiscal accuses, but had never committed any offence against our Holy Catholic Faith, nor done, nor said anything which pertained to the sect of Luther or any other heresy.

To the first article he answered, confessing that he had eaten bacon and onions on the said eve of St Bartholomew, and that although it was true he had been reminded that it was a fast, he had forgotten it, and on being again told of it while at his meal he immediately left off eating; that the person who ate with him was a young man, son to Borbon Merchante; that he did not do the above act out of disrespect to the Church or its precepts, well knowing that it was forbidden to eat flesh on such days, which regulation he had observed throughout his life, and remained in the determination to observe, believing in all the doctrines taught by the holy Catholic Roman Church. Here the prisoner fell upon his knees and declared that he had offended through forgetfulness.

To the second article he answered, that he had never at any other time committed the same offence, nor had he concealed the truth as to this point, either respecting himself or his companion, being an obedient son of the Church.

To the conclusion of the accusation, he answered that even if he were put to the torture, he could not declare anything further, and that he had offended, not from any bad intention, but through forgetfulness, occasioned by his great age.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the prisoner, and being read in his presence, is declared by him to be correctly recorded.

The Inquisitor,

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

The Inquisitor then ordered him a copy of the accusation that he might, within three days, make arrangements for his trial and defence by conferring and agreeing with one of the lawyers who are counsel for those persons tried by the Holy Office, namely, Doctor Magrina, priest, and Micar Morato, giving the prisoner liberty to make choice of either. The prisoner made choice of Dr Magrina, on which the Inquisitor ordered him to be summoned. The audience then closed, and the prisoner being admonished was remanded to prison.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE FOR COMMUNICATION OF THE ACCUSATION AND EVIDENCE

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentieth day of September, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta being at his morning audience, ordered the above Pedro Ginesta to be brought from prison, which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything which he was bound to declare, according to the oath he had sworn.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

The prisoner was then informed that Dr Francisco Magrina, whom he had selected for his counsel, was present, with whom he might confer, and make arrangements for his defence.

Dr Francisco Magrina was then sworn in verbo sacerdotis, to defend well and faithfully the said Pedro Ginesta, to inform him if his case was not on the side of justice, to do everything which a good advocate is bound to do, and to preserve secrecy throughout.

Then were produced and read, the several confessions of the said Pedro Ginesta, made from the eighteenth of this month to the present time, with the accusation, and the answers of the prisoner. These he examined, and conferred with the prisoner respecting his case, counselling him, as the best defence which could be made, to confess the whole truth, and if he had been guilty of any offence, to beg for pardon; by which means, he might obtain mercy.

The said Pedro Ginesta replied that he had declared the whole truth as appeared by his confessions, that beyond this he denied everything contained in the accusation, and in consequence begged to be acquitted and set at liberty.

The Inquisitor then ordered a copy of the above to be given to the Promoter Fiscal of the Holy Office, who declared, that, confining himself to what he had stated in his accusation and to the matter contained in the confession of the prisoner, he requested that they might proceed to the proofs. The Inquisitor replied that the cause should be judged definitively, and the proofs on both sides received salvo jure impertinentium et non admittendorum, according to the style of the Holy Office, and the same was notified to both parties.

The Promotor Fiscal then declared that he reproduced the testimony which had been received and registered against the said Pedro Ginesta in this Holy Office, which testimony he desired might be examined and ratified in form; and also that all other necessary investigations might be made and the testimony published; whereupon the audience closed, and the prisoner being admonished to bethink himself well, and declare the truth, was remanded to prison.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE FOR THE PUBLICATION OF THE TESTIMONY

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the sixth day of October, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta, being at his morning audience, ordered the above Pedro Ginesta to be brought from the secret prison, which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything which he was bound to declare according to the oath he had sworn.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

The prisoner was then informed that the Promotor Fiscal of the Holy Office had requested a publication of the testimony against him, before which it would be well for him to declare the whole truth, as this would cause him to experience more benignity and mercy.

Answered, that he had nothing to add to his former confessions; that it was true that he had eaten bacon on St Bartholomew’s eve, but had done it through ignorance, not knowing it to be a fast; that he begged pardon for his offence, having all the rest of his life conducted in a different manner.

Straightway appeared the Promoter Fiscal and requested publication of the testimony against the said Pedro Ginesta according to the style of the Holy Office. The Inquisitor ordered the publication to be made, concealing the names of the witnesses and other circumstances which might cause their persons to be known, according to the orders and style of the Holy Office, which was done in the manner following.

Publication of the testimony against Pedro Ginesta, native of the village of St Quinti, diocese of St Flor, in the kingdom of France.

A certain witness, sworn and qualified in the proper time and manner in the town of Tremp, bishopric of Urgel, on a certain day of the month of August, in the present year sixteen hundred and thirtyfive—declares, &c. [Here follows the testimony of Joan Compte as given before.]

Another witness sworn and qualified in the proper time and manner in the town of Semiana, &c. [Here follows the testimony of Geronima Aymar.]

Another witness &c. [All the other testimony repeated.]

The above testimony having been published, an oath was exacted from the prisoner to declare the truth in answer to the testimony aforesaid, article by article, and the same having been read to him de verbo ad verbum, he answered as follows;—

To the first article he replied that it was true he had eaten the bacon, but had done it through ignorance, having forgotten that it was St Bartholomew’s eve, as he had already confessed, and that on being apprised of the same, he had left off eating.

To the second article he answered that the hostess might possibly have said what she states, but that he had no recollection of it.

To the third article he answered that he repeated his former declaration that he was a Catholic Christian, and had he known it to be the fast of St Bartholomew, should not have eaten upon any account.

To the fourth article he answered by referring to the confession which he had already made, and declared that he did not remember having been warned by any one.

To the fifth article he answered by referring to his confession, and declared that beyond this he denied everything sworn to by the witness.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the prisoner, and the same having been read in his hearing is declared by him to be faithfully recorded,

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Before me—

Damian Fonolleda, Sec’y.

The Inquisitor then ordered the prisoner to be furnished with a copy of the above publication, that he might, with the assistance of his counsel, make arrangements for his defence, whereupon the prisoner was admonished, and remanded to prison.

AUDIENCE TO COMMUNICATE THE PUBLICATION

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the ninth day of October, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta being at his morning audience, ordered the above Pedro Ginesta to be brought from prison, which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything which he was bound to declare in discharge of his conscience, according to the oath he had sworn.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

The prisoner was then informed that Doctor Francisco Magrina, his counsel, was present, with whom he might communicate and take measures for his defence. The publication of the testimony against the prisoner, with his answers to the same, were then read to the said Dr Francisco Magrina, who proceeded to confer with the prisoner about his defence. Having done this he received from the hands of the prisoner a sheet of paper, upon which he drew up articles of defence which were then read to the prisoner and he declared that he made a formal presentation of the same. Here follows the defence.

DEFENCE

‘Although Pedro Ginesta, a native of France, and by trade a brazier, has no necessity for any defence against the charges brought against him by the Promotor Fiscal of this Holy Office, as may be clearly seen from the testimony; nevertheless, for greater security, and with an express declaration that his impeachment of the testimony of the witnesses against him, is not occasioned by a desire to injure them, but solely to defend himself, he states the following.

‘1st. He confesses that he has committed an offence, but denies that he ought to receive any ordinary or extraordinary punishment for the same, which is the truth, because,

‘2d. Although it be the fact that he ate meat on St Bartholomew’s eve last, yet it is not the fact that he did it through malice, or from the intention to transgress the ordinances of the Church; which declaration is the truth.

‘3d. The said Pedro Ginesta has, in consequence of his occupation, spent his life in travelling from one place to another, attending mass where he happened to be on Sundays and holidays, not being able to give more attention to the duties of religion; and in consequence has been ignorant of the fast days, by not hearing them announced; which is the truth.

‘4th. For this reason, and being ignorant that a fast was prescribed on St Bartholomew’s day, he declares he should not have eaten, had he known the same; which is the truth.

‘5th. Although it be true he was informed that he ought not to eat flesh at that time, as it was St Bartholomew’s eve, yet those present suffered him to eat, notwithstanding, and made no remonstrances; which is the truth.

‘6th. The said Pedro Ginesta, besides being a person of simple understanding, is very aged, being more than eighty years old, at which time the memory is apt to fail, as old age is a species infirmitatis; which is the truth.

‘7th. The said Pedro Ginesta did not offend through malice, but solely from ignorance, quod de jure excusari solet, et verum.

‘8th. The said Pedro Ginesta, although a Frenchman by birth, is a good Christian, and, as such, has always punctually adhered to every obligation by which a good Christian is bound; which is the truth.

‘9th. On the above accounts, the said Pedro Ginesta ought to be acquitted by your Excellency, and released from the prison in which he is at present confined, experiencing mercy at your hands; vel alias,

‘10th. Ponit quod omnia et singulos jure vero, super quibus jus diei et justitiam ministrari postulat, et verum.

F. Magrinya.

‘11th. The said Pedro Ginesta offers the above in his defence, and concludes by asking for mercy.

F. Magrinya.’

This being presented to the Inquisitor, was by him ordered to be put on file. It was likewise ordered that the same be notified to the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office; whereupon the audience closed, and the prisoner was remanded to prison.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

SENTENCE

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the sixteenth day of October, one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive, at the morning audience, present, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta presiding on his own part, and on the part of the Ordinary of the bishopric of Urgel, and Dr Augustin Fernandez Lopez, Vicar General of the bishopric of Barcelona. Having examined a trial carried on in this Holy Office, against Pedro Ginesta, a Frenchman by birth, native of St Quinti or Orliach, bishopric of St Flor, in Ubernia, a resident in Catalonia, in the district of Pallas, arrested in the town of Tremp, and now in the secret prison of this Holy Office, ordered, that in virtue of this act, the said prisoner be reprehended, and admonished, and forthwith released from prison.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez, Sec’y.

In the same audience, the said Pedro Ginesta was ordered to be brought from prison, which being done, and he present, the Inquisitor, Abbad y Huerta reprehended and admonished him, in conformity to the above sentence. The prisoner received the correction with humility, and promised amendment; which I, the Secretary, hereby certify.

Miguel Rodriguez.

Straightway, in the same audience, the prisoner was sworn to declare the truth; and he was

Questioned, &c.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say, either with respect to himself or others, in discharge of his conscience, nor anything relating to what had been said or done in the prison of this Holy Office against the honor, dignity, or secrets of the same or its ministers, or with respect to the custody of the prisoners therein contained; that he had not witnessed any communication carried on among them, or knew that any one had spoken to another; that he has no communication from them to carry to any one, and that the Alcayde and Steward have faithfully discharged their duties.

He was then commanded, by virtue of the oath he had sworn, and under penalty of complete excommunication, to observe perfect secrecy with respect to everything which had befallen him relating to his trial, and with respect to all which he had seen, heard, or learned in any manner while in prison, and not to reveal the same to any person, under any shape whatever; all which he promised to observe, and being unable to write, I, the Inquisitor, Abbad y Huerta, sign in his name; whereupon he was dismissed.

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Before me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

On the 19th day of the same month, the Secretary Rodriguez dispatched a letter to the Commissary of Salas in the name of the Tribunal, ordering him to restore to the prisoner, on account of his poverty, the instruments of his trade and his other property. The letter was sent by the prisoner.

Rodriguez.