This is a modern-English version of Records of the Spanish Inquisition, Translated from the Original Manuscripts, originally written by White, Andrew Dickson. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.


Every attempt has been made to replicate the original book as printed. Some typographical errors have been corrected {a list follows the text}. No attempt has been made to correct or normalize the printed accentuation or spelling of Spanish names or words. (etext transcriber’s note)

bookcover

bookcover

RECORDS

OF THE

SPANISH INQUISITION,



TRANSLATED FROM THE
ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS.
 

BOSTON:
SAMUEL G. GOODRICH, 141 WASHINGTON STREET.

MDCCCXXVIII.

BOSTON:
SAMUEL G. GOODRICH, 141 WASHINGTON STREET.

1828.

CONTENTS

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS, to wit:
District Clerk’s Office.

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS, to wit:
District Clerk’s Office.

Be it remembered, That on the twentysixth day of May, A. D. 1828, in the fiftysecond year of the Independence of the United States Of America, Samuel G. Goodrich, of the said district, has deposited in this office, the title of a book, the right whereof he claims as proprietor, in the words following, to wit;

Please note, that on May 26, A. D. 1828, in the fifty-second year of the Independence of the USA, Samuel G. Goodrich, of the said district, has submitted to this office the title of a book, the rights of which he claims as its owner, in the following words, namely;

‘Records of the Spanish Inquisition, translated from the Original Manuscripts.’

‘Records of the Spanish Inquisition, translated from the Original Manuscripts.’

In conformity to the act of the Congress of the United States, entitled ‘An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the time therein mentioned;’ and also to an act entitled ‘An act supplementary to an act, entitled, an act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books to the authors and proprietors of such copies during the times therein mentioned; and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving and etching historical and other prints.’

In accordance with the act of the Congress of the United States, titled ‘An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books, to the authors and owners of such copies, during the specified time;’ and also to an act titled ‘An act supplementary to an act, titled, an act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books to the authors and owners of such copies during the times specified; and extending the benefits of this to the arts of designing, engraving, and etching historical and other prints.’

JNO. W. DAVIS,
Clerk of the District of Massachusetts.

JNO. W. DAVIS,
Clerk of the District of Massachusetts.

 

      EXAMINER PRESS.      
Hiram Tupper, Printer—Bromfield Lane.

      EXAMINER PRESS.      
Hiram Tupper, Printer—Bromfield Lane.

PREFACE.

THE manner in which the originals of the following work came into the hands of the translator may be described in a few words. These papers are a part of the Records of the Inquisition of Barcelona, and were obtained during the revolution which broke out at Cadiz in 1819.

THE way the originals of the following work reached the translator can be summarized briefly. These documents are part of the Records of the Inquisition of Barcelona and were acquired during the uprising that took place in Cadiz in 1819.

The province of Catalonia, of which Barcelona is the capital, was one of the most forward and zealous to embrace the cause of freedom. Its inhabitants have, in all times, been distinguished for their daring and determined spirit, and their ardent love of liberty. The revolution moved with rapid strides from the Isle of Leon to the Ebro. On the twentyeighth of February, 1820, the governor of Tarragona received a summons to repair immediately to Madrid, and in a few days the insurrection burst out in the former place. On the fourteenth of March, two days after this, it exploded at Barcelona.

The province of Catalonia, with Barcelona as its capital, was one of the most eager and passionate supporters of the freedom movement. Its people have always been known for their boldness and determination, as well as their strong love for liberty. The revolution spread quickly from the Isle of Leon to the Ebro. On February 28, 1820, the governor of Tarragona was summoned to go to Madrid immediately, and within a few days, the uprising began in Tarragona. On March 14, just two days later, it erupted in Barcelona.

The first movement of the revolutionary party was to depose the Captain General of the province. This office was then held by Castañas, a royalist. His predecessor was General Villacampa, an officer of some distinction, who had been deprived of the captain-generalship, and banished to Mataró, a small town on the coast, for his attachment to liberal principles. Castañas was forced to resign, and Villacampa was conducted in triumph from his place of banishment to Barcelona, and reinstated in his dignity by the populace.

The first action of the revolutionary party was to remove the Captain General of the province. This position was held by Castañas, a loyalist. His predecessor was General Villacampa, a distinguished officer who had lost his captain-generalship and been exiled to Mataró, a small coastal town, because of his commitment to liberal ideas. Castañas was compelled to step down, and Villacampa was joyfully brought back from his exile to Barcelona, where the people reinstated him in his position.

The government of the city being revolutionized, their next thoughts were directed to the Inquisition, the great engine of priestly oppression, and the object of dread and detestation to the friends of liberty, both political and religious. The vast and gloomy piles of this tribunal, which covered a spot of more than ten times the extent of the Massachusetts State Prison, had been too long the terror of the oppressed and restless Catalonians to escape distinguished notice on this occasion. The populace demanded, with loud cries, of the Captain General, that the Inquisitorial Palace should be thrown open. What answer was given by Villacampa to this demand, does not appear. A body of twenty thousand persons rushed to the Inquisition, stormed at the gates, and demanded admittance. Those within told them to wait a few minutes and the gates should be opened. This interval they improved to make their escape, and in a short time the populace, growing impatient, burst the gates and rushed in.

The city's government was being overthrown, and the next focus turned to the Inquisition, the main tool of religious oppression and something feared and hated by those who valued freedom, both politically and religiously. The massive and gloomy buildings of this tribunal, which were larger than more than ten times the size of the Massachusetts State Prison, had been a source of terror for the oppressed and restless Catalonians for too long not to draw attention on this occasion. The crowd shouted loudly to the Captain General, demanding that the Inquisitorial Palace be opened. The response Villacampa gave to this demand is unclear. A group of twenty thousand people surged towards the Inquisition, banging on the gates and demanding to be let in. Those inside told them to wait a few minutes, and they would open the gates. They took this time to escape, and soon the crowd, growing impatient, broke down the gates and rushed in.

Every part of the premises was immediately filled. The dungeons were broken open; the prisoners released, and the papers cast out at the windows. For several days these were thrown in great numbers about the streets of the city, and a small portion of them, after passing through various hands, came into the possession of a gentleman of this city, who at that period was travelling in Spain. These papers were forwarded to Boston in 1820.

Every part of the place was quickly filled. The dungeons were broken open; the prisoners set free, and the papers thrown out of the windows. For several days, these papers littered the streets of the city in large numbers, and a small portion of them, after changing hands several times, ended up with a gentleman from this city who was traveling in Spain at that time. These papers were sent to Boston in 1820.

It was thought that a publication of these documents would be received with much interest and satisfaction by the community, as nothing of the kind has ever before seen the light. There are indeed some authentic and well written compilations relating to this subject, as well as a few narratives given by persons who have been imprisoned in the dungeons of the Holy Office; but a copious and minute detail of the forms and proceedings observed in the trials and investigations of the Inquisitorial Tribunal, such as is afforded in the following pages, has never, till this moment, existed in print. Should the Holy Office again rear its head in Spain, perhaps the Fiscal and Calificadores might do the publisher and Translator of this work the honor to take some notice of their labors. It is to be hoped, however, that these most illustrious and apostolical Señores may not very soon have occasion to obtain for either of us any such notoriety.

It was believed that releasing these documents would be met with significant interest and satisfaction from the community, as nothing like this has ever been published before. There are indeed some authentic and well-written compilations on this topic, as well as a few accounts from people who have been locked up in the dungeons of the Holy Office; however, a detailed and thorough account of the procedures and practices followed in the trials and investigations of the Inquisitorial Tribunal, as provided in the following pages, has never been printed until now. If the Holy Office reemerges in Spain, perhaps the Fiscal and Calificadores might recognize the efforts of the publisher and translator of this work. However, we can hope that these most distinguished and apostolic Señores will not soon need to bring either of us such fame.

 

Boston, June, 1828.

Boston, June 1828.

HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE INQUISITION.

THIS establishment had its origin in the endeavours of the Roman pontiffs for the suppression of heresy. In the year 1184, Pope Lucius II., alarmed at the appearance of the new religious sects in Dauphiny and Provence, called a great council at Verona, where a severe decree was issued against them, and the power of the secular princes called to aid in their discovery and punishment. In this decree we perceive the embryo of the Inquisition, although its proper foundation is commonly fixed some years later.[1]

THIS establishment originated from the efforts of the Roman popes to eliminate heresy. In 1184, Pope Lucius II, concerned about the rise of new religious sects in Dauphiny and Provence, convened a large council in Verona, where a strict decree was issued against them, and secular rulers were called upon to help find and punish these groups. In this decree, we see the beginnings of the Inquisition, although its formal foundation is usually recognized a few years later.[1]

It was in France, in the year 1208, that it was first established, and took a distinct character under the direction of Pope Innocent III., who despatched legates into that country, with a power independent of the bishops, to persecute the heretics with the assistance of the secular arm. The unfortunate Albigenses, the objects of this persecution, were extirpated with fire and sword, and the death of thousands by massacres, tortures, and the funeral pile, signalized the commencement of the Inquisition.[2]

It was in France, in the year 1208, that it was first established, and it took on a distinct character under the leadership of Pope Innocent III, who sent legates into that country with authority independent of the bishops to hunt down heretics with the help of the secular authorities. The unfortunate Albigenses, targeted by this persecution, were wiped out by fire and sword, and the deaths of thousands due to massacres, torture, and burning marked the beginning of the Inquisition.[2]

This was in the reign of Philip Augustus, during which the Inquisition appears not to have been in exercise beyond the limits of Provence and Languedoc; but in 1255, at the request of Louis IX., it was established by the papal authority throughout the whole kingdom, with the exception of the territories of the Count of Poitiers and Toulouse.[3] It did not however, obtain any permanent footing here, although the exact period of its discontinuance is not easy to ascertain. In 1560, the Cardinal of Lorraine made an effectual attempt to introduce it into France against the Protestants, which is the last time we find it mentioned in connexion with the history of that country.[4]

This was during the reign of Philip Augustus, when the Inquisition didn't seem to operate outside of Provence and Languedoc. However, in 1255, at the request of Louis IX, it was established by papal authority across the entire kingdom, except for the territories of the Count of Poitiers and Toulouse.[3] It didn't really establish a permanent presence here, although pinpointing the exact time it stopped is tricky. In 1560, the Cardinal of Lorraine made a successful effort to introduce it into France against the Protestants, which is the last time it’s mentioned in connection with that country’s history.[4]

In 1224, it was established by Pope Honorius II. in all the States of Italy, except Venice and Naples. In 1289, it was established at Venice.[5] It appears to have been in existence in the kingdom of Naples as early as 1269.[6] There is no very frequent mention of it in the histories of that period, and we may conclude that it did not assume that sanguinary character in these countries, which marked its first existence on the other side of the Alps. It disappeared from all these parts, except the Papal States, before completing a long career.

In 1224, Pope Honorius II established it in all the states of Italy, except for Venice and Naples. In 1289, it was established in Venice.[5] It seems to have existed in the kingdom of Naples as early as 1269.[6] There aren't many mentions of it in the histories from that time, so we can conclude that it didn't have the violent reputation in these regions that it did when it first appeared on the other side of the Alps. It disappeared from all these areas, except the Papal States, before completing a long history.

It was in Spain that this terrible tribunal was destined to obtain the firmest footing, and exercise the bloodiest sway. Its establishment in this country may be dated at the year 1232, and it gradually made its way into all the principalities of which this kingdom is composed, though not without a bloody resistance on the part of the inhabitants, who entertained the utmost horror of the Inquisition, and killed many of the Dominican Friars, who were its chief ministers, and the instruments of its establishment.[7] In 1481, upon the union, under Ferdinand and Isabella, of the Kingdom of Castile and Arragon, the inquisitorial constitution was reformed and modified, with respect to its various limits of territorial jurisdiction, and also by the introduction of new and severe statutes and rules. This was called the modern Inquisition,[8] and the pretext for its establishment was the persecution of the converted Jews, who were suspected of relapsing to their former faith. It afterwards took under its cognizance other heresies, and some civil offences. It is very clear that the people felt a decided aversion to it, which they manifested in violent tumults. Nevertheless force and terror overcame their resistance, and the domineering spirit of the Pope, the avarice of Ferdinand, and the fanaticism of the monks, succeeded in fastening the iron yoke of the Inquisition upon the necks of the Spaniards. It ran an uninterrupted career until abolished by Napoleon on the fourth of December, 1808.

It was in Spain that this terrible tribunal managed to establish a strong presence and exercised a brutal power. Its founding in this country dates back to 1232, and it gradually spread into all the principalities that make up this kingdom, though not without bloody resistance from the locals, who were horrified by the Inquisition and killed many of the Dominican Friars, who were its main agents and the driving force behind its establishment.[7] In 1481, when Ferdinand and Isabella unified the Kingdom of Castile and Aragon, the structure of the Inquisition was reformed and modified regarding its various territorial jurisdictions, along with the introduction of new and harsh laws. This was called the modern Inquisition,[8] and it was justified by the persecution of converted Jews suspected of reverting to their old faith. It later took on other heresies and some civil offenses. It is very clear that the people had a strong aversion to it, which they expressed through violent riots. Nevertheless, force and fear overcame their resistance, and the authoritarian nature of the Pope, the greed of Ferdinand, and the fanaticism of the monks succeeded in imposing the harsh burden of the Inquisition on the Spaniards. It continued without interruption until it was abolished by Napoleon on December 4, 1808.

The circumstances of its introduction into Portugal are too curious to be omitted. About the year 1540, there was in Spain, a monk of the name of Saavedra, who forged apostolic bulls, royal decrees, and bills of exchange, with so much accuracy, that they passed with every one for genuine. He succeeded so well as to pass himself off for a knight and commander of the military order of St Jago, the income of which, amounting to three thousand ducats, he received for the space of a year and a half. In a short time he acquired, by means of the royal deeds which he counterfeited, three hundred and sixty thousand ducats.

The way it was introduced to Portugal is too interesting to overlook. Around 1540, there was a monk in Spain named Saavedra who expertly forged apostolic bulls, royal decrees, and bills of exchange so accurately that everyone believed they were real. He did so well that he managed to pass himself off as a knight and commander of the military order of St. Jago, collecting an income of three thousand ducats for a year and a half. In a short time, he used the royal documents he faked to gain three hundred and sixty thousand ducats.

With a little prudence he might have remained undetected through life, but his successes tempted him to undertakings which led to his discovery. He fell in company with a Jesuit travelling to Portugal, with an apostolic brief for the foundation there of a college of that order. These two concerted measures for introducing the Inquisition as well as the Jesuits into Portugal. Saavedra forged letters from Charles V. to the King of Portugal, and a papal bull establishing the Inquisition in that country. This bull appointed Saavedra legate a latere for the purpose.

With a bit of caution, he could have gone through life unnoticed, but his successes pushed him into actions that led to his exposure. He got involved with a Jesuit traveling to Portugal, who had an apostolic brief for setting up a college of that order there. Together, they devised plans to introduce the Inquisition and the Jesuits into Portugal. Saavedra forged letters from Charles V. to the King of Portugal, as well as a papal bull that established the Inquisition in that country. This bull named Saavedra as legate a latere for this purpose.

This daring and brazenfaced impostor then took upon him the character and costume of a Roman cardinal. He travelled with litters, silver dishes, and a train of attendants, levying money on his course by forging bonds. He sent his secretary to Lisbon with his bull and papers to prepare for his reception. The king despatched to the frontiers a distinguished nobleman to receive him, and he made his entry into Lisbon, where he spent three months, and was treated with the highest respect. He afterwards travelled through the kingdom, and completed the business for which he had made his visit. He was at last detected by the Inquisitor General of Spain and arrested. After a trial by the Inquisition, he was sentenced to the gallies for ten years. The king added nine years more to the period. Almost all the establishments made by him in Portugal, were retained under the pretence that the Holy Office was necessary to persecute the Jews.

This bold and shameless impostor then adopted the role and appearance of a Roman cardinal. He traveled with litters, silver dishes, and a group of attendants, extorting money along his journey by forging documents. He sent his secretary to Lisbon with his official decree and papers to prepare for his arrival. The king sent a prominent nobleman to the borders to welcome him, and he entered Lisbon, where he spent three months and received the utmost respect. He later traveled throughout the kingdom and completed the business for which he came. Eventually, he was caught by the Inquisitor General of Spain and arrested. After a trial by the Inquisition, he was sentenced to serve ten years in the galleys. The king added nine more years to his sentence. Almost all the establishments he created in Portugal were retained under the pretext that the Holy Office was necessary to hunt down the Jews.

It has been the endeavour of the Spanish monarchs to extend it to every country under their dominion. The Emperor Charles V., whose zeal for the Inquisition has procured him the title of the Don Quixote of the Faith, established it in the Netherlands in 1522, and vast multitudes, who had embraced the Reformed religion, perished on its funeral piles. This bloody persecution was one of the means of exciting the revolt by which Holland was freed from the Spanish yoke.[9] An attempt was also made by him to introduce it into Naples, but it encountered the most determined opposition. The Neapolitans rose in insurrection, massacred the Spaniards, and obliged the emperor to give over the project. About the time of its appearance in the Netherlands it was also established in the Spanish dominions in America. The first autos de fe were celebrated at Lima in 1639.[10] The Portuguese carried it into their East Indian Colonies, fixing it at Goa in 1559.[11] In Brazil, however, it has never existed.

The Spanish monarchs have tried to spread it to every country they controlled. Emperor Charles V, known for his strong support of the Inquisition and often referred to as the Don Quixote of the Faith, established it in the Netherlands in 1522, leading to the deaths of countless people who converted to the Reformed religion. This brutal persecution contributed to the uprising that eventually liberated Holland from Spanish rule.[9] He also attempted to implement it in Naples, but faced fierce resistance. The people of Naples revolted, killed Spaniards, and forced the emperor to abandon the plan. Around the same time it appeared in the Netherlands, it was also established in the Spanish territories in America. The first autos de fe took place in Lima in 1639.[10] The Portuguese brought it to their East Indian Colonies, setting it up in Goa in 1559.[11] However, it has never existed in Brazil.

The modern history of the Inquisition must be familiar to every reader. Its abolition by Napoleon in 1808, its reestablishment under Ferdinand VII. and its second overthrow by the Spanish people in 1820, are events too well known to need a recapitulation here.

The recent history of the Inquisition should be known to everyone. Its abolition by Napoleon in 1808, its reinstatement under Ferdinand VII, and its second overthrow by the Spanish people in 1820 are events that are too well-known to need repeating here.

RECORDS OF THE SPANISH INQUISITION.

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

TRIAL OF PEDRO GINESTA, A RESIDENT OF THE VILLAGE OF ST QUINTI, IN THE DIOCESE OF ST FLOR, FOR EATING BACON ON A FORBIDDEN 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.

IN the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on September 4, 1635, present were the Inquisitor Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, officiating alone during his morning audience; after reviewing the information about Pedro Ginesta, a resident of the village of St. Quinti in the diocese of St. Flor, and Joan Mella from the village of St. Maurion in the parish of Xauvinar, diocese of Clermont, in the kingdom of France, both of whom are braziers and currently in custody of the Commissioner of Salas at the Agna Villa prison—ordered that these individuals be transferred to the secret prison of this Inquisition,[12] and that their trial be formally initiated; also ordered that the aforementioned Commissioner be instructed to permanently document ad perpetuam the testimony of the witnesses, confirm the identities of the individuals they testify against, and determine whether the prisoners are indeed the ones accused of eating bacon on St. Bartholomew’s eve, despite the prohibition; furthermore, that once the deposition process is completed, the prisoners be carefully transported by the designated Familiars to the prison of this Inquisition.

For which purpose let the necessary measures be taken.

For that reason, let the necessary steps be taken.

Before me—

In front of me—

Mattheo Magre, Sec’y.

Mattheo Magre, Secretary.


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.

In the town of Tremp, in the bishopric of Urgel, on August 25, 1635, in the morning, before Licenciate Joan Torroella, Presbyter Commissary of the Holy Office of the Inquisition in the town of Salas,—a man who claimed his name was Joan Compte, a native and resident of the town of Talarn in the same bishopric, appeared as summoned and formally swore to tell the truth. He stated he was about fifty-five years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was being called to appear.

Answered, that he neither knew nor conjectured.

Answered that he neither knew nor guessed.

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.

Questioned whether he knew or had heard of anyone speaking or acting in a way that was, or seemed to be, against our holy Catholic Faith and the evangelical teachings of the holy Catholic Roman Church, or against the rightful and free practice 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.

Answered that he knew nothing about the matters he was questioned on, except that on the eve of St. Bartholomew last, being in the town of Timian in the aforementioned bishopric of Urgel, he went to Pitieu's tavern and saw a man there, who worked as a brazier and had a grey beard. This man was well-known to the witness, as he had seen and entertained him in the town of Calan, where he practiced his trade and had worked for the witness. The witness did not know this man's name, as he had never heard it mentioned. At the same place was a young man, whom the brazier said was his apprentice. The two of them were sitting at a table eating soup; once they finished, the witness saw the brazier dump some bacon and onions from an earthen dish into a frying pan, and he asked the witness if he would eat with him. The witness replied that it was the eve and fast of St. Bartholomew, during which the church forbade such food. Nonetheless, the brazier and his apprentice ate the bacon and onions in the witness's presence, though a small portion was left in the dish. They placed this leftover on a piece of bread and presented it to the hostess on a plate. After this, the brazier and his apprentice went to the plaza of the town, and the witness remained in the tavern with the aforementioned hostess. This is the truth according to the witness's oath, and upon being read in his presence, he confirms that it is correctly written. The witness declares that he does not make this statement out of malice toward anyone. He was instructed to keep this confidential, and he promised to do so; since he could not write, I, the said Commissary, sign in his name.

Joan Torroella, Commissary.

Joan Torroella, Manager.


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.

In the town of Semiana, part of the bishopric of Urgel, on August 28, 1635, in the morning, before the Rev. Sr. Licentiate Joan Torroella, Presbyter Commissary of the Holy Office in the town of Salas, a woman named Geronima Aymara, who is the wife of Pedro Aymar y Piteu, a farmer and a native of Semiana, appeared as summoned and formally swore to tell the truth. She stated that she was around forty years old.

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

Questioned if she knew or guessed why she was being called 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.

Answered, she thought it was to find out if some people had eaten meat in her house on the eve of St. Bartholomew the Apostle. She could say that at that time, two people were at her house, whose names she didn’t know, but remembered one was an old man and the other a young man, both of whom were metalworkers. The young man asked her to cook a dish of salted bacon that was on the table. She asked why they wanted to eat bacon that day. The young man repeated his request to have the bacon cooked because they intended to eat it. She said she didn’t want to, as it was that time of year. The young man insisted again that she cook the bacon and told her to add onions to it. So, she went ahead and cooked the bacon, adding one dinero’s worth of onions, which she bought for that. Once she finished, she placed the food on the table in front of them. At that moment, Juan Compte from the town of Talarn entered; since the witness was baking that day and had to attend to her oven, she only set the food on the table in front of those two. When Juan Compte asked her for something to eat, she told him to wait until she got back from the oven, which he did. Upon her return, she found the two people at the table, and one of them told her to take away the leftover meat. She saw there was a bit of bacon and a few mouthfuls of the onions she had cooked, with the bacon stuffed into a piece of bread. After that, the two people left the house, and Juan Compte, who had been present all along, saw them finish their meal. Additionally, the witness said she remembers her husband mentioning on the Wednesday evening before that he heard those people say they planned to eat that piece of bacon they got the next day, which was St. Bartholomew’s, and her husband replied they couldn’t because it was a fast day. This is the truth according to the witness's oath, and after reading it in her presence, she confirmed it was correctly written. The witness further stated that she does not make this statement out of malice toward anyone. She was instructed to keep it a secret, which she promised to do, and since she couldn’t write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name.

The Licentiate
Joan Torroella, Commissary.

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.

In the village of Sanserin, part of Semiana, in the morning, before the aforementioned Licentiate Commissary Joan Torroella, a woman named Isabel Ramoneda, the wife of Pedro Ramoneda, a farmer living in the village of Sanserin, appeared as summoned and formally swore to tell the truth, stating that she was around thirty years old.

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

Questioned if she knew or guessed why she had been called 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.

Answered, that she thought it was to find out if certain Gascons had eaten meat in Semiana on the last St. Bartholomew’s eve. She stated that on Thursday, which was St. Bartholomew’s day, a Gascon, whom she thinks is named Pedro, an old man and a brazier by trade, came to her house in the evening. He said he had come from the town of Semiana; and while standing at her door, the servants of Francisco Rocabruna, an apothecary from Semiana, passed by. The Gascon asked the boys if they knew whether the young man who had been arrested in Semiana was released, to which they replied, ‘No,’ and shouted, ‘Ha! Lutheran, eating meat on a fast day!’ After the boys left, he told the witness that he had been eating, and that he was sorry or not sorry—she doesn't remember which. No one else was present. This is the truth according to the witness's oath, and after being read in her presence, she declared it was correctly recorded. The witness states that she isn't making this statement out of malice towards anyone. She was instructed to keep it confidential and promised to do so. As she is unable to write, I, the Commissary, will sign for her.

The Licentiate
Joan Torroella, Commissary.

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.

In the village of Sanserin, on that same morning, a man named Juan Monco, a farmer who was born and raised in the village, showed up as summoned and formally swore to tell the truth, claiming to be about twenty years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was called 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.

Answered that he thought it was to find out whether certain Gascons had eaten meat in the town of Semiana on the eve of St. Bartholomew last. He can say that on the evening of St. Bartholomew's Day, while near the house of Pedro Ramonera, there was a Gascon whose name he doesn't know. This Gascon was an old, overweight man and worked as a brazier. The servant of the apothecary Rocabruna from Tremp, whose name is also unknown to the witness, passed by. The witness overheard the servant of Rocabruna saying to the Gascon, "Hey, Lutheran! Did you eat meat on a fast day?" The Gascon replied, "Yes, I have eaten," but the witness is not sure if the servant of Rocabruna heard this. This is the truth according to the witness's oath; and after it was read in his presence, he confirmed that it was correctly recorded. The witness further states that he is not making this declaration out of malice toward anyone. Having been instructed to keep this secret, he promised to do so; and since he cannot write, I, the said Commissary, sign for him.

The Licentiate,
Joan Torroella, Commissary.

The Licentiate,
Joan Torroella, Commissioner.


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.

In the town of Semiana, at the same time, before me, the Licentiate and Commissary, Joan Torroella, the man who identified himself as Pedro Aymar y Piteu, a native and resident of Semiana, appeared as summoned and formally swore to tell the truth. He claimed to be around fifty-six years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was being called 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.

Answered that he thought it was to find out whether some Gascons had eaten meat in his house on the last St. Bartholomew's Day. His wife had informed him that the two Gascons in question had stopped by and eaten meat that day. He also mentioned that these Gascons, whose names he didn't know because he had never seen them before, had been at his house for dinner the night before, which was Wednesday. One of the Gascons was an older man and the other a younger man, both being metalworkers. The older man told the witness's wife that he wanted some meat for the next day, St. Bartholomew's, and asked her to cook some salted bacon. The witness replied that they couldn't, as it was a day of fasting. The older man insisted that they planned to eat regardless, which led the witness to believe that he had permission to eat meat or that he had some kind of illness. For this reason, he didn't object further. Later that same evening, when he returned home from work, his wife told him that the Gascons had eaten meat and that the older man had left while the younger one was arrested and taken to jail. This is the truth according to the witness's oath, and being read in his presence is declared by him to be correctly recorded. The witness further states that he does not make this statement out of malice towards anyone, and he promised to keep it confidential as instructed. Due to his inability to write, I, the said Commissary, sign on his behalf.

The Licentiate,
Joan Torroella, Commissary.

The Licentiate,
Joan Torroella, Commissioner.


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.

On September 17, 1635, at 3:00 PM, Pedro Ginesta from Auvergne, in the diocese of St. Flor, was ordered by the Inquisitors to be placed in the secret prison of the Inquisition. He was put under the care of P. Fontanella, the warden of that prison, who questioned him and permitted nothing that was against his instructions. The items found on him included two shirts, a pair of pants, a purse, one dinero, and three sueldos, which have been handed over to the Camara de Pablo.

Pedro Fontanella.

Pedro Fontanella.


FIRST AUDIENCE.

FIRST CROWD.

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.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on September 18, 1635, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, was holding his morning session. He ordered that the prisoner be brought from his cell; once he arrived, the prisoner was sworn in to tell the truth about this situation and any others until the trial was decided. He was also sworn to keep everything he might see, hear, or learn, and everything that happened to him, a secret.

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

Questioned about his name, age, occupation, birthplace, residence, and the time he was arrested 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.

Answered that his name was Pedro Ginesta, and he worked as a metal worker. He was from the village of Orliach, in the bishopric of St. Flor, in the kingdom of France. He lived in Orcan, Catalonia, and had been practicing his trade there for over fourteen years. He was around eighty years old and had been arrested yesterday by a commissioner of the Holy Office 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 about his father, grandfather, both paternal and maternal relatives, and his wife; who his uncles, brothers, and children were; what their jobs, birthplaces, and places of residence were. [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.

Questioned about the origin and background of his ancestors and relatives, and whether any of them had been punished or subjected to 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.

Answered, that all his relatives were older Roman Catholic Christians,[13] and that none of them had ever been punished or sentenced by the Holy Office up to now.

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.

Questioned if he was a baptized and confirmed Catholic, and if he regularly attended mass, went to confession, and received the sacrament at the times prescribed by the Holy Catholic Mother Church; when 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.

He answered that he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, having been baptized in the church of Santanti, which is under the authority of the suffragans of Caberna and other areas, and that he knew he had been confirmed by a bishop named Panlaza in the city of Huerca in Aragon, or Poroteo, the bishop of that kingdom, more than forty years ago in the cathedral. He clearly remembered the confirmation since he was of legal age at that time; he attends mass every Sunday and holiday, except when he is traveling; he confesses and takes communion at all the times set by the Holy Mother Church; he has certificates to prove this; he believes the last time he confessed was during Passion Week last, in the town of La Puente de Montania, to a priest from that church; and he does not remember the name of the priest who administered the sacrament. The prisoner then made the sign of the cross, invoking the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and correctly recited the four prayers and the general confession in Latin, stating that he knew nothing more about Christian doctrine.

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

Questioned whether he could write, read, or had studied any science or subject.

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

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.

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

Answered that he had been practicing his trade as a blacksmith for over sixty years in the regions of Catalonia and Aragon, occasionally visiting his home in France, where there are no Lutherans or people of uncertain faith.

Questioned, what were the events of his life.

Questioned about 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.

Answered that he was born, as mentioned above, in the village of Orliach, and stayed with his father until he was twenty, helping him in his work as a brazier; that he had spent his life in France, Aragon, and Catalonia, his father having brought him to this country when he was a boy, where he died, leaving him, sixty years ago, in the town of Erla, near Gea, in Aragon, where he worked all this time in various places and became well known; that his wife had never been to Spain at any time.

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

Questioned whether he knew or guessed the reason for 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.

He fell to his knees, crying and beating his chest, admitting that he had sinned against our Lord by eating bacon on the eve of St. Bartholomew in the village of Semiana. He acknowledged that the hostess of the house where it happened had reminded him the day before that the next day was a fast. However, not remembering this warning, he had eaten the bacon with a young man about fourteen or fifteen years old, who had recently come to work with him from the bishopric of Clermont in France. While they were eating, the hostess came back and reminded him again that it was the fast of St. Bartholomew and they shouldn't be eating it, so they immediately stopped. They were both arrested and taken on the road to Barcelona under the guard of one man, with the youth’s hands tied. When they got near a woods, the youth managed to escape despite the guard's efforts to find him. If this had offended our Lord, he begged for forgiveness 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.

The prisoner was then told that in this Holy Office, it wasn't standard practice to detain anyone without enough evidence that they had said, done, or witnessed something genuinely or seemingly harmful against God our Lord, or against his Holy Catholic faith and the evangelical law taught and preached by the Holy Mother Roman Church, or against the rightful and free operation of the Holy Office. Therefore, he needed to understand that he was imprisoned based on such information, and he was urged on behalf of God our Lord and the glorious and blessed Virgin Mary to reflect and confess his wrongdoings without hiding anything about himself or others, and without giving false testimony against anyone; by doing all of this, his trial would be handled promptly and decided with the mercy that the Holy Office extends to all who confess openly; otherwise, justice would be served.

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.

Answered that he had nothing else to add, and after the above was read to him, he stated that it was the truth according to the oath he had taken, and that he had nothing to change or take away from what was included in it. With this warning to reflect carefully and tell the truth, he was sent back to prison.

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta.


SECOND AUDIENCE.

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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on September 19, 1635, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, was holding his morning audience, overseeing matters of justice. He ordered that Pedro Ginesta be brought out of prison. Once this was accomplished and the prisoner was 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.

Questioned if he recalled anything about his affair that he was required to share truthfully to clear his conscience.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing more to add.

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

The prisoner was then warned on behalf of God our Lord, etc. [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.

Answered that he had nothing more to say; and being advised to consider his words carefully and tell the truth, he was sent back to prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.


THIRD AUDIENCE.

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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on September 20, 1635, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, was having his morning session when he ordered that Pedro Ginesta be brought from his prison. Once that was done and the prisoner was 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.

Questioned about whether he remembered anything concerning his affair that he was obligated to reveal, he answered honestly to clear his conscience.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else 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.]

The prisoner was then told that in the meetings that had already taken place, he had been warned on behalf of God our Lord, etc. [The whole repeated as before.]

Answered that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

The prisoner was then notified that the Promotor Fiscal[14] 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.

The prisoner was then informed that the Promotor Fiscal[14] of this Holy Office had an accusation to present against him. It would be wise for him to tell the whole truth, as he had already been warned. If he chose to do so, he would fully experience the mercy that the Holy Office always offers to those who confess openly; otherwise, the Fiscal would come and move forward with 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:—

Straightaway, Doctor Francisco Gregorio, the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office, came forward and presented the accusation, which he had signed, against Pedro Ginesta, swearing that it was not motivated by malice. The accusation was as follows:—

ACCUSATION.

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.

I, Doctor Francisco Gregorio, Prosecutor of this Holy Office, come before you, Your Excellency, to formally accuse Pedro Ginesta, a brazier from the village of Orliach, part of the diocese of St. Flor, in Ubernia, in the kingdom of France, who currently lives in this principality and is held in the secret prison of the Inquisition, and who is now present. I state that this individual, being a baptized and confirmed Christian, enjoying the graces and benefits that such individuals are supposed to enjoy, has shown a lack of fear of God, disregarded his own conscience, and ignored the justice administered by Your Excellency. He has committed offenses against our Holy Faith by expressing and engaging in actions that resemble the heresy of Luther, in the following manner.

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.

The prisoner was in a certain part of the village of Semiana in the bishopric of Urgel on the Feast of St. Bartholomew last year. Along with another person, he had a dish of bacon and onions cooked. Despite being reminded to be careful because it was a fast and such food was not allowed, he ordered the meat to be cooked anyway. Once the meat was prepared, he went ahead and ate it with the other person. Even after being informed by someone else while they were eating that it was St. Bartholomew's Day and a fast, during which eating such food was prohibited, the prisoner continued to eat the rest of the 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.

Furthermore, the mentioned prisoner, being from a nation affected by heresy, is presumed to have frequently eaten meat on forbidden days, following the practices of the Lutheran sect, and has committed many other offenses against our Holy Faith. Additionally, knowing that others have committed similar offenses, the prisoner was urged by your Excellency to tell the truth but has failed to do so and has committed perjury.

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.

For these reasons, I urge you to consider that, once there is sufficient evidence for my accusation, or at least enough to serve justice in this case, you will declare my accusation valid and find Pedro Ginesta guilty of the mentioned offenses. Please impose the harshest punishments allowed by law for these offenses, executing them on him and his belongings, as a penalty for him and a lesson for others. Additionally, if deemed necessary, the prisoner should be subjected to torture, with repetitions until he reveals the full truth about 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.

And I formally swear that I'm not making this accusation out of spite, but only to achieve justice, which I now ask for from you.

Dr Francisco Gregorio.

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:—

This accusation was presented and read, and Pedro Ginesta was officially sworn to tell the truth in response to every question related to it. After the accusation was read out loud, 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 main accusation, he replied that he was the same Pedro Ginesta that the Fiscal accused, but he had never committed any offense against our Holy Catholic Faith, nor had he done or said anything related 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 first article, he responded, admitting that he had eaten bacon and onions on the evening of St. Bartholomew's Day, and that even though he had been reminded it was a fast day, he had forgotten. When he was reminded again while eating, he immediately stopped. The person who ate with him was a young man, the son of Borbon Merchante. He stressed that he didn't eat this food out of disrespect for the Church or its rules, fully aware that eating meat on such days was prohibited, a regulation he had followed throughout his life and intended to continue observing, believing in all the teachings of the holy Catholic Roman Church. At this point, the prisoner fell to his knees and stated that he had sinned out of 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 second article, he replied that he had never committed the same offense at any other time and that he had not hidden the truth regarding this matter, either about himself or his companion, as he was a faithful 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.

To conclude the accusation, he responded that even if he were tortured, he couldn't say anything more, and that his offense wasn't out of bad intent but rather forgetfulness, caused by his old 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 above is the truth according to the prisoner's oath, and after being read in his presence, he confirms that it is accurately recorded.

The Inquisitor,
Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

The Inquisitor,
Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

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.

The Inquisitor then instructed that he be given a copy of the accusation so that he could, within three days, prepare for his trial and defense by consulting and coordinating with one of the lawyers representing those tried by the Holy Office, specifically, Doctor Magrina, a priest, and Micar Morato, allowing the prisoner to choose either one. The prisoner chose Dr. Magrina, at which point the Inquisitor ordered him to be summoned. The session then concluded, and after being cautioned, the prisoner was sent back to jail.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE FOR COMMUNICATION OF THE ACCUSATION AND EVIDENCE.

AUDIENCE FOR COMMUNICATING 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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on September 20, 1635, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, was having his morning audience when he ordered the prisoner Pedro Ginesta to be brought from jail. Once that was done and the prisoner was present, he was

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

Questioned if he remembered anything he was required to share based on the oath he had taken.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

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.

The prisoner was then informed that Dr. Francisco Magrina, whom he had chosen as his lawyer, was there, and he could talk with him to prepare his defense.

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.

Dr. Francisco Magrina was then sworn in verbo sacerdotis, to defend Pedro Ginesta diligently and faithfully, to inform him if his case wasn’t on the side of justice, to do everything that a good advocate is obligated to do, and to maintain confidentiality 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.

Then, the various confessions of Pedro Ginesta, made from the eighteenth of this month up to now, were produced and read, along with the accusation and the prisoner’s responses. He examined these and discussed the case with the prisoner, advising him that the best defense would be to confess the entire truth and, if he was guilty of any wrongdoing, to ask for forgiveness; this way, he might receive 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 aforementioned Pedro Ginesta stated that he had told the entire truth as shown by his confessions, and that apart from this, he denied everything in the accusation. Therefore, he requested to be cleared of the charges and released.

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 Inquisitor then ordered a copy of the above to be given to the Promoter Fiscal of the Holy Office, who stated that, sticking to what he had mentioned in his accusation and the details in the prisoner's confession, he requested to move forward with the evidence. The Inquisitor replied that the case should be judged definitively, and the evidence from both sides would be accepted salvo jure impertinentium et non admittendorum, in line with the Holy Office's procedures, and this was communicated 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.

The Prosecutor then stated that he had copied the testimony that had been received and recorded against Pedro Ginesta in this Holy Office, and he requested that this testimony be examined and confirmed properly; he also asked for any other necessary investigations to be conducted and for the testimony to be made public. After that, the session ended, and the prisoner was urged to reflect carefully and tell the truth before being taken back to jail.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE FOR THE PUBLICATION OF THE TESTIMONY.

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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on October 6, 1635, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, during his morning audience, ordered that Pedro Ginesta be brought from the secret prison. Once this was done and the prisoner was present, he was

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

Questioned about whether he recalled anything he was required to declare based on the oath he had taken.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else 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.

The prisoner was then told that the Prosecutor of the Holy Office had requested a publication of the testimony against him, and it would be wise for him to tell the whole truth, as this would lead to greater kindness 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.

Answered that he had nothing to add to his previous confessions; that it was true he had eaten bacon on St. Bartholomew’s eve, but he did it out of ignorance, not realizing it was a fast; that he asked for forgiveness for his mistake, having lived the rest of his life in a different way.

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.

Straight away, the Prosecutor requested the publication of the testimony against Pedro Ginesta in accordance with the procedures of the Holy Office. The Inquisitor ordered that the publication take place, keeping the identities of the witnesses and any details that could reveal who they were confidential, following the guidelines and practices of the Holy Office, which was carried out in the following manner.

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

Publication of the testimony against Pedro Ginesta, who is from the village of St. Quinti, in the diocese of St. Flor, located 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.]

A specific witness, sworn in and qualified at the right time and in the right way in the town of Tremp, bishopric of Urgel, on a certain day in August of the current year, 1635—states, &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 sworn in and qualified at the appropriate time and place in the town of Semiana, &c. [Here follows the testimony of Geronima Aymar.]

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

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;—

The above testimony having been published, an oath was required from the prisoner to tell the truth in response to the testimony mentioned, article by article, and this was read to him word for word, 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 first article, he replied that it was true he had eaten the bacon, but he did so out of ignorance, having forgotten that it was St. Bartholomew’s eve, as he had already confessed, and that once he was informed about it, he stopped 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 second article, he replied that the hostess might have said what she claims, but he didn't remember 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 third article, he replied that he reaffirmed his earlier statement that he was a Catholic Christian, and had he known it was the fast of St. Bartholomew, he would not have eaten under any circumstances.

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 fourth article, he responded by pointing to the confession he had already made and stated that he didn’t recall being warned by anyone.

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

To the fifth article, he replied by pointing to his confession and stated that apart from this, he denied everything that the witness had sworn to.

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,

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.

Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Before me—

In front of me—

Damian Fonolleda, Sec’y.

Damian Fonolleda, Secretary.

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.

The Inquisitor then ordered that the prisoner be given a copy of the publication mentioned above so that he could, with the help of his lawyer, prepare his defense. After this, the prisoner was warned and sent back to prison.

AUDIENCE TO COMMUNICATE THE PUBLICATION.

AUDIENCE TO SHARE 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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the ninth day of October, 1635, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, was holding his morning audience. He ordered that Pedro Ginesta be brought from prison, and once that was done and the prisoner was 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.

Questioned if he remembered anything he needed to disclose to clear his conscience, based on the oath he had taken.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing more to add.

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.

The prisoner was then informed that Dr. Francisco Magrina, his lawyer, was present and available for communication to discuss his defense. The testimony against the prisoner, along with his responses, was then read to Dr. Francisco Magrina, who began to consult with the prisoner about his defense. After this, he received a sheet of paper from the prisoner, on which he drafted defense points that were then read to the prisoner, who stated that he formally accepted them. Here follows the defense.

DEFENCE.

DEFENSE.

‘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.

‘Although Pedro Ginesta, a native of France and a brazier by trade, has no need for any defense against the charges made against him by the Promotor Fiscal of this Holy Office, as is clearly evident from the testimony; nonetheless, for added security and with a clear statement that his challenge of the witnesses' testimony against him is not motivated by a wish to harm them, but purely 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,

‘1st. He admits that he has done something wrong, but he insists that he shouldn’t face any regular or exceptional punishment for it, which is true, 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.

‘2d. Although it's true that he ate meat on St. Bartholomew's Eve last, it is not true that he did it out of malice or with the intention of breaking the Church's rules; this statement 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.

‘3d. Pedro Ginesta has, because of his job, spent his life traveling from one place to another, attending mass wherever he happened to be on Sundays and holidays, and has not been able to pay more attention to his religious duties; as a result, he has been unaware of the fasting days since he hasn't heard them announced; this 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.

‘4th. For this reason, and not knowing that a fast was required on St. Bartholomew’s day, he states he wouldn’t have eaten if he had known; 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.

‘5th. Although he was told that he shouldn't eat meat at that time because it was St. Bartholomew's Eve, everyone there let him eat anyway and didn’t say anything against it; that's 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.

‘6th. The said Pedro Ginesta, besides being a person of limited understanding, is very old, being over eighty years, at which age it's common for memory to decline, 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.

‘7th. The mentioned Pedro Ginesta did not act out of malice, but purely from ignorance, which is usually excused by law, and is true.

‘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.

‘8th. The mentioned Pedro Ginesta, although born in France, is a good Christian, and, as such, has always faithfully fulfilled every obligation expected of a good Christian; this is true.

‘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,

‘9th. For these reasons, Pedro Ginesta should be cleared by your Excellency and set free from the prison where he is currently held, receiving mercy from you; vel alias,

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

‘10th. It states that everything and everyone, according to true law, upon which justice and the law of the day call for action, is true.

F. Magrinya.

F. Magrinya.

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

‘11th. Pedro Ginesta presents the above as his defense and finishes by asking for leniency.

F. Magrinya.

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.

This was presented to the Inquisitor, who ordered it to be filed. It was also ordered that the same be communicated to the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office; after which the audience concluded, and the prisoner was sent back to prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

SENTENCE.

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.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on October 16, 1635, during the morning session, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, was present, along with Dr. Augustin Fernandez Lopez, Vicar General of the bishopric of Barcelona, representing the Ordinary of the bishopric of Urgel. After reviewing a case conducted by this Holy Office against Pedro Ginesta, a Frenchman from St. Quinti or Orliach in the bishopric of St. Flor, in Ubernia, who was living in Catalonia in the district of Pallas and had been arrested in the town of Tremp and is now in the secret prison of this Holy Office, it was ordered that, based on this action, the prisoner be reprimanded, and warned, and immediately released from prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez, Sec’y.

Miguel Rodriguez, Secretary.


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.

In the same audience, Pedro Ginesta was ordered to be brought from prison. Once he was present, the Inquisitor, Abbad y Huerta, reprimanded and warned him as per the previous sentence. The prisoner accepted the correction with humility and promised to change his ways; I, the Secretary, hereby certify this.

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.


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

Straight away, in the same meeting, the prisoner was sworn to tell the truth; and he was

Questioned, &c.

Questioned, etc.

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.

Answered that he had nothing more to say, either about himself or others, regarding his conscience, nor anything related to what had been said or done in the prison of this Holy Office against its honor, dignity, or secrets, or concerning the treatment of the prisoners there; that he had not seen any conversations taking place among them, nor knew if anyone had talked to another; that he had no messages from them to deliver to anyone, and that the Warden and Steward had faithfully fulfilled their responsibilities.

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.

He was then ordered, due to the oath he had taken and under threat of complete excommunication, to keep quiet about everything that had happened to him regarding his trial, and about everything he had seen, heard, or learned while in prison. He was not allowed to share any of this information with anyone, in any form. He promised to keep this promise, and since he couldn’t write, I, the Inquisitor, Abbad y Huerta, signed on his behalf; after that, he was released.

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

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.

On the 19th day of that month, Secretary Rodriguez sent a letter to Commissary Salas on behalf of the Tribunal, instructing him to return the tools of the prisoner’s trade and his other belongings due to his financial hardship. The letter was sent by the prisoner.

Rodriguez.

Rodriguez.

TRIAL OF JUAN DURAN,

FOR BLASPHEMY AND WITCHCRAFT.

I, the Fiscal of this Holy Office, state that from information received, it is made manifest that Juan Duran, blacksmith, a native of Manresa, and a resident of Villaredonda, in the bishopric of Barcelona, has committed offences against our holy faith; on which account, I purpose to bring a formal accusation against him. For which reasons I request your Excellency to order the said person to be arrested and confined in the secret prison of this Inquisition, for the purpose of accomplishing fully the ends of justice.

I, the Financial Officer of this Holy Office, declare that based on the information received, it is clear that Juan Duran, a blacksmith originally from Manresa and now living in Villaredonda in the diocese of Barcelona, has committed offenses against our sacred faith. Therefore, I intend to file a formal accusation against him. For this reason, I ask your Excellency to order the arrest of this individual and to have him confined in the secret prison of this Inquisition to ensure that justice is fully served.

Dr Francisco Gregorio.

Dr. Francisco Gregorio.


In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the tenth day of December, one thousand, six hundred and thirtytwo, the Inquisitors, Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner and Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta, being at their evening audience,—having examined the testification against Juan Duran, blacksmith, a resident of Villaredonda in the bishopric of Barcelona; ordered that the above person be arrested and confined in the secret prison of this Inquisition, and that his trial be instituted in form.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on December 10, 1632, the Inquisitors, Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner and Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, during their evening session—after reviewing the testimony against Juan Duran, a blacksmith living in Villaredonda in the bishopric of Barcelona—ordered that he be arrested and held in the secret prison of this Inquisition, and that his trial be officially initiated.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.


TO FRANCISCO COLL, COMMISSARY.

TO FRANCISCO COLL, COMMISSIONER.

On the receipt of this, you will proceed to take prisoner, on the part of this Holy Office, Juan Duran, blacksmith, a resident of this town, for some days past, and formerly of Villaredonda. He is a tall, thin faced, person; pale, with a chestnut beard, and meanly dressed; having secured him, you will dispatch him, under good attendance, to this Holy Office, by the hands of the Familiars, in such a manner that he cannot escape, taking measures in all the places through which he may pass, to let it be known he is apprehended by this Inquisition.

On receiving this, you will take into custody, on behalf of this Holy Office, Juan Duran, a blacksmith living in this town for the past few days, and formerly from Villaredonda. He is a tall, thin-faced person; pale, with a chestnut beard, and dressed poorly. Once you have secured him, you will send him, under proper supervision, to this Holy Office with the Familiars, ensuring that he cannot escape. Please take measures in all the areas he passes through to inform them that he has been apprehended by this Inquisition.

Also, if occasion should offer, you will sieze so much of the prisoner’s property, if it be found in that town, as shall amount to eight ducats, for the expense of his maintenance, which you will transmit by those who have him in custody.

Also, if the opportunity arises, you will take possession of as much of the prisoner’s property as can be found in that town, up to the value of eight ducats, to cover his maintenance costs, which you will send along with those who are holding him.

This letter is to be returned, with a statement of all that may be done agreeably to the above orders, with respect to which we trust in the guidance of our Lord.

This letter should be returned along with a statement of everything that can be done according to the above instructions, for which we rely on the guidance of our Lord.

Barcelona, December 14th. 1632.

Barcelona, December 14, 1632.

 

The prisoner being taken, you will inspect his person and his lodgings, in order to secure a book, about the size of the hand, in which, it is confidently believed, there are certain prayers and superstitious matters. This book you will despatch to us.

The prisoner is being taken, so you will check him and his living space to collect a book, roughly the size of a hand, which is believed to contain some prayers and superstitious content. Please send us this book.

Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner,
Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner,
Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

By order of this Holy Office—

By order of this Holy Office—

Miguel Rodriguez, Sec’y.

Miguel Rodriguez, Secretary.

TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS INQUISITORS OF THE PRINCIPALITY OF CATALONIA.

TO THE MOST DISTINGUISHED INQUISITORS OF THE PRINCIPALITY OF CATALONIA.

I received the orders of your Excellencies and put them in execution. I learned that Juan Duran had left this town of Villaredonda a month since, and that he labored at times in repairing the bridge of Armentera, in the archbishopric of Tarragona, whither I sent after him and had him siezed by a Familiar of that place. I have examined him, and found his book and papers which, you will receive along with this. No more cash was found upon him than three reales, which I also transmit by the Familiar who has him in custody. This is all which could be obtained of his property. The prisoner I despatch to your Excellencies according to order, and remain at the service of your Excellencies, to whom may our Lord grant many happy years.

I received your Excellencies' orders and carried them out. I discovered that Juan Duran had left the town of Villaredonda a month ago and was sometimes working on repairing the bridge of Armentera, in the archbishopric of Tarragona. I sent for him and had him captured by a Familiar from that area. I have questioned him and found his book and papers, which you will receive with this. He had only three reales on him, which I am also sending with the Familiar who is holding him. This is everything I could retrieve from his belongings. I am sending the prisoner to your Excellencies as ordered, and I remain at your service, wishing you many happy years with our Lord's blessings.

Villaredonda, Dec. 24th, 1632.

Villaredonda, Dec. 24, 1632.

Francisco Coll, Rector of Villaredonda,
and Commissary of the Holy Office
.

Francisco Coll, Rector of Villaredonda,
and Commissioner of the Holy Office
.


In the town of Valles Campo, in the archbishopric of Tarragona, on Saturday, the twentyseventh day of November, one thousand six hundred and thirty two, at evening, appeared, without summons, before Dr Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Presbyter Commissary of the Holy Office, and swore to declare the truth, a person calling himself Pedro Oriola, apothecary, resident of the town of Valles, of age, as he stated, fortyfour years, or thereabout; which person, in discharge of his conscience, declared and denounced the following.

In the town of Valles Campo, in the archbishopric of Tarragona, on Saturday, November 27, 1632, in the evening, a person named Pedro Oriola, an apothecary living in Valles, voluntarily appeared before Dr. Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Presbyter Commissary of the Holy Office, and swore to tell the truth. He claimed to be about forty-four years old and, in fulfilling his duty, he stated and reported the following.

That about fifteen days since, there visited at his house, Juan Bafforell, and one Marcal, a gardener, inhabitants of the said town; and that among other things they told him they had heard a certain person (whose name and birth place the deponent is ignorant of, but knows him by sight, and that he is a blacksmith, working with Pablo Llaurador of this town, and came hither in company with a Frenchman, who officiated as a physician, and a short time since had been imprisoned by the Holy Office), say, that he possessed a book, which, if it were thrown into a fire, along with a crucifix, would remain unhurt, while the crucifix would be consumed.

About fifteen days ago, Juan Bafforell and Marcal, a gardener from the same town, visited his house. They mentioned that they had heard a certain person—whose name and birthplace he doesn't know but recognizes by sight as a blacksmith who works with Pablo Llaurador in this town—say that he owned a book. He claimed that if the book was thrown into a fire along with a crucifix, the book would stay unharmed while the crucifix would be burned.

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the deponent, and being read in his hearing, is declared by him to be correctly recorded. Deponent further states that he does not make this declaration out of malice to any one, but solely to discharge his conscience, and declares that he will keep the whole secret.

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the person giving the statement, and after being read in his presence, he confirms that it has been recorded accurately. The person giving the statement further mentions that he is not making this declaration out of malice toward anyone, but solely to clear his conscience, and he declares that he will keep the entire matter confidential.

Signed,

Signed,

Pero Orrola.

Pero Orrola.

Before me—

In front of me—

Geronymo Joan Rossellon,
Presbyter Notary of the Holy Office.

Geronimo Joan Rossellon,
Notary Priest of the Holy Office.


In the town of Valles, on Sunday, the twentyeighth day of the said month and year, in the evening, before the said Commissary, appeared, according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth, Juan Bafforell, a native and inhabitant of the town of Valles, of age, as he stated, fortyeight years or thereabout.

In the town of Valles, on Sunday, the 28th day of the month and year, in the evening, before the Commissary, Juan Bafforell, a native and resident of Valles, appeared as summoned and swore to tell the truth, declaring that he is approximately 48 years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was being called to appear.

Answered, that he neither knew nor conjectured.

Answered that he neither knew nor guessed.

Questioned, if he knew, or had heard that any person had said or done anything, which was, or appeared to be contrary to the Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law preached and taught by the Holy Mother Catholic Roman Church, or against the proper and free jurisdiction of the Holy Office.

Questioned if he knew or had heard that anyone said or did anything that was, or seemed to be, against the Holy Catholic Faith and the Evangelical Law taught by the Holy Mother Catholic Roman Church, or against the proper and free authority of the Holy Office.

Answered, that he knew nothing of the matter, but the following. About fifteen days since, he was at the house of Mosen Pedro Oriola, apothecary, in company with the said Oriola, Bernardo Serda, innkeeper, and Salvador Marcal, gardener, and in the course of the conversation the said Marcal observed that a certain man, whom the deponent knew by sight, but not his name, or where he belongs, a blacksmith, working with Pablo Llaurador, of this town, had said, in his presence, in the tavern of the abovementioned Bernardo Serda, that he possessed a book or books of such quality and power, that if the said book or books were thrown into a fire along with an image of Christ crucified, the Christ would be burnt, and not the book. Further the deponent knoweth not.

He replied that he didn’t know anything about the matter, except for the following. About fifteen days ago, he was at the house of Mosen Pedro Oriola, the apothecary, with Oriola, Bernardo Serda, the innkeeper, and Salvador Marcal, the gardener. During the conversation, Marcal mentioned that a man he recognized but didn’t know by name— a blacksmith who worked with Pablo Llaurador from this town— had said, in his presence, at Serda's tavern, that he owned a book or books with such quality and power that if those books were thrown into a fire with an image of Christ crucified, the image would burn, not the books. Beyond that, the deponent doesn’t know anything.

The above 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 has not made this declaration out of malice, but solely to unburthen his conscience; and, moreover, promises secrecy; being unable to write, I, the said Commissary sign in his name.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the witness; and after being read to him, he confirms that it is accurately recorded. The witness further states that he has not made this declaration out of spite, but solely to relieve his conscience; and he also promises to keep it confidential; since he cannot write, I, the said Commissary, sign on his behalf.

Dr Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Dr. Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Before me—

In front of me—

Geronymo Joan Rossellon,
Presbyter Notary of the Holy Office.

Geronymo Joan Rossellón,
Priest Notary of the Holy Office.


In the town of Valles, on Tuesday the thirtieth of the same month and year, before the said Commissary, appeared according to summons, and swore formally to declare the truth, a person calling himself Bernardo Serda, innkeeper, a native and inhabitant of the said town of Valles, of age, as he stated, twentyfour years or thereabout.

In the town of Valles, on Tuesday the 30th of the same month and year, before the aforementioned Commissary, a person named Bernardo Serda, an innkeeper and a native resident of Valles, appeared as summoned and took an oath to tell the truth. He stated that he was around twenty-four years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed the reason for his summons.

Answered, that he supposed it to be for the purpose of ascertaining the substance of what he had stated on several occasions; in relation to which, the facts were, that about fifteen or thirty days since on returning to his house, he was informed by his wife and another woman belonging to Vique, who lodged at his house, and who went about the country curing diseases, that they had heard a certain stranger, (a blacksmith, working with Pablo Llaurador, but whose name or birthplace they did not know although they knew him by sight), declare, that he was a doctor who cured all disorders, that he was the God of the land, and that he had a book, which, being put into the fire along with a crucifix, would remain unhurt, while the crucifix would be consumed. The above was heard by the women, but not by the deponent. The said person also stated that he was circumcised as Jesus Christ was, which being heard of by the deponent he was greatly shocked, and declared that had it been uttered in his hearing, he would have cudgelled him out of doors.

Answered that he thought it was to confirm what he had mentioned several times; regarding which, the facts were that about fifteen or thirty days ago, when he returned home, his wife and another woman from Vique, who stayed at his house and traveled around treating illnesses, told him they had overheard a certain stranger (a blacksmith working with Pablo Llaurador, whose name or birthplace they didn’t know, but they recognized him by sight) claiming that he was a doctor who could cure any illness, that he was the God of the land, and that he had a book which, if thrown in the fire along with a crucifix, would come out unscathed while the crucifix would burn away. The women heard this, but he did not. The same person also claimed he was circumcised like Jesus Christ, and when the deponent heard this, he was very upset and said that if he had heard it himself, he would have kicked him out.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent, and being read to him he declares it to be correctly recorded. He further states that he does not make this declaration out of malice, and promises to observe secrecy. Not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in his name.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the person giving the statement, and after reading it to him, he confirms that it has been correctly recorded. He also states that he is not making this declaration out of malice and promises to keep it confidential. Since he is unable to write, I, the mentioned Commissary, sign on his behalf.

Dr Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Dr. Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Before me—

In front of me—

Geronymo Joan Rossellon, Presbyter Not’y.

Geronymo Joan Rossellon, Notary Public.


In the town of Valles, on Thursday, the second day of December, one thousand six hundred and thirtytwo, in the afternoon, before the said Commissary, appeared according to summons, and swore formally to declare the truth, a person calling himself Pablo Llaurador, blacksmith, an inhabitant of the town of Valles, of age, as he stated, fiftyfive years or thereabout.

In the town of Valles, on Thursday, December 2, 1632, in the afternoon, before the aforementioned Commissary, a person named Pablo Llaurador, a blacksmith and resident of Valles, appeared as summoned and swore to tell the truth. He stated that he was about fifty-five years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was called to appear.

Answered, that he supposed it to be for the purpose of investigating the following matter. There was a person living with him who assisted him in his trade. This person called himself Juan Duran, and said he was a native of Manresa. The said person declared a few days before the feast of All Saints, in the presence of the deponent, Pablo Vicens, and others whose names were forgotten, that he had a book containing a prayer of such efficacy, that, if it were put into a fire along with a crucifix, this last would be consumed before the book, which words being uttered with much earnestness by him, deponent and the others reprehended him, and advised him to abstain from such speeches, as they were scandalous, and should they come to the knowledge of the Inquisition, would bring some punishment upon him. The above person repeated his assertions several times, but at length desisted and appeared somewhat alarmed at the rebukes they gave him, turning pale. At other times this person had declared to the deponent that he was very skilful in curing disorders, and that the Holy Virgin del Rosario, had twice appeared to him, giving him power to cure all diseases, and bestowed upon him her benediction, all which deponent laughed at, and ascribed to the speaker’s want of understanding; but on hearing the assertion respecting the book, he became offended, and dismissed him from his house. Whither he went on his departure deponent did not know, only that he stated his intention soon to return. The book abovementioned he had shown to the deponent many times. It was a small thing, about the size of the hand, but thick, and was read by the possessor in great secrecy, as if he were at prayer. These, and other things, it was said, were known to Jayme Carbonell, a young man, son to the widow Carbonell, who keeps an inn. The person in question was a tall, thin, pale faced man, with a chestnut beard, and meanly dressed.

Answered that he thought it was to investigate the following matter. There was a person living with him who helped him in his work. This person called himself Juan Duran and claimed to be from Manresa. A few days before All Saints' Day, he stated in front of the witness, Pablo Vicens, and others whose names were forgotten, that he had a book containing a prayer that was so powerful that if it was thrown into a fire with a crucifix, the crucifix would burn up before the book. He said this with much seriousness, and the witness and others reprimanded him and advised him to stop making such statements, as they were scandalous and could lead to punishment if known by the Inquisition. The individual repeated his claims several times but eventually stopped and seemed a bit scared by their criticism, turning pale. At other times, this person told the witness that he was very skilled at healing ailments and that the Holy Virgin del Rosario had appeared to him twice, giving him the power to cure all diseases and blessing him. The witness found this laughable and attributed it to the speaker’s lack of understanding; however, upon hearing the claim about the book, he became offended and asked him to leave his house. The witness did not know where he went after that, only that he said he would return soon. He had shown the mentioned book to the witness many times. It was small, about the size of a hand, but thick, and the possessor read it in great secrecy as if he were praying. It was said that Jayme Carbonell, a young man and the son of the widow Carbonell who runs an inn, was aware of these and other matters. The person in question was a tall, thin, pale-faced man with a chestnut beard, dressed simply.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent; and being read in his presence, is declared by him to be correctly recorded. He further states that he does not make this declaration out of malice, and promises to observe secrecy. Not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in his name.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the person giving the testimony; and after being read in his presence, he confirms that it has been accurately recorded. He also states that he is not making this declaration out of spite, and agrees to keep it confidential. Since he cannot write, I, the undersigned Commissary, sign on his behalf.

Dr Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Dr. Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Before me—

In front of me—

Geronymo Juan Rossellon, Presbyter Not’y.

Geronymo Juan Rossellon, Presbyter Not’y.


In the town of Valles, on the same day, month, and year, before the said commissary, appeared according to summons, and swore formally to declare the truth, a person calling herself Esperanza Serdana, wife of Bernardo Serdana, innkeeper, an inhabitant of the town of Valles, of age, as she stated, thirty years or thereabout.

In the town of Valles, on the same day, month, and year, before the mentioned commissioner, a person named Esperanza Serdana appeared as summoned and swore to tell the truth. She identified herself as the wife of Bernardo Serdana, the innkeeper, and a resident of Valles, claiming to be about thirty years old.

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

Questioned if she knew or guessed why she had been called to appear.

Answered, that she neither knew or conjectured.

Answered that she neither knew nor guessed.

Questioned, if she knew or had heard that any person had said or done any thing which was, or appeared to be, contrary to the Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Doctrine taught and preached by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church, or against the proper and free jurisdiction of the Holy Office.

Questioned whether she knew or had heard that anyone had said or done anything that was, or seemed to be, against the Holy Catholic Faith and the Evangelical Doctrine taught and preached by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church, or against the proper and free authority of the Holy Office.

Answered, that all she knew relating to such matter was the following. About six weeks since, while she was waiting upon the guests in her tavern, and had just gone out of the kitchen into the room where the guests were, she observed them crossing themselves and expressing great wonder, crying ‘Jesu!’ ‘Jesu!’ Upon which she demanded what was the matter, and they told her, (she could not tell which of them, as there were so many present) that a man, then in the room, whose name she did not know, but only that he was a blacksmith and one she had never seen before, had said he had a book, which, thrown into a flaming fire along with a crucifix, would be preserved rather than this last, which expressions being heard by the deponent, she did not fail to express her astonishment, by crying ‘Jesu!’ and then went out of the room. The persons present also told her that the above person had said he was circumcised and had shed his blood as well as Jesus Christ our Lord.

Answered that all she knew about this matter was the following. About six weeks ago, while she was serving the guests in her tavern and had just stepped out of the kitchen into the room where they were, she saw them crossing themselves and expressing great amazement, shouting ‘Jesus!’ ‘Jesus!’ She asked what was wrong, and they told her (she couldn’t tell which one since there were so many people) that a man in the room, whose name she didn’t know but only that he was a blacksmith and someone she had never seen before, claimed he had a book that, if thrown into a blazing fire along with a crucifix, would be preserved better than the crucifix itself. After hearing this, she couldn’t help but express her shock by exclaiming ‘Jesus!’ and then left the room. The people present also mentioned that this man had said he was circumcised and had shed his blood just like Jesus Christ our Lord.

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the deponent, and being read in her presence, is declared by her to be correctly recorded. She further states that she does not make this declaration out of malice, and promises secrecy. Being unable to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name.

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the person giving the statement, and after being read in her presence, she confirms that it has been recorded correctly. She also states that she is not making this declaration out of spite and promises to keep it confidential. Since she cannot write, I, the undersigned Commissary, sign on her behalf.

Dr Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Dr. Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Before me—

In front of me—

Geronymo Juan Rossellon, Presbyter Not’y.

Geronymo Juan Rossellon, Presbyter Not’y.


In the town of Valles, on Saturday, the fourth day of December, one thousand six hundred and thirtytwo, in the afternoon, before the said Commissary, appeared according to summons, and swore to declare the truth, a person calling himself Pablo Vicens, peasant, a native and inhabitant of the said town, of age, as he stated, thirty years or thereabout.

In the town of Valles, on Saturday, December 4, 1632, in the afternoon, before the aforementioned Commissary, a person named Pablo Vicens, a peasant and resident of the town, appeared as summoned and swore to tell the truth, claiming to be around thirty years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was called to appear.

Answered, that he supposed it to be for the purpose of making inquiry about the following matter. About fifteen days before the feast of All Saints, he was informed by Bernardo Serda, innkeeper, an inhabitant of this town, that a man working with Pablo Llaurador, blacksmith of this town, had said before his wife and the guests in the inn, that he had in a certain book, a prayer of such efficacy that, were the book thrown into a blazing fire, along with a crucifix, the book would be preserved and the crucifix burnt; at which the deponent was much shocked, and went home. About six or eight days after this, the deponent went to the house of Pablo Llaurador, and found there the man abovementioned, whom he believes they called Juan Duran. Deponent spoke to this person, asking him what he meant by making such a speech as the above, and advised him to take care what he said, lest he got punished for it. The said Juan Duran answered, that he had made the above assertion, and would repeat it, which he did. The deponent told him he had been informed by Bernardo Serda of his speech about the book, and other assertions of his; namely, that the Holy Virgin del Rosario had appeared twice to him, and declared that he possessed the power to cure all diseases, giving him her benediction; for all which the deponent reprehended him in such a manner, that they had nearly come to blows, he having seized a blacksmith’s sledge for the purpose of throwing at the deponent, but desisted, as every one present exclaimed against him. Deponent was presently called away, and left the house, and a day or two after, on inquiring for the said person, of Pablo Llaurador, was informed that he had left him the same day. Deponent thinks he has since seen him at Villaredonda, where he believes he may be found at present.

He responded that he thought it was to ask about the following matter. About fifteen days before All Saints' Day, he was told by Bernardo Serda, an innkeeper and resident of this town, that a man working with Pablo Llaurador, the local blacksmith, had told his wife and the guests at the inn that he had a book containing a prayer so powerful that if the book were thrown into a raging fire along with a crucifix, the book would survive while the crucifix would burn. The respondent was quite shocked by this and went home. Around six or eight days later, he visited Pablo Llaurador’s house and found the aforementioned man, who he believes was called Juan Duran. The respondent talked to him, asking why he had made such a statement and warned him to be careful about what he said, or he might face consequences. Juan Duran said he stood by his claim and reiterated it. The respondent told him that Bernardo Serda had informed him about his comments regarding the book and other claims, specifically that the Virgin of the Rosary had appeared to him twice, telling him he had the power to heal all diseases and blessed him for it. The respondent confronted him so sternly that it almost led to a fight, as he had picked up a blacksmith's hammer to throw at the respondent but backed off when the others present protested. The respondent was soon called away and left the house, and a day or two later, when he inquired about Juan Duran from Pablo Llaurador, he found out that Juan had left the same day. The respondent believes he has since seen him in Villaredonda, where he thinks he might be currently located.

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the deponent; and being read in his presence, is declared by him to be correctly recorded. He further states that he has not made this declaration out of malice, and promises secrecy. Not being able to write, I, the said Commissary sign in his name.

The above statement is true, based on the oath of the person giving the testimony; and after being read to him, he confirms that it is recorded accurately. He also states that he did not make this declaration out of spite and promises to keep it confidential. Since he cannot write, I, the named Commissary, sign on his behalf.

Dr Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Dr. Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Before me—

In front of me—

Geronymo Rossellon, Presbyter Not’y.

Geronymo Rossellon, Presbyter Not’y.

In the town of Valles, on Sunday, the fifth of December, one thousand six hundred and thirtytwo, before the said Commissary appeared and swore to declare the truth, a person calling himself Jayme Carbonell, native and inhabitant of the town of Valles, of age, as he stated, sixteen years or thereabout.

In the town of Valles, on Sunday, December 5, 1632, before the mentioned Commissary, a person named Jayme Carbonell appeared and swore to tell the truth. He claimed to be a native and resident of Valles, and said he was about sixteen years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was being called to appear.

Answered, that he neither knew nor conjectured.

Answered that he neither knew nor guessed.

Questioned, if he knew or had heard that any person had said or done anything which was, or appeared to be contrary to the Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Doctrine taught and professed by our Holy Mother Roman church, or against the proper and free jurisdiction of the Holy Office.

Questioned whether he knew or had heard of anyone saying or doing anything that was, or seemed to be, contrary to the Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Doctrine taught and practiced by our Holy Mother Roman Church, or against the proper and free authority of the Holy Office.

Answered, that all he knew respecting this matter, was the following. About six weeks since, he met at his home, a man whom they called Juan, (his other name he did not know) and being in conversation with him, alone, by the fireside, the said person told him he had a book worth fifty ducats; that he knew how to cure all diseases simply by looking at the book, and that by the help of it he could even restore a dead person to life; that if people knew his great powers he should get to be very rich, and that he had been circumcised with wounds and blood like Jesus Christ; at all which the deponent laughed, and said to himself, ‘No doubt this man is crazy.’ The person referred to, worked at a blacksmith’s trade with Pablo Llaurador, and slept at the tavern of the deponent’s mother, while he was in town.

Answered that all he knew about this matter was the following. About six weeks ago, he met a man at his home whom they called Juan (he didn’t know his other name), and while talking to him alone by the fireplace, this man told him he had a book worth fifty ducats; that he could cure all diseases just by looking at the book, and that with its help, he could even bring a dead person back to life; that if people knew about his amazing powers, he would become very rich, and that he had been circumcised with wounds and blood like Jesus Christ; to all of which the deponent laughed and thought to himself, ‘No doubt this man is crazy.’ The person mentioned worked as a blacksmith with Pablo Llaurador and stayed at the deponent’s mother’s tavern while he was in town.

The deponent was then informed that besides what had already been related, this tribunal had received intimation that the said Juan had stated he had a book, which, being cast into a fire along with a crucifix, would remain unhurt, while the crucifix would be consumed; and that the Holy Virgin del Rosario had twice appeared to him, giving him her benediction and granting him the power to cure all diseases. He was admonished to bethink himself, and declare the whole truth.

The person giving the statement was then told that, in addition to what had already been mentioned, this court had learned that Juan claimed he had a book that, if thrown into a fire with a crucifix, would stay unharmed while the crucifix would burn. He also said that the Holy Virgin del Rosario had appeared to him twice, blessing him and giving him the ability to heal all diseases. He was urged to consider carefully and tell the whole truth.

Answered, that he never heard him utter such a thing, and knew of nothing more which the above person had said.

Answered that he had never heard him say anything like that and didn't know of anything else the person mentioned.

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. He further states that he does not make this declaration out of malice, and promises secrecy.

This is the truth according to the oath of the person giving testimony, and after being read in his presence, he confirms that it is recorded accurately. He also states that he is not making this declaration out of malice, and he promises to keep it confidential.

Signed— Jaume Carbonell Fadri.

Signed— Jaume Carbonell Fadri.

Before me—

In front of me—

Geronymo Juan Rossellon, Presbyter Not’y.

Geronymo Juan Rossellon, Presbyter Not’y.


RATIFICATION OF THE PRECEDING TESTIMONY.

Approval of the previous testimony.

In the town of Valles Campo, archbishopric of Tarragona, on Friday, the twentyfirst day of January, one thousand six hundred and thirtythree, in the afternoon, before Dr Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Presbyter Commissary of the Holy Office, in the said town of Valles, appeared Pedro Oriola, apothecary, an inhabitant of the said town, of age, as he stated, forty years or thereabout, and swore to declare the truth, in presence of the honest and religious persons, the Reverend Jaume Busquers and Pablo Fonolleda, Presbyter Benificiaries in the parochial church of the said town; which persons swore to observe secrecy.

In the town of Valles Campo, archbishopric of Tarragona, on Friday, January 21, 1633, in the afternoon, Dr. Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Presbyterian Commissary of the Holy Office, in the town of Valles, had Pedro Oriola, an apothecary and resident of the town, appear before him. Pedro stated he was around forty years old and swore to tell the truth in front of the honest and devout individuals, the Reverend Jaume Busquers and Pablo Fonolleda, Beneficiary Presbyter of the local parish church; these individuals also swore to keep everything confidential.

Questioned, if he remembered having gone before any justice, and given his deposition against any person concerning religious matters.

Questioned whether he remembered going before any judge and giving his statement against anyone regarding religious issues.

Answered, that he remembered having deposed before the said Dr Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary of the Holy Office, against a certain stranger, accompanied by a French doctor who had been imprisoned by the Holy Office. The substance of this deposition he repeated, and requested it to be read.

Answered that he remembered having testified before Dr. Pablo Pasqual Marquez, the Commissary of the Holy Office, against a certain stranger, alongside a French doctor who had been imprisoned by the Holy Office. He repeated the main points of this testimony and requested that it be read.

He was then informed that the Promotor Fiscal of the Holy Office presented him as a witness in an action which he had commenced against the above person, whose name it was ascertained was Juan Duran. He was ordered to give attention while his deposition was read, and if he found anything to alter or add, to do it in such a manner as to declare the whole truth, for his present declaration might be of service to the said Juan Duran. The deposition was then read de verbo ad verbum, which the said Pedro Oriola having heard and understood, he declared it to be his testimony, and that it was correctly recorded; that he had nothing to add or amend, but was willing to repeat the whole anew. He was again, under oath, enjoined secrecy, which he promised. The whole I sign for him.

He was then told that the Promoter of the Holy Office listed him as a witness in a case he had started against the person identified as Juan Duran. He was instructed to pay attention while his statement was read, and if he noticed anything he wanted to change or add, to do so in a way that would convey the whole truth, as his current statement could help Juan Duran. The statement was then read verbatim, and after hearing and understanding it, Pedro Oriola confirmed that it was his testimony and that it was recorded accurately; he had nothing to add or change, but he was willing to repeat everything if needed. Once again, under oath, he was instructed to keep it confidential, which he agreed to. I sign on his behalf.

Pedro Oriola, Apothecary.

Pedro Oriola, Pharmacist.

Before me—

In front of me—

Geronymo Juan Rossellon, Presbyter Notary
of the Holy Office
.

Geronimo Juan Rossellon, Notary Priest of the Holy Office.

[Here follows, in the original, the ratification in the same manner of all the other testimony.]

[Here follows, in the original, the confirmation in the same way of all the other evidence.]


In the town of Valles, on the day, month, and year above specified, before the said Commissary, appeared, according to summons, and swore formally to declare the truth, a person calling himself Juan Llaurador, blacksmith, an inhabitant of the said town, of age, as he stated, twentyone years, or thereabout.

In the town of Valles, on the specified date, a person named Juan Llaurador, a blacksmith and resident of the town, appeared before the Commissary as summoned and formally swore to tell the truth. He stated he was around twenty-one years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was summoned to appear.

Answered, that he neither knew nor conjectured.

Answered that he neither knew nor guessed.

Questioned, if he knew or had heard that any person had said aught which was, or appeared to be contrary to our holy Catholic Faith, and Evangelical Doctrine professed and taught by the holy Mother Roman Catholic Church, or against the proper and free jurisdiction of the Holy Office.

Questioned whether he knew or had heard that anyone had said anything that was, or seemed to be, against our holy Catholic Faith and the Evangelical Doctrine taught by the holy Mother Roman Catholic Church, or against the proper and free authority of the Holy Office.

Answered, that on a certain day, shortly before the feast of All Saints, Pablo Vicens came to his house, where his father, Pablo Llaurador, himself, and an apprentice were at work, with another person, whose name deponent did not know, but noticed that he spoke hardly a word. These persons being together, the said Pablo Vicens observed that he was astonished and grieved that there existed a man who could say he had a book, which, being thrown into a fire with an image of Christ, the book would be saved, and the Christ burnt. Upon which he was answered by the person abovementioned, who called himself Juan Duran, and was a native of the city of Manresa, that he was the man whom he meant, but that his assertion was only that the Christ would be consumed before the prayer contained in the book, if the Christ were not consecrated. At this they all reprimanded him, and declared that a simple representation of Christ crucified was more powerful than his book or prayer. The said Juan Duran, being thus contradicted and reproved by every one, was silent, and left the place. The deponent also heard the said Juan Duran say, in conversation, that he knew more than the doctors; that the Virgin, Our Lady del Rosario had appeared to him and given him her benediction, and that by her assistance he could cure better than the doctors, and do anything better than other persons. The deponent also heard Jayme Carbonell say, that Juan Duran had declared, in his presence, that he was next to God. He has also heard Juan Duran read or recite out of a little book, as large as the hand, at which all the family laughed. The said book the deponent has seen.

Answered that on a certain day, shortly before the feast of All Saints, Pablo Vicens came to his house, where his father, Pablo Llaurador, himself, and an apprentice were working, along with another person whose name the deponent did not know but noticed that he hardly spoke a word. These people being together, Pablo Vicens remarked that he was shocked and saddened that there was a man who claimed he had a book that, if thrown into a fire with an image of Christ, the book would survive while the image would burn. To this, the previously mentioned person, who identified himself as Juan Duran and was from the city of Manresa, responded that he was the man he referred to, but his claim was only that the image of Christ would be consumed before the prayer in the book, if the image were not consecrated. At this, everyone criticized him and stated that a simple representation of Christ crucified was more powerful than his book or the prayer. Juan Duran, being contradicted and rebuked by everyone, fell silent and left the place. The deponent also heard Juan Duran say in conversation that he knew more than the doctors; that the Virgin, Our Lady del Rosario, had appeared to him and given him her blessing, and that with her help he could heal better than the doctors and do anything better than others. The deponent also heard Jayme Carbonell say that Juan Duran had claimed, in his presence, that he was next to God. He has also heard Juan Duran read or recite from a little book, about the size of a hand, which made the whole family laugh. The deponent has seen that book.

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the deponent, and being read in his presence, is declared by him to be faithfully recorded. He further states that he does not make this declaration out of malice, and promises secrecy. Being unable to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in his name.

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the person giving the statement, and being read in his presence, he confirms that it has been recorded accurately. He also states that he is not making this declaration out of spite and promises to keep it confidential. Unable to write, I, the said Commissary, sign on his behalf.

Dr Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Dr. Pablo Pasqual Marquez, Commissary.

Before me—

In front of me—

Geronymo Juan Rossellon, Presbyter Not’y
of the Holy Office
.

Geronimo Juan Rossellon, Priest of the Holy Office.


CALIFICACION.[15]

RATING.[15]

A certain person, native of this principality, has stated, in conversation, two or three times, that he possessed a book containing a prayer of such efficacy, that if the book were thrown into a fire along with a crucifix, this last would be consumed before the book; which assertion being repeated by him with great earnestness, he was reproved for it, and told among other things, that if the Inquisition knew it, he would be punished, which silenced him after some time. The abovementioned book he exhibited several times.

A local person from this principality has mentioned in conversation, a few times, that he has a book with a prayer so powerful that if you throw the book into a fire along with a crucifix, the crucifix would burn up before the book would. He repeated this claim with such conviction that he was warned about it and told that if the Inquisition found out, he would face consequences, which eventually quieted him down. He showed the book several times.

2d. The same person declared on another occasion, that he was very skilful in curing disorders; that the Holy Virgin del Rosario had appeared to him and empowered him to heal diseases, and given him her benediction.

2d. The same person stated on another occasion that he was very skilled at curing ailments; that the Holy Virgin del Rosario had appeared to him, empowered him to heal illnesses, and given him her blessing.

3d. The same person on another occasion declared that he had a book which he would not sell for fifty ducats, as by merely looking at it he could cure any disease, and even restore a dead person to life; that if people knew his great powers, he should grow very rich; and that he was circumcised with wounds and blood like Jesus Christ.

3d. On another occasion, the same person claimed he had a book that he wouldn't sell for fifty ducats, because just by looking at it, he could cure any illness and even bring someone back to life. He said that if people knew about his incredible abilities, he would become very wealthy, and that he was marked with wounds and blood just like Jesus Christ.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the tenth day of December, one thousand six hundred and thirtytwo, being present at the afternoon audience, the Inquisitors, Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta, Father Vincente Navarro, Father Martin Perez and Geronymo Vidal, Jesuits and Calificadores of this Holy Office,—and having examined the above propositions, declared, unanimously, that the

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on December 10, 1632, during the afternoon meeting, the Inquisitors, Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, Father Vicente Navarro, Father Martin Perez, and Geronymo Vidal, Jesuits and Assessors of this Holy Office,—having reviewed the aforementioned propositions, declared, unanimously, that the

1st, is a superstitious compact with the devil, and the comparison of the book to the figure of Christ a blasphemy; the

1st, it's a superstitious deal with the devil, and comparing the book to the figure of Christ is blasphemous; the

2d, vain and superstitious; and the

2d, vain and superstitious; and the

3d, is a superstitious imposture; and the assertion of being circumcised, one which creates suspicions of enmity to our Holy Faith.

3d, is a superstitious deception; and claiming to be circumcised raises suspicions of hostility towards our Holy Faith.

Vicente Navarro, Jesuit.

Martin Perez, Jesuit and Lecturer
in Theology
.

Geronymo Vidal, Jesuit.

Vicente Navarro, Jesuit.

Martin Perez, Jesuit and Theology Lecturer.

Geronimo Vidal, Jesuit.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.


FIRST AUDIENCE.

FIRST AUDIENCE.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the tenth day of January, one thousand six hundred and thirtythree, the Inquisitor, Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner, being at his morning audience, ordered to be brought from the secret prison, a certain person, who, on his appearance, was formally sworn to declare the truth in this audience and all others, till the conclusion of his trial, and to keep secret whatever he might see or hear, and everything which should befall him, concerning his trial.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on January 10, 1633, the Inquisitor, Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner, during his morning session, ordered a certain individual to be brought from the secret prison. When this person appeared, they were formally sworn to tell the truth in this session and all others until the end of their trial, and to keep confidential everything they might see or hear, as well as anything that happened regarding their trial.

Questioned, what was his name, birthplace, age, occupation, and the date of his imprisonment.

Questioned about his name, birthplace, age, occupation, and the date of his imprisonment.

Answered, that his name was Juan Duran, a native of the city of Manresa, in the bishopric of Vique, of age, thirtyone years, or thereabout, by trade a blacksmith and farrier, and that on the day of the Innocents, he was arrested, and put in the prison of the Holy Office.

Answered that his name was Juan Duran, a native of the city of Manresa, in the bishopric of Vique, about thirty-one years old, working as a blacksmith and farrier, and that on the Day of the Innocents, he was arrested and taken to the prison of the Holy Office.

Questioned, who was his father, and wife; who were his grandfathers and uncles, paternal and maternal; his brothers and children; what were their birthplaces, residences, occupations, &c.

Questioned about who his father and wife were; who his grandfathers and uncles, both paternal and maternal, were; who his brothers and children were; what their birthplaces, places of residence, occupations, etc. were.

Answered, [Here follows a long account, in reply to the above queries.]

Answered, [Below is a detailed response to the questions above.]

Questioned, of what lineage and stock were his ancestors, and collateral relatives; and if they, or any one of them, or himself, had ever been imprisoned, put under penance, absolved, or condemned by the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Questioned about the background and heritage of his ancestors and relatives, and whether any of them, or he himself, had ever been imprisoned, punished, forgiven, or condemned by the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Answered, that they were all old Christians of pure blood, and that he had never heard or understood that any one of them had been imprisoned, put under penance, absolved, or condemned by the Holy Office of the Inquisition; that he had never been imprisoned by the Holy Office till the present occasion.

Answered that they were all long-time Christians of pure descent and that he had never heard or understood that any of them had been imprisoned, punished, forgiven, or condemned by the Holy Office of the Inquisition; that he had never been imprisoned by the Holy Office until now.

Questioned, if he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, and made it a practice to attend mass, go to confession, and communicate, at the times fixed by the Holy Mother Church.

Questioned whether he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, and if he routinely attended mass, went to confession, and took communion at the times set by the Holy Mother Church.

Answered, that he was a Christian, and was baptized, according as he had heard from his parents, in the cathedral church of Manresa, but did not know the name of the bishop who confirmed him; that he made it a practice to hear mass, confess, and commune, at the times prescribed by the holy Mother Church, and that his last confession was in the town of Valles Campo de Tarragona, in the month of October last, on the day of Our Lady del Rosario of the fleet of Don John of Austria, which confession was made to a Carmelite friar, of the convent of that city, whose name he did not know; that he received the holy sacrament from the hands of the same Friar; that he had also confessed and received the sacrament during the Lent of the last year, in the church of Igualada, before a priest belonging there, whose name he did not know; and that he had a certificate to this effect in his possession, when he was taken to prison.

He responded that he was a Christian and was baptized, as he had heard from his parents, in the Manresa cathedral, but he didn't know the name of the bishop who confirmed him. He made it a habit to attend mass, confess, and take communion at the times set by the Holy Mother Church, and his last confession was in the town of Valles Campo de Tarragona in October, on the day of Our Lady del Rosario of the fleet of Don John of Austria. He confessed to a Carmelite friar from the convent in that city, whose name he didn’t know, and received the holy sacrament from the same friar. He also confessed and received the sacrament during Lent last year at the church of Igualada, before a priest from there, whose name he didn’t know. He had a certificate confirming this that he kept with him when he was taken to prison.

Here he crossed himself, repeated the Paternoster, Ave Maria, and Credo in Latin, the Salve Regina, the ten commandments, the seven deadly sins, and the general confession in Catalan, all correctly, and declared he knew nothing more of the christian doctrine.

Here he crossed himself, said the Our Father, Hail Mary, and the Creed in Latin, the Hail Holy Queen, the Ten Commandments, the seven deadly sins, and the general confession in Catalan, all correctly, and stated that he didn’t know anything else about Christian doctrine.

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

Questioned whether he could read or write, or if he had ever studied any science or field.

Answered, that he could read, but badly, having taught himself. That he had never studied any art, and could not write.

Answered that he could read, but poorly, having taught himself. That he had never studied any art and could not write.

Questioned, if he had ever been out of the kingdom of Arragon, and with what persons.

Questioned if he had ever left the kingdom of Aragon, and who he had been with.

Answered, that he had once visited the kingdom of Granada, but not in company with any person; and that he had never had communication with people of suspicious faith.

Answered that he had once visited the kingdom of Granada, but not with anyone else; and that he had never communicated with people of questionable beliefs.

Questioned, what were the events of his life.

Questioned about the events of his life.

Answered, that he was born in the city of Manresa, as aforesaid, and brought up in the house of his father, till the age of sixteen years, when he was sent to the town of Igualada, to Maestre Ando, a blacksmith and farrier, with whom he staid four months, learning his trade; that he afterwards resided in several places in Catalonia, and then visited Arragon and Granada, as above stated, made no long stay, but returned hither about two years ago; that lately he had been dwelling in the village of Pont de Armenteria, Campo de Tarragona, where he was seized by the Holy Office and brought to prison.

He stated that he was born in the city of Manresa, as mentioned earlier, and raised in his father's house until he was sixteen. At that age, he was sent to the town of Igualada to apprentice with Maestre Ando, a blacksmith and farrier, where he stayed for four months to learn the trade. Afterward, he lived in several places in Catalonia, then traveled to Aragon and Granada, as noted above. He didn't stay long before returning here about two years ago. Recently, he had been living in the village of Pont de Armenteria, Campo de Tarragona, when he was arrested by the Holy Office and taken to prison.

Questioned, if he knew or conjectured the cause of his being arrested and confined in the prison of the Holy Office.

Questioned about whether he knew or guessed the reason for his arrest and confinement in the prison of the Holy Office.

Answered, that he knew not, nor could conjecture, unless it was for this; he had often cured persons of fevers and other disorders, with rosemary water, flor vitæ, rue, &c., which art he had learned from God and the holy Mary our Lady, from whom he had received a particular gift for this purpose.

Answered that he didn’t know and couldn’t guess, unless it was for this reason: he had often cured people of fevers and other illnesses with rosemary water, flor vitæ, rue, etc., a skill he had learned from God and the holy Mary, our Lady, from whom he had received a special gift for this purpose.

Questioned, in what manner, and at what time he had received this gift.

Questioned about how and when he received this gift.

Answered, that he had received it at two years of age, having been born with a mole on his neck and two others on the left hip; that he had been sick in his youth for ten years or more with great lameness, and had entreated God and the Virgin to restore him to health, and grant him the power to cure others, that he might in this way earn his living.

Answered that he received it at the age of two, having been born with a mole on his neck and two more on his left hip; that he had been ill in his youth for over ten years with severe lameness, and had begged God and the Virgin to heal him and give him the ability to heal others, so he could make a living this way.

Questioned, what reason he had for believing that God and our Lady had given him the above power.

Questioned about why he believed that God and Our Lady had given him the power mentioned above.

Answered, that he was led to believe it from the good success which had accompanied his attempts to perform the abovementioned cures, which had been effected in the case of many persons whose names he did not remember, and from whom he had never received any pay but what they gave him out of charity; that if on the above account any testimony had been given against him, he supposed this to be the cause of his imprisonment by the Holy Office, although he was not conscious of ever having committed any offence against our Lord, nor knew any other reason for his being imprisoned.

He explained that he believed it was true because of the successful results he had achieved while trying to perform the cures mentioned earlier. These cures had helped many people whose names he couldn’t recall, and he had only received donations from them out of kindness. If any testimony had been given against him for this reason, he thought it might be the reason for his imprisonment by the Holy Office. However, he was not aware of having done anything wrong in the eyes of the Lord and didn’t know of any other reason for his imprisonment.

The prisoner was then informed that in this Holy Office it was not customary to imprison any person without sufficient information that he had committed, or seen committed, some act which was, or appeared to be contrary to our holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical doctrine, which is taught and professed by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church, or against the proper and free jurisdiction of the Holy Office; for which reason he was to understand that it was in consequence of some such information that he had been apprehended, and on this account he was exhorted on the part of God our Lord and his glorious and blessed mother, the Virgin Mary, to bethink himself well, and confess the whole truth. Whereupon he was remanded to prison.

The prisoner was then told that in this Holy Office, it wasn't usual to imprison someone without enough evidence that he had committed or witnessed an act that was, or seemed to be, against our holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical teachings, which are upheld by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church, or against the rightful authority of the Holy Office. For this reason, he needed to understand that it was based on some such information that he had been arrested, and on this account, he was urged on behalf of God our Lord and his glorious and blessed mother, the Virgin Mary, to reflect carefully and confess the whole truth. After that, he was sent back to prison.


SECOND AUDIENCE.

SECOND AUDIENCE.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the eleventh day of January, one thousand six hundred and thirtythree, the Inquisitor, Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner being at his morning audience, ordered the above Juan Duran to be brought out of prison; which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on January 11, 1633, the Inquisitor, Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner, during his morning audience, ordered that Juan Duran be brought out of prison. Once that was done and the prisoner was present, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything relating to his affair, which he was bound to state according to his conscience.

Questioned about whether he remembered anything related to his affair, which he felt obligated to disclose according to his conscience.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing more to add.

The prisoner was then informed, that he had been already in a former audience exhorted in the name of our Lord, and his glorious and blessed mother, the Virgin Mary, to bethink himself well, and unburthen his conscience by declaring the whole truth respecting all which he had done, said, seen, or heard, offensive against God, or contrary in reality or appearance to his Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Doctrine, taught and professed by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church, or against the proper and free jurisdiction of the Holy Office, without testifying anything false. By following this direction, he would demean himself like a true Catholic Christian, and would have his trial despatched with all possible brevity and mercy; but if not, justice should be executed upon him.

The prisoner was then informed that he had already been urged in a previous meeting, in the name of our Lord and his glorious and blessed mother, the Virgin Mary, to think carefully and clear his conscience by revealing the whole truth about everything he had done, seen, or heard that was against God or contrary, in reality or appearance, to his Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Doctrine taught and upheld by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church, or against the rightful and independent authority of the Holy Office, without giving any false testimony. By following this advice, he would act like a true Catholic Christian, and his trial would be handled with as much speed and mercy as possible; but if he did not, justice would be carried out against him.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say. He was then admonished and remanded to prison.

Answered that he had nothing more to say. He was then warned and sent back to prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.


THIRD AUDIENCE.

THIRD AUDIENCE.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twelfth day of January, one thousand six hundred and thirtythree, the Inquisitors, Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner, and Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta, being at their morning audience, ordered the aforesaid Juan Duran, to be brought out of prison; which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on January 12, 1633, the Inquisitors, Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner and Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, during their morning session, ordered that Juan Duran be brought out of prison; once this was done, and the prisoner was present, he was

Questioned, if he remembered anything relating to his affair, which he was bound by his conscience to declare.

Questioned about whether he recalled anything related to his affair, which he felt he had to admit.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

The prisoner was then informed, &c. [The whole repeated as above.]

The prisoner was then informed, etc. [The whole repeated as above.]

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

He was then informed that the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office had an accusation to bring against him, before which he would do well to declare the whole truth, and unburthen his conscience, otherwise the Promoter Fiscal would appear and proceed to his trial.

He was then told that the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office had an accusation to make against him, and it would be wise for him to tell the whole truth and clear his conscience; otherwise, the Promoter Fiscal would come and move forward with his trial.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing more to add.

Straightway appeared Dr Francisco Gregorio, Promotor Fiscal of this Holy Office, and declared that he presented an accusation, signed with his name, against the said Juan Duran, taking an oath that he did not present the same through malice. The accusation was as follows:—

Straight away, Dr. Francisco Gregorio, the Promoter of this Holy Office, came forward and stated that he was presenting a signed accusation against Juan Duran, swearing that he was not doing so out of malice. The accusation was as follows:—

ACCUSATION.

Accusation.

I, Dr Francisco Gregorio, Fiscal of this Holy Office, appear before your Excellencies, and accuse criminally, Juan Duran, blacksmith, a native of the city of Manresa, attached to the secret prison of this Inquisition, and now present; inasmuch as the said person, being a baptized and confirmed Christian, and in the enjoyment of all the rights and immunities which such persons do and ought to enjoy, not having the fear of God before his eyes, but disregarding his own conscience and the justice administered by your Excellencies, has committed offences against our Holy Catholic Faith, by uttering superstitious and blasphemous speeches, and compacting with the devil, in the manner following.

I, Dr. Francisco Gregorio, prosecutor of this Holy Office, stand before you, your Excellencies, to formally accuse Juan Duran, a blacksmith from the city of Manresa, who is currently in the secret prison of this Inquisition. This individual, being a baptized and confirmed Christian and entitled to all the rights and protections that such individuals should have, has shown no fear of God, disregarding his own conscience and the justice upheld by your Excellencies. He has committed offenses against our Holy Catholic Faith by making superstitious and blasphemous statements and engaging with the devil in the following ways.

1. A few days before the feast of All Saints last, in a certain part of the town of Valles, in presence of certain persons, the said Duran declared, two or three times, that he possessed a book containing a prayer, of such efficacy, that if it were thrown into a fire along with a crucifix, the book would be preserved, and the crucifix consumed.

1. A few days before last year's All Saints' Day, in a certain part of the town of Valles, in presence of some people, Duran said multiple times that he had a book with a prayer so powerful that if it were thrown into a fire with a crucifix, the book would survive, while the crucifix would be burned.

2d. In the same place and on the same occasion, the persons abovementioned hearing the said Duran repeat with much earnestness the above assertion, reproved him, and advised him to give over saying such things, as they were scandalous, and, if known to the Inquisition, would bring some punishment upon him; whereupon he again repeated it, and declared that he had said it and would say it again, thus remaining in his obstinacy and error.

2d. In the same place and at the same time, the people mentioned above heard Duran repeat his statement with great sincerity. They scolded him and urged him to stop saying such things because they were scandalous and, if the Inquisition found out, he could face punishment. Despite this, he repeated it again and asserted that he had said it and would say it again, staying stubborn and mistaken.

3d. About three months since, in the town of Valles, the said prisoner being in conversation with a certain person, told him that he knew how to cure all disorders; that he had a book worth fifty ducats, as by merely looking at it he could cure any disease, and even restore the dead to life; and, moreover, that if people knew his great gifts he should become very rich.

3d. About three months ago, in the town of Valles, the prisoner was talking to someone and claimed that he knew how to heal any ailment. He said he owned a book worth fifty ducats, which allowed him to cure any illness just by looking at it, and even bring the dead back to life. He also mentioned that if people were aware of his incredible abilities, he would become very wealthy.

4th. The said Duran declared, in the same place, at the same time, and to the same person, that he, the said Duran, had been circumcised with blood and wounds, like Jesus Christ, from which it is presumed that he has turned Jew.

4th. The said Duran declared, in the same place, at the same time, and to the same person, that he, the said Duran, had been circumcised with blood and wounds, like Jesus Christ, from which it is presumed that he has turned Jew.

5th. In consequence of the abovementioned cures, he has been in the habit of uttering forbidden and diabolical invocations, especially that of St Cyprian, which he has had in a small book, about his person; and it is believed that the cures he has performed have been executed by his diabolical arts and the league he has made with the devil.

5th. As a result of the aforementioned cures, he has developed a habit of reciting forbidden and sinister invocations, especially that of St Cyprian, which he keeps in a small book on him; and it is believed that the cures he has performed have been achieved through his dark arts and the pact he has made with the devil.

6th. He has boasted, on many occasions, before certain persons, that God and the Holy Virgin had given him his power of curing; that the Virgin del Rosario had twice appeared to him, granted him the faculty of healing, and given him her benediction; all which assertions he has made to cover his villanies.

6th. He has bragged, on many occasions, in front of certain people, that God and the Holy Virgin gave him his healing powers; that the Virgin of the Rosary appeared to him twice, granted him the ability to heal, and gave him her blessing; all of which claims he has made to hide his wrongdoings.

7th. From the above it is to be presumed that the said prisoner has uttered many other superstitious and blasphemous speeches, and done many other things by the help of the devil, with whom he holds a particular intimacy; also that he is knowing to the commission by others of many such crimes, the whole of which he has maliciously concealed, and though advised by your Excellencies to declare the truth, has not done it, but has committed perjury.

7th. Based on the above, it can be assumed that the mentioned prisoner has made numerous other superstitious and blasphemous statements and has carried out many other acts with the help of the devil, with whom he has a close relationship; also, that he is aware of others committing many such crimes, all of which he has maliciously hidden, and despite being advised by your Excellencies to tell the truth, he has not done so and has committed perjury.

For which reasons, I entreat that your Excellencies will receive my relation for true, or such part thereof as shall suffice for the ends of justice in a definitive sentence, and declare the accusation fully proved, and the said Juan Duran guilty of the commission of the said crimes, imposing upon him the heaviest punishments denounced against such offences, and executing them upon his person and goods for a penalty to himself, and an example to others; and also that he be put to the torture if this be found necessary, and that the torture 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.

For these reasons, I ask that you all accept my account as true, or at least the part that is necessary for a fair judgment, and declare the charges fully proven, finding Juan Duran guilty of the crimes mentioned. He should face the harshest penalties prescribed for such offenses, applied to him personally and to his property as a punishment for him and a warning to others. Additionally, if necessary, he should be subjected to torture, with the torture repeated until he reveals the complete truth about himself and others. I solemnly swear that I am not making this accusation out of spite, but solely to achieve justice.

Dr Francisco Gregorio.

Dr. Francisco Gregorio.

The above accusation having been presented and read, the said Juan Duran was formally sworn to declare the truth, and answer to the same, article by article, which he did in the manner following.

The above accusation was presented and read, and Juan Duran was officially sworn in to tell the truth and respond to each article, which he did in the following manner.

To the head of the accusation, he answered that he was the same Juan Duran whom the Fiscal accused, but that he had committed no offence against the Holy Catholic Faith, nor been guilty of any blasphemies or superstitions beyond what he had confessed.

To the main accusation, he replied that he was indeed the same Juan Duran that the prosecutor accused, but stated that he had committed no offense against the Holy Catholic Faith, nor had he been guilty of any blasphemies or superstitions beyond what he had already confessed.

To the first article he answered, that he confessed what was contained therein; that he uttered the words specified, in the town of Valles at the inn of La Cerdaña, and that the book referred to was the one found upon him, with the invocation of St Cyprian and which was now exhibited; but that he had made the assertion abovementioned from mere ignorance and simplicity, not believing it himself; which confession he made with tears and begging for pardon.

To the first article, he replied that he admitted to the contents of it; that he said the specified words in the town of Valles at the La Cerdaña inn, and that the book in question was the one found on him, containing the invocation of St. Cyprian, which was now shown; but that he had made the above statement out of ignorance and naivety, not truly believing it himself; he made this confession in tears and asking for forgiveness.

To the second article, he answered, that it was true, but that he did not remember repeating the assertion after he had been reproved for it.

To the second article, he replied that it was true, but he didn’t remember repeating the claim after being scolded for it.

To the third article, he answered that it was true, and that the book alluded to was the one now exhibited; but that he never believed that he could raise the dead to life by the help of it.

To the third article, he replied that it was true, and that the book mentioned was the one currently shown; but that he never believed he could bring the dead back to life with its help.

To the fourth article, he answered that it was true, but that he was not circumcised, nor was he a Jew.

To the fourth article, he replied that it was true, but he was not circumcised, nor was he a Jew.

To the fifth article, he answered that he had used the invocation of St Cyprian on several occasions in cures, without knowing that it was forbidden, but did it from pure ignorance. He denied that he had any league with the devil.

To the fifth article, he replied that he had called on St. Cyprian in various healing situations, without realizing it was prohibited, but he did so out of sheer ignorance. He denied having any connection with the devil.

To the sixth article, he answered that it was true, and that he had made some such boasts, on the following account; about fifteen years since, he was sick of lethargy, when our Lady del Rosario appeared to him, clothed in white, at the sight of which he was cured. The Virgin, however, did not tell him that he should possess the power to cure all diseases, and whether she gave him her benediction or not, he could not tell.

To the sixth article, he replied that it was true, and that he had made some claims for this reason; about fifteen years ago, he was suffering from lethargy when Our Lady of the Rosary appeared to him, dressed in white, and he was healed. However, the Virgin did not inform him that he would have the power to cure all illnesses, and he couldn’t say whether she blessed him or not.

To the seventh article, he answered that he had never said or done any of the things charged upon him, save those confessed above, nor knew of any such which had been done by others.

To the seventh article, he replied that he had never said or done any of the things accused against him, except for those admitted above, nor did he know of any similar actions performed by others.

To the conclusion of the accusation he answered that he had stated the whole truth; and even if he were put to the torture, could say nothing more. He ended by begging to have mercy shown him. The above being read in his presence is declared by him to be correctly recorded, and as he cannot write, I, the Inquisitor sign this.

To wrap up the accusation, he said that he had told the whole truth; and even if he were tortured, he couldn't say anything more. He ended by pleading for mercy. After the above was read in his presence, he confirmed that it was recorded correctly, and since he can't write, I, the Inquisitor, sign this.

Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner.

Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

The above Inquisitors then ordered the said Juan Duran to be furnished with a copy of the accusation, that he might within three days make arrangements for his defence, with the help of one of the advocates for the prisoners of the Holy Office. The prisoner made choice of Father Geronymo Vidal, Jesuit, for this purpose, who was forthwith ordered to be summoned; whereupon the audience closed, and the prisoner, having been admonished, was remanded to prison.

The Inquisitors mentioned above then instructed that Juan Duran be given a copy of the accusation so that he could prepare his defense within three days, with the assistance of one of the advocates for the prisoners of the Holy Office. He chose Father Geronymo Vidal, a Jesuit, for this purpose, and he was immediately ordered to be summoned. After this, the audience concluded, and the prisoner, having been advised, was sent back to prison.

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE TO COMMUNICATE THE ACCUSATION AND EVIDENCE.

AUDIENCE TO PRESENT THE ACCUSATION AND EVIDENCE.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twelfth day of January, one thousand six hundred and thirtythree, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta being at his morning audience, ordered the aforesaid Juan Duran to be brought out of prison, which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on January 12, 1633, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, was holding his morning audience when he ordered that Juan Duran be brought out of prison. Once this was done and the prisoner was present, he was

Questioned, if he recollected anything relating to his affair which he was bound to divulge, agreeably to his conscience.

Questioned if he remembered anything about his situation that he was obligated to share, according to his conscience.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

He was then informed that Father Geronymo Vidal, whom he had chosen for his advocate, was present, that he might communicate with him and prepare for his defence. The said Father Vidal then swore in verbo sacerdotis to defend faithfully and diligently the said Juan Duran, in the present trial, so far as justice would permit, to inform him if his cause was not defensible, to do everything which a good advocate is bound to do, and to keep the whole matter secret.

He was then told that Father Geronymo Vidal, whom he had picked as his lawyer, was there, and he could talk to him and get ready for his defense. Father Vidal then promised to defend Juan Duran faithfully and diligently in this trial, as far as justice allowed, to inform him if his case wasn’t defensible, to do everything a good lawyer is supposed to do, and to keep everything confidential.

The confessions of the said Juan Duran were then read, with the accusation against him, and his answers thereto, and the advocate conferred with the prisoner respecting his case, advised him to confess the whole truth, without uttering false testimony either against himself or others, and, if he were guilty, to beg pardon, by doing which, he would experience mercy. The prisoner stated that he had declared the truth as appeared by his confessions, and beyond what was therein contained denied the accusation, on which account he begged to be set at liberty.

The confessions of Juan Duran were then read, along with the accusations against him and his responses. The lawyer talked to the prisoner about his situation, advising him to confess the whole truth without giving false testimony about himself or others. He suggested that if Juan was guilty, he should ask for forgiveness, as doing so would bring him mercy. The prisoner insisted that he had told the truth as shown in his confessions and denied the charges beyond what was stated, which is why he requested to be released.

The Inquisitor then declared that definite trial should be now had, and both parties bring their proofs salvo jure impertinentium et non admittendorum, according to the style of the Holy Office, and the Promotor Fiscal gave notice that he reproduced the testimony of the witnesses which had been already recorded. This testimony he requested might be examined, and also that all other necessary investigations might be made, and the testimony afterwards published; whereupon the prisoner was admonished, and remanded to prison.

The Inquisitor then announced that a formal trial should now take place, with both parties presenting their evidence salvo jure impertinentium et non admittendorum, following the procedures of the Holy Office. The Promotor Fiscal informed everyone that he was resubmitting the testimony of the witnesses that had already been recorded. He requested that this testimony be reviewed, along with any other necessary investigations, and that the testimony be published afterward. The prisoner was then warned and sent back to prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE FOR PUBLICATION.

TARGET AUDIENCE.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentyninth day of January one thousand six hundred and thirtythree, the Inquisitors, Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner and Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta, being at their morning audience, ordered the aforesaid Juan Duran to be brought from prison, which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on January 29, 1633, the Inquisitors, Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner and Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, during their morning session, ordered that Juan Duran be brought from prison. Once that was done and the prisoner was present, he was

Questioned, if he recollected anything relating to his affair which he was bound in conscience to divulge.

Questioned if he remembered anything about his affair that he felt obligated to reveal.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

He was then informed that the Fiscal of this Holy Office had demanded publication of the testimony against him, before which it would be well for him to bethink himself and declare the entire truth; by doing which, his trial would be despatched with all brevity and mercy.

He was then informed that the prosecutor of this Holy Office had requested the release of the testimony against him, and it would be wise for him to reflect and reveal the whole truth; by doing so, his trial would be handled with speed and leniency.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to say.

Straightway appeared the said Francisco Gregorio, Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office, and requested publication of the testimony against the said Juan Duran, according to the style of the Holy Office. The said Inquisitors then ordered the publication to be made, concealing the names of the witnesses, and other circumstances which might tend to discover their persons, according to the orders and style of the Holy Office.

Straight away, the mentioned Francisco Gregorio, the Prosecutor of this Holy Office, appeared and asked for the testimony against Juan Duran to be published, following the procedures of the Holy Office. The Inquisitors then ordered the publication to occur, keeping the witnesses' names and any details that could reveal their identities confidential, in accordance with the protocols and practices of the Holy Office.

PUBLICATION OF THE TESTIMONY.

PUBLISHING THE TESTIMONY.

A certain witness sworn and qualified in the proper time and manner, declares, &c. [Here follows the substance of the deposition of Pedro Oriola, as already given:]

A witness who was properly sworn in and qualified states, &c. [Here follows the substance of the deposition of Pedro Oriola, as already given:]

Another witness, &c. [In this manner, a summary of all the testimony is given.] * * *

Another witness, etc. [In this way, a summary of all the testimony is provided.] * * *

The publication being accomplished, the said Juan Duran was sworn to declare the truth in answer to the above testimony, article by article. [Here follow the answers of the prisoner to the several specifications, which do not differ materially from the answers to the accusation already given.]

The publication being completed, Juan Duran was sworn to tell the truth in response to the above testimony, article by article. [Here follow the answers of the prisoner to the various specifications, which do not differ significantly from the answers to the accusation already provided.]

A copy of the above publication was ordered to be given the prisoner, that he might, with the assistance of his counsel, prepare for his defence. Father Vidal, the prisoner’s advocate, was then summoned, and conferred with the prisoner respecting his trial, when the audience closed, and the prisoner, being admonished, was remanded to prison.

A copy of the above publication was ordered to be given to the prisoner, so he could, with the help of his lawyer, prepare for his defense. Father Vidal, the prisoner’s lawyer, was then called in and discussed the trial with the prisoner before the session ended, and the prisoner, having been cautioned, was sent back to jail.

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE FOR THE PRISONER’S DEFENCE.

AUDIENCE FOR THE DEFENSE OF THE PRISONER.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentyninth day of January, one thousand six hundred and thirtythree, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta being at his afternoon audience, ordered the said Juan Duran to be brought from prison, which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on January 29th, 1633, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, during his afternoon session, ordered that Juan Duran be brought from prison. Once this was done and the prisoner was present, he was

Questioned, if he recollected anything relative to his affair, which he was bound in conscience to divulge.

Questioned if he remembered anything about his situation that he felt he needed to share.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

He was then informed that Father Geronymo Vidal was present, who had drawn up his defence, and that he might confer with him; the above advocate then read to the prisoner a writing which the prisoner accepted, and declared that he made a formal presentation of the same. The defence was as follows:—

He was then told that Father Geronymo Vidal was there, who had prepared his defense, and that he could speak with him; the above advocate then read a document to the prisoner, which the prisoner acknowledged and stated that he was formally submitting it. The defense was as follows:—

Although Juan Duran, inhabitant of Manresa, in the archbishopric of Vique, has no necessity for a defence, on account of his full confession and declaration of the truth respecting the matter of the Fiscal’s accusation, yet for greater security in his defence, he offers the following.

Although Juan Duran, a resident of Manresa in the archbishopric of Vique, doesn't need a defense because he fully confessed and stated the truth regarding the Fiscal’s accusation, he still presents the following for added security in his defense.

1st. That he is ignorant, and uttered the assertions of which he is accused, without knowing that they were heavy offences against our Lord, for which he is extremely grieved, and begs pardon with tears, both of God and this Holy Tribunal, having spoken out of mere vanity, things which were not true.

1st. That he is unaware and made the statements he’s being accused of without realizing they were serious offenses against our Lord, for which he is deeply saddened and asks for forgiveness with tears, both from God and this Holy Tribunal, having spoken out of sheer vanity about things that weren't true.

2d. That he has fully confessed; and as to what is stated by one witness against him, that he declared himself to be the God of the country, and by another, that he affirmed he was next to God, that these testimonies are so extravagant that they ought not to be regarded; that he is very penitent for his offences against our Lord, and begs correction and instruction, with all humility.

2d. He has fully confessed; and regarding what one witness claims he said—that he declared himself to be the God of the country—and what another witness states—that he asserted he was next to God—these testimonies are so outrageous that they shouldn’t be taken seriously. He feels very remorseful for his sins against our Lord and asks for guidance and correction with complete humility.

3d. That he is descended from old Christians, and is a good Christian himself, having set a good example wherever he has resided, living by his labor, hearing mass and sermons; that he knows the prayers, and in whatever he has failed, he has not offended wilfully; on all which accounts he concludes by supplicating the favor of your Excellency’s usual mercy.

3d. That he comes from a long line of Christians and considers himself a good Christian, having set a positive example wherever he has lived, earning his living through hard work, attending mass and sermons; that he knows the prayers, and in any shortcomings, he has not acted with intention to offend; on all these grounds, he concludes by asking for your Excellency’s usual mercy.

Geronymo Vidal.

Geronymo Vidal.

The Inquisitors then ordered the above to be notified to the Fiscal of this Holy Office; whereupon the audience closed, and the prisoner was remanded to prison.

The Inquisitors then instructed that the above be communicated to the Fiscal of this Holy Office; following that, the audience concluded, and the prisoner was sent back to jail.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

SENTENCE.

SENTENCE.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the tenth day of February, one thousand six hundred and thirtythree, at the afternoon audience for the determination of causes, present, the Inquisitors, Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner and Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta, and, on the part of the archbishopric of Tarragona and bishopric of Urgel, Don Ramon de Queralt. Having examined the proceedings of the cause against Juan Duran, blacksmith, native of Manresa, and now in the secret prison of this Holy Office; ordered, unanimously, that the said person attend at an Auto de Fe, if any one should shortly happen, and if not, that he proceed to some church designated by this Tribunal, in the manner of a penitent, and with the insignia of a necromancer, that his sentence be there read to him, and a mass be said; that he make an abjuration de levi,[16] and be banished from the city of Manresa, and town of Valles, the places where he transgressed, for four leagues roundabout, during the space of four years; and that if he infringe this order, he suffer double the above penalty.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on February 10, 1633, during the afternoon session to determine cases, the Inquisitors, Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner and Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, along with Don Ramon de Queralt from the archbishopric of Tarragona and the bishopric of Urgel, were present. After reviewing the case against Juan Duran, a blacksmith from Manresa, who is currently in the secret prison of this Holy Office, they unanimously ordered that he attend an Auto de Fe if one occurs soon. If not, he is to go to a church designated by this Tribunal, as a penitent, wearing the insignia of a necromancer, where his sentence will be read to him, and a mass will be held. He must make an abjuration de levi,[16] and be banished from the city of Manresa and the town of Valles, the places where he committed his offenses, for a radius of four leagues for a period of four years. If he violates this order, he will face double the penalties stated.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez..

Miguel Rodriguez..


In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the fifth day of March, one thousand six hundred and thirtythree, the Inquisitors, Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner, and Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta being at their morning audience, ordered the said Juan Duran to be brought from prison, which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on March 5, 1633, the Inquisitors, Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner and Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, were holding their morning audience. They ordered that Juan Duran be brought from prison. Once that was done and the prisoner was present, he was

Questioned, &c.

Questioned, etc.

Answered, that he had nothing to declare in discharge of his conscience, either respecting his own affair, or with respect to aught that had been done or said in the prisons of this Holy Office, or against the dignity, authority, or secrets of its ministers, or respecting the custody of the prisoners therein; that he had not witnessed any communication carried on among them, or knew that any one had spoken to another, or to any one without; that he carried no communication from them to any one, and that the Alcayde and Steward have faithfully discharged their duties.

Answered that he had nothing to declare for the sake of his conscience, either about his own situation or about anything that had happened or been said in the prisons of this Holy Office, or against the dignity, authority, or secrets of its officials, or regarding the treatment of the prisoners there; that he had not seen any interactions among them, nor did he know if anyone had talked to another, or to anyone outside; that he had not relayed any messages from them to anyone, and that the Alcayde and Steward had faithfully fulfilled their responsibilities.

He was then commanded by virtue of the oath which he had taken, and under penalty of complete excommunication, to observe perfect secrecy in relation to all which had befallen him, and all which he had seen, heard, learned, or understood while in prison, and not to divulge the same, in any shape; all which he promised.

He was then ordered, due to the oath he had taken and under the threat of total excommunication, to keep complete secrecy about everything that had happened to him and all that he had seen, heard, learned, or understood while in prison, and not to share any of it in any form; and he agreed to do so.

Dr Bernardo Luis Cotoner.

Dr. Bernardo Luis Cotoner.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

TRIAL OF LEONARDO PHELIPE,

FOR LUTHERANISM.

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

I, the undersigned Secretary, who, in the absence of the Fiscal of this Holy Office, exercise his duties, appear before your Excellency, and declare, that, from the information which I now present, it appears, and is manifest that Phelippe Leonart, a needlemaker, and a Frenchman by birth, now resident in the city of Tarragona, is a Lutheran heretic, commonly swearing, and denying God and the Saints, ridiculing the Holy Sacraments of the Church, never confessing himself, for which he has been declared excommunicated, and committing other crimes.

I, the undersigned Secretary, who, in the absence of the Treasurer of this Holy Office, perform his duties, come before your Excellency and state that, based on the information I present now, it is clear that Phelippe Leonart, a needlemaker and a Frenchman by birth, currently living in the city of Tarragona, is a Lutheran heretic. He regularly swears, denies God and the Saints, mocks the Holy Sacraments of the Church, and never confesses, for which he has been declared excommunicated, along with committing other offenses.

On which account, I request that your Excellency will order him to be arrested and confined in the secret prison, in order that the ends of justice may be accomplished.

On that note, I ask that your Excellency will have him arrested and placed in the secret prison so that justice can be served.

Mattheo Magre, Sec’y.

Mattheo Magre, Secretary.

In the city of Tarragona, on the fifteenth day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, appeared voluntarily Tecla Leonarda, wife of Felipe Leonart, needlemaker, a Frenchman by birth, and inhabitant of this city of Tarragona, of age, as she stated, fifty years, or thereabout. She made the following declaration.

In the city of Tarragona, on April 15, 1637, Tecla Leonarda, the wife of Felipe Leonart, a needle maker originally from France and a resident of Tarragona, voluntarily appeared and stated that she was about fifty years old. She then made the following declaration.

‘Señor Commissary, I am the wife of Felipe Leonart, needlemaker, a Frenchman, and have been married to him about twenty years. I cannot learn that during all this time he has confessed himself once, unless compelled to do it during Lent. He has many times been declared excommunicated for not confessing, and for neglecting to comply with the precepts of the church. He formerly lived in Valencia, in the Calle de la Mar, Parish of St Tomas. He never confessed himself here, and was reminded of his neglect by the Rector. Upon being rebuked by me and his son, and advised to confess, he broke out into blasphemies against God and the Saints, with such violence that he appeared more like a demoniac than anything else. It being suggested to him that God did not prosper him because he did not attend mass, nor wear a rosary, nor hear sermons, nor confess, but swore, and blasphemed, and that if the Holy Inquisition knew of this he would be apprehended, he replied that the devil must help him; that he did not care for me nor the Inquisition, that he would not confess, and that God gave him nothing which the devil would give. In particular, last Passion Week his son carried him to the Jesuits to confess; but, on finding to what place he was conducting him, the said Felipe abandoned him and refused to confess, greatly offending his son and the confessor. He has given so many proofs of not being a Christian, that many of his apprentices have left him, declaring that they would not live in a house where God was not venerated and worshipped.’

‘Mr. Commissary, I am the wife of Felipe Leonart, a needle maker from France, and we’ve been married for about twenty years. I can’t find any record of him confessing even once during this time, unless he was forced to during Lent. He has been declared excommunicated multiple times for not confessing and for neglecting the church’s rules. He used to live in Valencia, on Calle de la Mar, in the Parish of St. Tomas. He never confessed while living here, despite reminders from the Rector. When I and our son urged him to confess, he erupted into blasphemy against God and the Saints with such aggression that he seemed more possessed than anything else. When it was suggested to him that God doesn’t bless him because he doesn’t attend mass, wear a rosary, listen to sermons, or confess, but instead swears and curses, and that the Holy Inquisition would apprehend him if they knew, he answered that the devil must be helping him; that he didn’t care about me or the Inquisition, that he wouldn’t confess, and that God gave him nothing that the devil would. Specifically, last Passion Week, his son took him to the Jesuits to confess; however, upon realizing where he was being taken, Felipe abandoned his son and refused to confess, greatly upsetting both his son and the confessor. He has shown so many signs of not being a Christian that many of his apprentices have left him, stating they wouldn’t live in a place where God isn’t honored and worshiped.’

The deponent further declared that on making a full confession last Lent, of all the sins of her husband and her own negligence in denouncing him, she was directed to give information of the whole to this Holy Office, and was refused absolution unless she complied, and that there were many more things to be told which she could not recollect, as they happened so long since.

The witness also stated that after fully confessing last Lent about all her husband's sins and her own failure to report him, she was instructed to share everything with this Holy Office, and she was denied forgiveness unless she did so. She added that there were many more things to mention that she couldn’t remember since they happened so long ago.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent, and is stated by her not out of malice, but solely to discharge her conscience. It was read to her, and declared to be faithfully recorded. She promised secrecy, and I, the Commissary, sign for her.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the person giving their statement, and it's said by her not out of spite, but just to clear her conscience. It was read to her and confirmed to be accurately recorded. She promised to keep it confidential, and I, the Commissary, am signing for her.

The Canon,
Juan Ferrer, Commissary.

The Canon,
Juan Ferrer, Commissary.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Gibert, Not’y of Tarragona.

Miguel Gibert, Notary of Tarragona.


In the city of Tarragona, on the day, month, and year above specified, before the abovementioned Commissary of this Holy Office, appeared, according to summons, and swore formally to declare the truth, a woman calling herself Maria Leonart, wife of Joseph Leonart, an inhabitant of this city of Tarragona, of age, as she stated, sixteen years, or thereabout.

In the city of Tarragona, on the date specified above, before the aforementioned Commissioner of this Holy Office, a woman named Maria Leonart, wife of Joseph Leonart, who lives in this city of Tarragona, came in response to a summons and formally swore to tell the truth, stating that she is around sixteen years old.

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

Questioned if she knew why she was summoned to appear.

Answered, that she supposed it to be for the purpose of making inquiry respecting the life and conduct of Felipe Leonart, her father-in-law. She was married about four months ago to Joseph Leonart, his son, and what she knew of the matter in question was this;—the said Felipe Leonart was accustomed to swear a thousand times a day, with and without cause. He would swear ‘by the head of God;’ and the deponent had heard him declare, many times, that all his good luck happened in the name of the devil, and not of God. The deponent had asked him why he did not confess, observing that to kneel at the foot of a confessor, and relate his sins, was to relate them to God; and the said Felipe Leonart replied that this was all babble; that he believed just as he pleased. As to hearing mass, he would take it upon trust; that the priests said in their sermons just what they chose, and that they did nothing but trouble the common folks. Some one asking him if he was not afraid of dying, he replied that if he knew that there was a tavern in the other world, he should wish to die immediately. The deponent advised him to confess himself, as otherwise he would be declared excommunicated. He replied that he would not confess, and in fact did not, the last Lent, although his son attempted to carry him to confession. His common oaths were ‘the sacred host,’ ‘the hours of God,’ ‘the head of God.’ His common helpers were the devils; saying, ‘by the help of the devil I will do this,’ &c. So that during the whole space of four months the deponent has never known a word or action of a Christian to proceed from him, never kneeling when the signal is given, nor taking off his cap, nor leaving off eating, although requested to do so by his wife and the deponent.

Answered that she thought it was to inquire about the life and behavior of Felipe Leonart, her father-in-law. She got married about four months ago to Joseph Leonart, his son, and what she knew about the situation was this: Felipe Leonart would swear a thousand times a day, with or without reason. He would swear “by the head of God,” and she had heard him say many times that all his good luck came from the devil, not from God. She had asked him why he didn’t confess, pointing out that kneeling before a confessor and admitting his sins was basically telling them to God; Felipe Leonart replied that it was all nonsense and that he believed whatever he wanted. As for attending mass, he would take that at face value; he claimed that priests just said whatever suited them and only caused trouble for ordinary people. When someone asked him if he was afraid of dying, he responded that if he knew there was a tavern in the afterlife, he would want to die right away. She advised him to confess, warning that otherwise he would be declared excommunicated. He said he wouldn’t confess, and he didn’t during the last Lent, even though his son tried to take him to confession. His usual oaths were “the sacred host,” “the hours of God,” and “the head of God.” His usual allies were the devils, saying, “with the help of the devil, I’ll do this,” etc. For the entire four months, she never saw him act or speak like a Christian, never kneeling when the signal was given, never taking off his hat, nor stopping eating, even when his wife and she asked him to.

The above statement is not made from any but conscientious motives, and on being read, was declared by the deponent to be correctly recorded. She promised secrecy, and I, the said Commissary, sign for her.

The above statement is made purely out of sincere intentions, and after reading it, the deponent confirmed that it was accurately recorded. She agreed to keep it confidential, and I, the undersigned Commissary, sign on her behalf.

The Canon,
Juan Ferrer, Commissary.

The Canon,
Juan Ferrer, Commissioner.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Gibert, Not’y of Tarragona.

Miguel Gibert, Notary of Tarragona.


In the city of Tarragona, on the seventeenth day of the month abovementioned, and the same year, before the said Commissary of the Holy Office, appeared, according to summons, and swore formally to declare the truth, a man calling himself Joseph Leonart, an inhabitant of Tarragona, of age, as he stated, twenty years or thereabout.

In the city of Tarragona, on the seventeenth day of the mentioned month and the same year, before the Commissary of the Holy Office, a man named Joseph Leonart appeared, as summoned, and formally took an oath to tell the truth. He claimed to be a twenty-year-old resident of Tarragona.

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

Questioned whether he knew why he had been called to appear.

Answered, that he supposed it to be for the purpose of learning the bad conduct of Felipe Leonart, a Frenchman, and his father. For a number of years the deponent and his mother had concealed many heavy offences committed by him against the Holy Catholic Faith.

Answered, he believed it was meant to find out about the misconduct of Felipe Leonart, a Frenchman, and his father. For several years, he and his mother had hidden many serious offenses he had committed against the Holy Catholic Faith.

The said Felipe Leonart was a great swearer, saying ‘The head, soul, and body of Christ’ a million times every day, declaring that he did not fear God, the king, nor anybody; and that if he knew there was a tavern in the other world, he should not care if he were to die, although his body were burnt at Carraxet. Everything which succeeded well with him, he ascribed to the devil and not to God, saying, ‘The devil will give me food, for I do not want anything from God,’ and, ‘The devil will give me luck in this;’ so that his patron and helper in everything was the devil. He never confessed, and the last Lent the deponent attempted to carry him to the convent of St Francisco; but on perceiving that he was leading him to confession, he ran away from him. He declared it nonsense to relate one’s sins to a confessor, and that a man should tell of nothing but what he pleased. The deponent had never seen him more than once at mass. He wore no rosary, nor any sign of a Christian. He had been declared excommunicated for not complying with the precepts of the church, in this city, in Barcelona, and in Valencia. He declared that the preachers were troublers of the people. At one time, in Valencia, he went to bed after tiring himself with swearing, and told the family that a woman, a monkey, and a young man then in the house, had appeared to him in bed, scratched his face all over and thrown him down stairs. They found him at the foot of the stairs with his face scratched, and believed that this had been done by the devil, from his mentioning him so often. The deponent and his wife had advised him to remove his residence lest the Holy Inquisition should punish him; to which he answered that he did not care for the Inquisition. Finally, the said Felipe Leonart lead such a life that he appeared more like a Lutheran than a Christian.

The said Felipe Leonart was a huge swearer, saying "The head, soul, and body of Christ" a million times every day, claiming that he didn’t fear God, the king, or anyone; and that if he knew there was a bar in the afterlife, he wouldn't care if he died, even if his body was burned at Carraxet. Everything that went well for him, he credited to the devil and not to God, saying, "The devil will provide for me, because I don’t want anything from God," and "The devil will bring me luck in this;" so his patron and helper in everything was the devil. He never confessed, and last Lent the deponent tried to take him to the convent of St. Francisco; but when he realized he was being led to confession, he ran away. He thought it was ridiculous to tell a confessor about one’s sins, insisting that a person should only disclose what they wanted. The deponent had only seen him at mass once. He didn’t wear a rosary or any sign of being a Christian. He had been declared excommunicated for not following the church’s rules in this city, in Barcelona, and in Valencia. He said that preachers were a nuisance to the people. At one point, in Valencia, he went to bed after exhausting himself with swearing, and told the family that a woman, a monkey, and a young man who were in the house had appeared to him in bed, scratched his face all over, and thrown him down the stairs. They found him at the bottom of the stairs with his face scratched, and believed that the devil was responsible for it, given how often he mentioned him. The deponent and his wife had advised him to move away before the Holy Inquisition punished him; to which he replied that he didn't care about the Inquisition. Ultimately, Felipe Leonart led such a life that he seemed more like a Lutheran than a Christian.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent, who does not make this declaration out of malice or ill will against his father, but solely to discharge his conscience, and to obey the commands of his confessors. It having been read, he declared it to be correctly recorded, and signed his name.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the person giving the testimony, who is not making this statement out of spite or bad intention toward his father, but only to clear his conscience and follow the instructions of his confessors. After it was read, he stated that it was accurately recorded and signed his name.

Josef Lleonart.

Josef Lleonart.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Gibert, Not’y of Tarragona.

Miguel Gibert, Notary of Tarragona.

CALIFICACION.

RATING.

A person of ordinary rank, and of an infected nation has been declared, by persons living with him, to have confessed but once for twentytwo years, and at this time by compulsion. On many occasions he has been declared excommunicated for not complying with the precepts of the Church.

A person of ordinary status from an infected nation has been reported by those living with him to have confessed only once in twenty-two years, and this was done under duress. He has frequently been declared excommunicated for not following the Church's teachings.

The same witnesses, as they cannot perceive that he goes to confession, rebuke him for it, whereupon he abjures God and the Saints in such a manner that he appears possessed. He wears no rosary, does not hear mass, nor confess, and declares that the devil helps him. On being rebuked and threatened with a denunciation to the Inquisition, he speaks contemptuously of it, declares that he will not confess, and that God gives him nothing that the devil will give.

The same witnesses, unable to see that he's going to confession, criticize him for it. In response, he renounces God and the Saints so dramatically that he seems possessed. He doesn't wear a rosary, doesn’t attend mass, doesn’t confess, and claims that the devil assists him. When confronted and threatened with being reported to the Inquisition, he dismissively talks about it, states that he won’t confess, and insists that God doesn’t provide anything that the devil does.

Every day he swears by God without occasion, and affirms that all which happens well to him is done in the name of the devil and not of God. Being told to go to mass, he replied that he would take it upon trust; that the preachers said just what suited them; that he believed what he pleased; that they did nothing but make trouble; that he did not wish for anything from God which the devil could give him; and that it was nonsense to relate a man’s sins to a confessor, or anything more than what a man pleased. Wherever he has lived he has been excommunicated for not following the precepts of the Church.

Every day he swears by God without any reason and claims that everything good that happens to him is done in the name of the devil, not God. When he was told to go to mass, he said he would just take it on faith; that the preachers said what suited them; that he believed what he wanted; that they only caused trouble; that he didn’t want anything from God that the devil could give him; and that it was ridiculous to confess one’s sins to a priest, or to say anything more than what he felt like sharing. Wherever he has lived, he has been excommunicated for not following the Church’s teachings.

Some one asking him if he was not afraid of dying, he answered that he did not fear God, and that if he knew that there was a tavern in the other world, he should not regard dying immediately.

Somebody asked him if he was afraid of dying, and he replied that he didn't fear God, and that if he knew there was a bar in the afterlife, he wouldn't worry about dying right away.


In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the seventh day of May, one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta presiding sole in his morning audience, ordered the Calificadores of this Holy Tribunal, Father Maestro Onofre Ferrer, and Father Maestro Chrysostomo Bonamich, both Conventuals of this city to appear before him.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on May 7, 1637, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, presiding alone during his morning session, ordered the Calificadores of this Holy Tribunal, Father Maestro Onofre Ferrer, and Father Maestro Chrysostomo Bonamich, both Conventuals from this city, to come before him.

Having examined the propositions above specified, they declared unanimously that the above person is a scandalous, presumptuous blasphemer, and a formal heretic, who ought to be proceeded against.

Having reviewed the proposals mentioned above, they agreed without dissent that the individual in question is a disgraceful, arrogant blasphemer, and a confirmed heretic, who should face action.

Maestro Fr. Onofre Ferrer.
Maestro Fr. Chrysostomo Bonamich.

Maestro Fr. Onofre Ferrer.
Fr. Chrysostomo Bonamich, Maestro.

Before me—

In front of me—

Damian Fonolleda, Sec’y.

Damian Fonolleda, Secretary.


In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the seventh day of May, one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta presiding sole in his afternoon audience, having examined the information received by the Commissary of Tarragona against Phelipe Leonardo, needlemaker, a Frenchman, and an inhabitant of that city,—ordered, that this person be arrested and confined in the secret prison of this Holy Office to take his trial in form, and that his apprehension be intrusted to the Commissary of the abovementioned city, who shall transmit him from place to place and from the hands of one Familiar to another.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on May 7, 1637, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, presiding alone at his afternoon session, having reviewed the information received from the Commissary of Tarragona against Phelipe Leonardo, a needle maker from France and a resident of that city, ordered that this individual be arrested and placed in the secret prison of this Holy Office to undergo trial in the proper manner. He instructed that his apprehension be handled by the Commissary of the aforementioned city, who would transport him from one location to another, passing him from one Familiar to another.

Before me—

In front of me—

Damian Fonolleda, Sec’y.

Damian Fonolleda, Secretary.

FIRST AUDIENCE.

FIRST AUDIENCE.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentysecond day of May, one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta presiding sole in his morning audience, ordered to be brought out of prison, a person, who, on his appearance, was formally sworn to declare the truth, both on this occasion and in all the other audiences which may be held till the determination of his trial; also to preserve secrecy with respect to everything which he may see, hear, or understand, and everything which may take place respecting him.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on May 22, 1637, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, presiding alone in his morning session, ordered the release from prison of a person who, upon his appearance, was formally sworn to tell the truth, both today and in all future hearings until his trial is concluded; he was also required to keep confidential anything he might see, hear, or understand, as well as anything that might happen regarding him.

Questioned, his name, birthplace, residence, age, and occupation, and the time of his imprisonment by the Holy Office.

Questioned about his name, birthplace, residence, age, occupation, and the duration of his imprisonment by the Holy Office.

Answered, that his name was Leonardo Phelipe, needlemaker; that he was a Frenchman by birth, born in the village of Agullon in the bishopric of Genes; that he was about fortysix years of age, and that he was apprehended by the Holy Office on Sunday, the sixteenth of the present month.

Answered that his name was Leonardo Phelipe, a needlemaker; that he was French by birth, born in the village of Agullon in the bishopric of Genes; that he was about forty-six years old, and that he was taken into custody by the Holy Office on Sunday, the sixteenth of the current month.

Questioned, who was his father and mother, who were his grandfathers, uncles, paternal and maternal, wife, children, brothers, &c.

Questioned about his father and mother, grandfathers, uncles on both sides, wife, children, brothers, etc.

[Here follows the prisoner’s account.]

Here’s the prisoner’s account.

Questioned, of what race and stock were his ancestors and collateral relations, and whether any one of them, or he himself, had ever been put under penance or punished by the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Questioned about the race and background of his ancestors and relatives, and whether any of them, or he himself, had ever faced penance or punishment from the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Answered that they were French, and old Catholic Christians, of pure blood and lineage; that in the place of his birth there were no Lutherans; that none of the family had ever been contaminated with this heresy, and that none of them had ever been apprehended, punished, or put under penance by the Holy Office of the Inquisition, till the present occasion.

Answered that they were French, old Catholic Christians with pure blood and lineage; that in their birthplace there were no Lutherans; that none of the family had ever been influenced by this heresy, and that none of them had ever been caught, punished, or put under penance by the Holy Office of the Inquisition, until this current situation.

Questioned, if he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, heard mass, confessed, and took the sacrament at such times as the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church directed; at what time he made his last confession, and from whom he received the holy sacrament.

Questioned whether he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, attended mass, confessed, and took the sacrament as directed by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church; about when he made his last confession, and from whom he received the holy sacrament.

Answered, that he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, according to what he had been told by his parents, and that he recollected the fact of his confirmation by the bishop of Genes, on which occasion he gave him a slap in the face; that he attended mass, confessed, and took the sacrament when directed by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church; that the last time he confessed was at the festival of the Resurrection, the present year, in the convent of St Francisco, at Tarragona, to the Guardian or Sacristan; that he received the holy sacrament in the cathedral church from the hands of one of the curates, as could be shown by the certificate found upon him at the time of his imprisonment.

Answered that he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, as his parents had told him, and that he remembered his confirmation by the bishop of Genes, during which he received a slap in the face; that he attended mass, confessed, and took the sacrament when instructed by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church; that the last time he confessed was at the festival of the Resurrection this year, in the convent of St Francisco, at Tarragona, to the Guardian or Sacristan; that he received the holy sacrament in the cathedral church from one of the curates, as indicated by the certificate found on him at the time of his imprisonment.

Here the prisoner crossed himself in a clumsy manner, and could not repeat perfectly the words of the prœsignum crucis. He said the paternoster, ave Maria, and credo with much reverence, declaring that he did not know the salve regina. He repeated the ten commandments, and stated that he knew nothing more of the christian doctrine.

Here the prisoner awkwardly crossed himself and couldn't perfectly recite the words of the prœsignum crucis. He said the paternoster, ave Maria, and credo with great respect, admitting that he didn't know the salve regina. He recited the ten commandments and stated that he didn't know anything else about Christian doctrine.

Questioned, if he had visited any foreign countries since he came to Spain, or had any dealings with people suspected in the faith.

Questioned about whether he had traveled to any foreign countries since arriving in Spain, or if he had interacted with anyone suspected of heresy.

Answered, No.

No.

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

Questioned whether he could read and write, or if he had studied any science or subject.

Answered, that he could neither read nor write, nor had ever studied anything but his trade.

Answered that he could neither read nor write and had never studied anything except his trade.

Questioned, what were the events of his life.

Questioned about the events of his life.

Answered, that he was born, as already stated, in the village of Agullon, and brought up by his parents till thirteen years of age, without doing anything but eat and drink. On the death of his parents, he was left a destitute orphan, and came to Catalonia begging. He arrived at Barcelona, and lived three years as a servant with Maestre Gosart, needlemaker, after which he served various other persons in Barcelona for the space of more than eleven years. From this city he went to Tarragona, where he worked with Francisco Roca till he married the wife abovementioned, since which he has worked for himself without leaving Tarragona but once, when he staid about three months in Caragoca, at the end of which he returned home.

Answered that he was born, as already stated, in the village of Agullon, and raised by his parents until he was thirteen, only eating and drinking. After his parents died, he became a destitute orphan and came to Catalonia to beg. He arrived in Barcelona and lived for three years as a servant with Maestre Gosart, a needlemaker, after which he served various other people in Barcelona for over eleven years. From there, he went to Tarragona, where he worked with Francisco Roca until he married the aforementioned wife, since which time he has worked for himself without leaving Tarragona except for once, when he stayed in Caragoca for about three months, after which he returned home.

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

Questioned whether he knew or guessed why he had been summoned to appear.

Answered, that he neither knew nor conjectured anything, except that he was seized by the Holy Office while at work in his shop.

Answered that he didn’t know or guess anything, except that he was taken by the Holy Office while he was working in his shop.

The prisoner was then informed that in this Holy Office it was not customary to imprison any one without sufficient information that he had said or done, or witnessed the saying or doing by other persons, of something which was, or appeared to be contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law, taught and preached by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church, or against the free and just proceedings of the Holy Office, and on this account he must understand that he was imprisoned by reason of some such information; therefore he was exhorted, by his reverence for God our Lord and his glorious and blessed Mother the Virgin Mary, to bethink himself and declare the whole truth with respect to his own offences, and what he knew of others, without concealing anything or bearing false witness against any one, by which proceeding he would clear his conscience as a Catholic Christian, and save his soul, and that his trial should, in this case, be despatched with all brevity and mercy; otherwise justice should be executed.

The prisoner was informed that in this Holy Office, it wasn’t standard procedure to imprison someone without enough evidence that they had said or done, or witnessed others saying or doing something that went against our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law, as taught and preached by the Holy Mother Roman Catholic Church, or against the fair and proper workings of the Holy Office. Because of this, he needed to understand that he was imprisoned based on such information. Therefore, he was urged, out of reverence for God our Lord and his glorious and blessed Mother the Virgin Mary, to reflect and tell the whole truth regarding his own wrongdoings and what he knew about others, without hiding anything or bearing false witness against anyone. By doing so, he would clear his conscience as a Catholic Christian and save his soul, and his trial would be handled with all speed and mercy; otherwise, justice would be served.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

The declarations which he had made in this audience were then read and declared by him to be correctly recorded. He declared that they contained the truth, that he had nothing to alter in them, and if necessary was ready to repeat them anew. And having been admonished to bethink himself and declare the truth, he was remanded to prison. Not being able to write, I, the said Inquisitor, sign this.

The statements he made during this meeting were then read back to him, and he confirmed they were accurately recorded. He stated that they were true, that he had nothing to change, and if needed, he was ready to repeat them again. After being urged to reflect and tell the truth, he was sent back to prison. Since I, the Inquisitor, cannot write, I sign this.

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

SECOND AUDIENCE.

SECOND AUDIENCE.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentythird day of May, one thousand six hundred and thirtyseven, the Inquisitor, Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta presiding alone in his morning audience, ordered the abovementioned Leonardo Felipe to be brought out of prison, which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on May 23, 1637, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, presiding alone in his morning audience, ordered that the aforementioned Leonardo Felipe be brought out of prison. Once this was done and the prisoner was present, he was

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

Questioned about whether he remembered anything related to his affair that he was obligated by his oath to reveal.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

The prisoner was then told that he was aware he had in the preceding audience been exhorted by his reverence for God our Lord and his glorious and blessed Mother, &c.

The prisoner was then informed that he knew he had been urged in the previous meeting by his respect for God our Lord and his glorious and blessed Mother, etc.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

Whereupon he was admonished to bethink himself and remanded to prison.

Whereupon he was advised to think carefully and sent back to prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

THIRD AUDIENCE.

Third Audience.

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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on May 25, 1637, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, presiding alone at his morning audience, ordered that Leonardo Phelipe be brought out of prison; once that was done and the prisoner was present, he was

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

Questioned about whether he remembered anything regarding his affair that he was obligated to disclose according to his oath.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to say.

The prisoner was then told that he was aware he had in the preceding audiences been exhorted, &c.

The prisoner was then informed that he knew he had been urged in the previous meetings, etc.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

Whereupon the audience closed, and the prisoner having been admonished to bethink himself, was remanded to prison.

Whereupon the audience concluded, and the prisoner was reminded to reflect on himself, then was sent back to prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE FOR PRESENTING THE ACCUSATION.

AUDIENCE FOR PRESENTING THE ACCUSATION.

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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on May 25, 1637, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, presiding alone in his afternoon session, ordered that Leonardo Phelipe be brought out of prison; once this was done, and the prisoner was present, he was

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

Questioned if he remembered anything about his affair that he was required by his oath to reveal.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

He was then informed that the Promoter Fiscal of the Holy Office had an accusation to bring against him, and that it would be well for him, both as a means of discharging his conscience and despatching briefly his trial, to confess the whole truth before the accusation was presented, according as he had been previously exhorted, by which he would experience the mercy which the Holy Office extends towards all who confess freely; otherwise he was informed that the Fiscal would attend, and justice be executed.

He was then told that the Prosecutor of the Holy Office had an accusation against him, and that it would be wise for him, both to clear his conscience and to speed up his trial, to confess the whole truth before the accusation was brought forward, just as he had been advised before. By doing so, he would receive the mercy that the Holy Office offers to everyone who confesses willingly; otherwise, he was informed that the Prosecutor would be present, and justice would be served.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

Straightway appeared the Secretary, Damian Fonolleda, who, by reason of the absence of the Fiscal, and the indisposition of Mateo Magre, Secretary, took upon him that office. He presented an accusation signed by him against the said Leonardo Phelipe, making oath that he did not present the same out of malice.

Straightaway, the Secretary, Damian Fonolleda, appeared since the Fiscal was absent and Mateo Magre, the Secretary, was unwell. He took on that role and presented an accusation he signed against Leonardo Phelipe, swearing that he didn't make the accusation out of malice.

ACCUSATION.

ALLEGATION.

I, the Fiscal of this Holy Office, appear before your Excellency, and accuse criminally, Leonardo Phelipe, needlemaker, born in the village of Agullon, in the bishopric of Gens, kingdom of France, and an inhabitant of the city of Tarragona, attached to the secret prison of this Inquisition, and now present, inasmuch as he, being a baptized and confirmed Christian, and enjoying all the graces and immunities which such persons may and ought to enjoy, not having the fear of God, his own conscience, or the justice administered by your Excellency before his eyes, has committed offences against our Holy Catholic Faith, by blaspheming and denying God our Lord, seeking favor and help from devils, and doing other things in the manner following.

I, the Fiscal of this Holy Office, come before your Excellency to formally accuse Leonardo Phelipe, a needlemaker from the village of Agullon in the bishopric of Gens, France, and currently residing in the city of Tarragona, who is now present and detained in the secret prison of this Inquisition. As a baptized and confirmed Christian, enjoying all the rights and privileges that such individuals should have, he has shown a complete disregard for God, his own conscience, and the justice that your Excellency upholds. He has committed offenses against our Holy Catholic Faith by blaspheming and denying God our Lord, seeking help and support from devils, and engaging in other related actions.

1. He has many times been declared excommunicated in Barcelona, Tarragona, and other places, for not confessing in Lent according to his duty. And while he resided in the parish of St Thomas, in Valencia, he could not be persuaded to confess, although he received many admonitions to that effect from the rector of the said parish, thus remaining excommunicated, careless of the salvation of his soul.

1. He has often been declared excommunicated in Barcelona, Tarragona, and other places for failing to confess during Lent as required. While living in the parish of St. Thomas in Valencia, he could not be convinced to confess, despite receiving numerous warnings from the rector of that parish, thus remaining excommunicated and indifferent to the salvation of his soul.

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.

2. Certain people he knew criticized him for not confessing. In response, he cursed God and the Saints with such rage and hatred that he seemed possessed. He didn't wear a rosary. When someone threatened him with punishment from the Inquisition, he said he didn't care about the Inquisition and that he wouldn't confess; he also claimed that he didn't want anything from God that 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.

3. During Passion Week in the last Lent, someone was taking him to the Jesuits in the city of Tarragona for confession, out of kindness. Although he could have followed the requirement this time, he refused and ran out of the church, causing great shock to the confessor who was there to hear him, as well as to others present.

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.

4. He is used to denying God and swearing “by the head of God” and “the soul and body of Christ,” saying it many times a day. He also claims that his livelihood and everything he receives is in the name of the devil and not God. When someone criticized him for this, he said he believed what he wanted to and, as for attending mass on the required days, he would just take their word for it; the preachers said whatever they wanted and only served to upset 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.

5. He claims that he doesn't fear God, and that if he knew there was a bar in the afterlife, he wouldn't mind dying, even if his body was burned.

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.

6. I charge him with saying that a person shouldn’t confess their sins to a priest and that it’s ridiculous for someone to share anything other than what they want. Since this idea is supported by the false and condemned group of Martin Luther, and the defendant is from France, a country where this group is common, it’s reasonable to assume he is part of 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.

7. Furthermore, it’s assumed that the prisoner has committed many other offenses against our Holy Catholic Faith and has spoken other blasphemies and heretical remarks. He also knows that others have done the same, all of which he hides like a bad Christian. I plan to accuse him more formally. For now, I’m speaking in general terms, and even though he has been encouraged by your Excellency to tell the truth, he hasn’t done so and has committed perjury instead.

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.

For these reasons, I respectfully ask your Excellency to accept my charges as proven, or at least enough of them to serve justice in a final judgment, or any appropriate action that may be taken. I urge you to declare my accusations fully substantiated and to find Leonardo Phelipe guilty of the offenses mentioned above, sentencing him to the maximum legal penalties and enforcing those penalties against him and his belongings by turning him over to the secular justice system, as a punishment for him and a warning to others. Additionally, I request that if necessary, he may be subjected to torture, and that this be applied continually until he reveals the entire truth about 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.

And I officially swear that I’m not making this accusation out of spite, but solely to serve the purpose of justice, which I seek from you, Your Excellency.

Damian Fonolleda, Sec’y.

Damian Fonolleda, Secretary.


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.

The above accusation was presented and read, and Leonardo Phelipe was officially sworn to tell the truth in response. After it was read to him, 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 main accusation, he responded that he was indeed Leonardo Phelipe, the person the prosecutor accused, but he had not committed any offenses against our Holy Catholic Faith, nor had he denied our Lord, even though he had occasionally 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 first article, he replied that he had always confessed like other Christians, and in Valencia, he had not let a year go by without doing so, and that he had never been excommunicated for this reason.

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 second article, he replied that he denied it, as it wasn't true that he didn't have a rosary. He used one in his prison eleven times and now showed the same one in his hands, which I, the Secretary, can confirm.

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 third article, he replied that he denied it because it wasn't true; during that Passion Week, last Lent, he had confessed at the convent of St. Francisco in Tarragona. He followed the Church's teachings, as he said in his first hearing, and this could be confirmed by the confession certificate that was found on him when he was imprisoned.

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

To the fourth article he replied that he denied it because it wasn’t 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 fifth article, he replied that he denied it; that he had faith in God, and a heretic couldn't 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 sixth article, he replied that he denied it, saying it wasn't true, and he couldn't understand how such testimony could be presented 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 seventh article, he replied that he hadn't committed any offense against our Holy Catholic Faith, nor did he know of anyone else who had done so, and that he had told the whole truth and had not lied under oath.

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

To conclude the accusation, he replied that even if he were tortured, he couldn't say anything 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.

The above is the truth based on the prisoner's oath, and after being read, he confirmed that it was recorded accurately. Since I am unable to write, I, the Inquisitor, sign this.

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

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 the prisoner to be given a copy of the accusation so that he could respond to it on the third day with the help of one of the lawyers who represent cases in this Holy Office, specifically Dr. Francisco Magrinya, and the Rector of the Company of Jesus. He was allowed to choose one of these individuals and decided on Dr. Magrinya.

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

The Inquisitor then ordered him to be called in, and after the prisoner was advised to reflect on his situation, he was sent back to prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE TO COMMUNICATE THE ACCUSATION AND PROOF.

AUDIENCE TO PRESENT THE ACCUSATION AND EVIDENCE.

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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on May 29, 1637, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, presiding alone at his morning session, ordered the aforementioned Leonardo Phelipe to be brought out of prison; once that was done, he was

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

Questioned about whether he remembered anything related to his case that he was required by his oath to reveal.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

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.

He was then told that Dr. Francisco Magrinya was there, the advocate he had chosen, and that he could discuss his defense with him. Dr. Magrinya promised to defend Leonardo Phelipe properly and faithfully, as far as the law allowed, to let him know if his case was weak, to do everything a good advocate is expected to do, and to keep everything confidential.

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.

The prisoner’s confessions were then read, along with the accusations and his responses. The prisoner spoke with his lawyer, who advised him that the best way to clear his conscience and move his trial along was to be truthful without lying about himself or anyone else. If he was guilty, he should ask for forgiveness, which would lead to 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.

Answered that he had told the truth in his confessions and denied the accusation as far as it went beyond that. He requested to be released and treated kindly for what he had confessed. He stated that after publication of the testimony, he would present a more formal defense.

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 then instructed that this be communicated to the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office. In response, Mattheo Magre, the senior Secretary acting as Fiscal, stated that he accepted the confessions of Leonardo Phelipe only insofar as they supported the accusation, and rejected all other parts. He asked that the evidence be presented.

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 Inquisitor stated that the case should be judged definitively, and the evidence accepted salvo jure impertinentium et non admittendorum, according to the procedures of the Holy Office. This was communicated 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 Promoter Fiscal then said that he presented the evidence and testimonies against Leonardo Phelipe again, which had been received and recorded in the Holy Office. He asked that they be confirmed and verified appropriately, that all other necessary investigations be conducted, and that the testimony be made public.

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

The prisoner was urged to reflect and tell the truth, and was then sent back to prison, which I, the aforementioned Secretary, confirm.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE FOR PUBLICATION.

TARGET AUDIENCE.

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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on June 17, 1637, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, presiding alone in his morning audience, ordered the aforementioned Leonardo Phelipe to be brought out of prison; once that was done, he was

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

Questioned if he remembered anything about his affair, which he was obligated by his oath to reveal.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

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.

He was then informed that the Promoter of the Holy Office was about to request the publication of the testimony against him, and it would be wise for him to confess the whole truth, as this would allow his trial to be handled with speed and mercy.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing more to add.

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.

Straight away, the Secretary, Mattheo Magre, who acted as the Prosecutor, requested the publication of the testimony against Leonardo Phelipe in accordance with the procedures of the Holy Office. The Inquisitor then directed that the publication be carried out, ensuring that the names and other details of the witnesses that could reveal their identities were kept confidential, following the guidelines and procedures of the Holy Office.

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

[Here are the publication and the prisoner’s responses, matching what has already been provided.]

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.

The Inquisitor then instructed that he be provided with a copy of the above publication so that he could, with the help of his lawyer, respond to it on the third day. After being urged to reflect and tell the truth, he was sent back to prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE TO COMMUNICATE THE PUBLICATION.

AUDIENCE TO SHARE 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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on June 22, 1637, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, presiding alone in his morning session, ordered that Leonardo Phelipe be brought out of prison; which was done, he was

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

Questioned if he recalled anything about his affair that he was required by his oath to reveal.

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.’

Answered that because of the issues happening in his house, he had occasionally let slip some swear words, 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.

He was then told that Dr. Francisco Magrinya, his lawyer, was there, and he could talk to him about the publication and other aspects of his defense. The publication and the prisoner’s responses were then read to Dr. Francisco Magrinya, who created defense articles based on a document prepared by the Secretary. The audience then concluded, and the prisoner was reminded to reflect on his situation and was sent back to prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

AUDIENCE FOR THE DEFENCE.

DEFENSE AUDIENCE.

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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on June 25, 1637, the Inquisitor, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta, presiding alone in his morning audience, ordered that Leonardo Phelipe be taken out of prison; once that was done, he was

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

Questioned about whether he recalled anything related to his affair, which he was required by his oath to reveal.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

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.

He was then told that Dr. Francisco Magrinya, his lawyer, was there and had prepared his defense for him to review. Dr. Francisco Magrinya then read him some articles he had written in his favor, and after listening to them, the prisoner stated that he accepted them and asked for the witnesses listed in the margin to be examined, along with the other investigations mentioned.

DEFENCE.

DEFENSE.

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR

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:—

Although Bernardo Phelippe, a resident of the city of Tarragona, doesn't need any defense against the accusations from the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office, he wants to clearly demonstrate his innocence. He explicitly states that his remarks about the witnesses are not meant to harm or slander them, but only to defend himself, onere superflux probationis rejecto. He presents 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.

1. It’s not true that he has rejected, sworn against, or disrespected God, or spoken any other blasphemies, and that 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.

2. It’s not true that he hasn’t attended mass on the Sundays and holidays required, or that he hasn’t confessed and taken the sacrament every year, or that he’s been excommunicated for those reasons; that 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.

3. The witnesses testifying against him twist all his promises 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.

4. Even though he may have occasionally sworn ‘by the head of God,’ it was done in a moment of passion, and since the initial impulse is not inherently in a person, nothing bad can be blamed on 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.

5. In addition to this, the witnesses mentioned above are individual witnesses, disagree with each other, and aren’t trustworthy, 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.

6. The prisoner, even though he's French, is still a good Christian and has no questionable beliefs. He attends mass on Sundays and designated holidays, as many can confirm who have seen him; this 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.

7. He also confesses and takes communion every year at Easter, and at other times with the Guardian of the Convent of St. Francisco and the Sacristan, as evidenced by his certificate of confession given at last Lent, which he now presents as a testimonial only in his favor; this 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.

8. There's also the same reason to believe that he has confessed every Easter, as shown by the confession records 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.

9. Someone who tells one lie can't be trusted with anything else they say. The witnesses against the prisoner claimed that he never confessed over the year, was excommunicated, and was declared so for not following the rules, and that he didn’t have a rosary. However, all of this has been proven false by his certificate and the rosary that was found on him. For this reason, we can't believe them when they say he doesn’t attend mass, and that he swears and blasphemes; these things are true.

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.

10. The prisoner suspects that one of the witnesses testifying against him is a young man around twenty years old and a sworn enemy of the prisoner. This, along with the fact that he is a minor, should lead to his testimony being dismissed; and that 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.

11. The other witness's testimony should also be dismissed, as he believes this person to be his wife, who has a contentious relationship with him and harbors deep hostility toward him; and that 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.

12. The prisoner thinks that the reason for his current misfortune is that he gave his wife a serious beating on Easter, which is why she probably has turned her anger towards him and bribed the other witnesses; which is true.

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.

13. Joseph Lleonart, his son, carries the same hatred toward him because the prisoner pawned an anvil, which displeased his son; and that’s 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.

14. Bernardo Phelippe is known all over the city of Tarragona as an honest man and a good Christian. He attends mass at the church on the designated days with great punctuality, and he confesses and takes communion at the right times, as confirmed by his certificate; this is the truth.

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

15. Bernardo Phelippe has never been imprisoned or punished by this or any other court; that 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.

16. From all of this, it seems that Phelippe is not guilty of any of the charges against him and should be absolved and released from the prison where he is held, receiving mercy, which would also be a form of justice, or in any other better way that could be deemed appropriate by law, and the truth.

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

17. It states that all things and each individual matter are true, concerning which the law of the day and justice must be administered, and the truth.

F. Magrinya.

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.

The Inquisitor ordered the above to be added to the trial records and stated that he was prepared to conduct the necessary investigations. As a result, the prisoner, after being warned, was sent back to jail.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

TO THE CANON JOAN FERRER, COMMISSARY.

TO THE CANON JOAN FERRER, COMMISSIONER.

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—

Leonardo Phelipe, a needlemaker and resident of this city, is currently held in the secret prison of this Holy Office due to a case filed against him by Licentiate Don Andres Panyagua, the prosecutor of this Inquisition. In his defense, he has submitted the following articles or questions:

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.

1. That Leonardo Phelipe, although he is French, is a good Christian and not suspected of Lutheranism or any other heresy; as such, he attends mass every Sunday and on prescribed holidays, which can be proven 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.

2. That he also confesses and receives the sacrament every year, at Easter and other times, as shown by his certificate of confession received during last Lent, which he presents in his defense.

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.

3. That the wife of Leonardo Phelipe mistreats him and harbors deep resentment against him, and has put him in this situation because he physically assaulted her during the last Resurrection festival, which only intensified 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.

4. Joseph Leonardo, his son, feels the same hostility towards him after they had a disagreement because he pawned an anvil against his son's wishes. For this reason, he planned this action against the prisoner with his mother.

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.

5. Leonardo Phelipe is widely regarded in the city of Tarragona as an honest man and a good Christian, who regularly attends church to hear mass on designated days and participates in confession and takes communion at the appropriate 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.

Upon receiving this, you will gather information regarding the matters mentioned in the questions above, in support of Leonardo Phelipe, by examining the witnesses listed next to each item. This should be done in the presence of the Notary, following the necessary legal procedures and according to the printed format used by the commissioners. You will also obtain a copy of the church register mentioned in the second item. Once all of this is completed, you will send the sealed documents to us as quickly as possible.

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

For this task, we give you complete authority and responsibility in the proper manner. May God keep you safe.

Dr Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta.

The Inquisitor presiding alone.

The Inquisitor presiding solo.

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

Barcelona, June 25th, 1637.

Barcelona, June 25, 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.

In the city of Tarragona, on July 18, 1637, before the distinguished Juan Ferrer, Presbyter Canon of the Holy Church of Tarragona, Commissary of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, and by special commission from the most distinguished Inquisitors Apostolical of the Principality of Catalonia, a person who identified himself as Father Pablo Morer, Guardian of the Monastery and Convent of St. Francisco in Tarragona, appeared as summoned and formally swore to tell the truth. He stated that he was about forty-six years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was called to appear.

Answered, No.

No.

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

Questioned if anyone had tried to convince him to speak in support of any person locked up by the Holy Office.

Answered, No.

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.

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

Answered, that he knew neither of them.

Answered that he didn't know either 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.

He was then told that Felipe had named him as a witness in his defense for a case brought against him by the Fiscal of the Holy Office. He was instructed to pay attention while certain questions were asked and to tell 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.

To the second question, he replied that he didn't know anything about the issue being asked about, since he wasn't familiar with the person. To the last question, he stated that what he had said was true, and after it was read, he confirmed that it was recorded correctly. He promised to keep it confidential and signed his name.

Pablo Morer.

Pablo Morer.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Gibert, Not’y of Tarragona.

Miguel Gibert, Notary 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.

In the city of Tarragona, on the date mentioned above, before the esteemed Juan Ferrer, Presbyter, Commissary, etc., a person who called himself Father Nicholas Gil, from the convent of St. Francisco in this city, appeared as summoned and swore to tell the truth. He stated that he was about forty-four years old.

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

Questioned whether he knew or guessed the reason for being called to appear.

Answered, No.

No.

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

Questioned if anyone had tried to convince him to speak in favor of any person imprisoned by the Holy Office.

Answered, No.

Responded, 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.

Questioned whether he knew the Fiscal of the Holy Office or Leonardo Felipe, a needlemaker from this city, who is now imprisoned 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.

Answered that he didn't know the Fiscal, but he was acquainted with Leonardo Felipe and had done business 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.

He was then told that the aforementioned Leonardo Felipe was presenting him as a witness in a case filed against him by the mentioned Fiscal. He was instructed to pay attention while certain questions were asked and to tell 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.

To the second question, he replied that he remembered hearing the confession of Leonardo Felipe only once during last Lent, but he couldn’t recall if he issued 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

The above is the truth according to the oath of the person who gave the testimony, and after it was read, he stated that it was recorded correctly. He promised to keep it confidential and signed his name.

Pr. Nicola Gil.

Pr. Nicola Gil.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Gibert, Not’y Public of Tarragona.

Miguel Gibert, Notary 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.]

[Here are the statements in the same format as the previous ones, from various other witnesses who support the prisoner, concerning the claims he made in his defense.]

AUDIENCE FOR CONCLUDING THE TRIAL.

AUDIENCE FOR ENDING 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

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on June 27, 1637, the Inquisitors, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta and Licentiate Don Blas Alexandra de Lezaeta presiding over their afternoon session, ordered that the aforementioned Leonardo Phelipe be brought out of prison. Once that was done, he was

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

Questioned if he remembered anything he was required by his oath to disclose.

Answered, that he had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had nothing else to add.

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.

Dr. Francisco Magrinya, the prisoner’s lawyer, was present and was informed that the investigations he requested had been carried out. He was told that if he wanted the case to be decided, it could proceed, or if he wanted other actions taken, he should specify them, and everything allowed by justice would be addressed. Then, the said Leonardo Phelipe, , following his lawyer’s advice, stated that he was ready for a final decision and requested a lenient 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.

The Inquisitors then instructed that the same be communicated to the Promoter Fiscal of this Holy Office, so a conclusion could be reached on the third day. The prisoner was then returned to prison.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez.

Miguel Rodriguez.

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

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

Rodriguez.

Rodriguez

SENTENCE.

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,—

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on July 28, 1637, the inquisitors, Dr. Domingo Abbad y Huerta and Licentiate Don Blas Alexandre de Lezaeta, were presiding over their morning session (the Ordinary was not present because the Cabildo of Tarragona had failed to appoint someone to this role, even though they had been notified and the eight-day period had passed). They reviewed the case against Leonardo Phelipe, a Frenchman by birth, who worked as a needlemaker, was originally from the village of Agullon in the diocese of Genes, and now resided in the city of Tarragona, currently held in the secret prison of this Holy Office.—

Ordered, unanimously, that this trial, without any other sentence, be suspended, and remain as it is at present.

Ordered, unanimously, that this trial, without any other judgment, be paused, and remain as it currently is.

Before me—

In front of me—

Miguel Rodriguez, Sec’y.

Miguel Rodriguez, Secretary.

TRIAL OF DON ANTONIO ADORNO,

FOR NECROMANTICAL PRACTICES.

In the city of Valencia, on the thirteenth day of April, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, before Dr Lorenzo Ballester, Presbyter, Confessor to the secret prison of the Holy Office, and before the Extraordinary Commissary for this investigation, appeared voluntarily, and made oath to declare the truth, and preserve secrecy, a person calling himself Joaquim Gil, scrivener, residing in the house of Felipe Matheu in the Calle del Mar of this city, a native of Puebla de Arenoso, in this archbishopric, of age, as he stated, twentyfour years.

In the city of Valencia, on April 13, 1756, before Dr. Lorenzo Ballester, a priest and confessor to the secret prison of the Holy Office, and the Extraordinary Commissary for this investigation, a person identifying himself as Joaquim Gil, a scrivener living in Felipe Matheu's house on Calle del Mar in this city, originally from Puebla de Arenoso in this archbishopric, declared under oath that he would tell the truth and keep everything confidential. He stated he was twenty-four years old.

Questioned, why he had demanded an audience.

Questioned why he had requested a meeting.

Answered, that it was for the purpose of giving information to the Holy Office respecting a certain soldier of the regiment of Asturias in the garrison of this city. This person was called Don Antonio, and was by birth a Neapolitan, a robust, middle sized man, with a dark complexion, and about twentyfour or twentyfive years of age, which was all the description the deponent could give. On the evening of the eleventh of the present month, the deponent and the abovementioned Felipe Matheu were in company with five soldiers at the house of the said Matheu. Among these was the abovenamed Don Antonio, and this person declared in conversation with the deponent that he possessed the faculty of discovering the thief when a thing was stolen. This he had performed in the following manner. On a certain occasion one of his friends was lamenting the loss of some money which had been stolen from him, when he, the said Don Antonio, replied, that he would discover the thief. He then wrote the names of all the persons present upon separate pieces of paper, and threw them into the fire. Those which contained the names of the innocent were consumed, but the one containing that of the thief remained. Nobody was able to take this out of the fire except Don Antonio. The paper was kept from consuming by the power of the words Christo Señor Nuestro, uttered by him, and it was drawn out from among the coals by the help of this expression; ‘Ego sum. Factus est homo. Consummatum est.’ Besides this he knew another way of practising this divination; and this was to collect the ashes made by the papers, and rub them on the back of his hand, where they would leave marked the name of the thief. Furthermore he stated that he possessed another method of accomplishing this purpose, but this he did not explain.

Answered that it was to inform the Holy Office about a certain soldier from the Asturias regiment stationed in this city. This person was named Don Antonio, born in Naples, a sturdy, medium-sized man with a dark complexion, and around twenty-four or twenty-five years old, which was all the witness could provide. On the evening of the eleventh of this month, the witness and the aforementioned Felipe Matheu were with five soldiers at Matheu's house. Among them was Don Antonio, who told the witness during their conversation that he had the ability to discover a thief when something was stolen. He demonstrated this in the following way. One time, a friend of his was upset about some money that had been stolen from him, and Don Antonio claimed he could identify the thief. He wrote the names of everyone present on individual pieces of paper and tossed them into the fire. The papers with the innocent names burned up, but the one with the thief’s name remained intact. No one was able to retrieve it from the fire except Don Antonio. He kept the paper from burning by saying the words Christo Señor Nuestro, and he pulled it out from the ashes using the phrase; ‘Ego sum. Factus est homo. Consummatum est’. In addition, he mentioned another method of doing this divination, which involved collecting the ashes from the burned papers and rubbing them on the back of his hand, where they would reveal the name of the thief. Furthermore, he stated that he had another way to achieve this, but he didn’t explain it.

This conversation having been heard by the abovementioned Felipe Matheu, he rebuked Don Antonio, and this last replied that what he had done he would repeat even before the Inquisitors, or, if that was of any consequence, after communion, inasmuch as he used the words which had been uttered by Christ. Proceeding in the conversation with the deponent, he told him that he had some instruments in his pocket which were useful for many things. He then drew from his right pocket a paper folded up and containing two or three coils of something which the deponent did not see distinctly, on account of the darkness, but felt and handled them. The deponent asked Don Antonio where he had obtained the above knowledge. He replied that he had got it by studying a book of magic which he possessed; that he had learned from this the secret of making himself invisible, and also to render a man invulnerable to thrusts with a sword, a trial of which last he would make upon a dog or cat and show the efficacy of it. The deponent asked him if he knew any secrets relative to playing at ball. He answered that he did not remember any at present, but would make some researches and call upon the deponent at his house, when he would teach him a secret to gain the favor of the ladies. This was agreed to, and the deponent described the house to him. He offered him money if he would discover all his arts, which he did for the purpose of laying the whole before the Holy Office for the benefit of the Catholic Faith.

This conversation was overheard by Felipe Matheu, who scolded Don Antonio. Don Antonio responded that he would repeat what he had done even in front of the Inquisitors, or, if it mattered, after taking communion, since he was using the words spoken by Christ. Continuing the discussion with the witness, he mentioned that he had some tools in his pocket that were useful for many things. He then pulled out a folded piece of paper from his right pocket, which contained two or three coils of something the witness couldn't see clearly because it was dark, but he felt and handled them. The witness asked Don Antonio where he had learned this knowledge. He replied that he had studied a book of magic he owned, from which he learned the secret to making himself invisible, and also how to make a person invulnerable to sword thrusts, a test of which he would demonstrate on a dog or cat to show its effectiveness. The witness asked if he knew any secrets about playing ball. He said he didn’t remember any at the moment but would do some research and visit the witness at his house to teach him a secret to win the favor of women. This was agreed upon, and the witness described his house to him. He offered Don Antonio money if he would reveal all his arts, intending to present everything to the Holy Office for the good of the Catholic Faith.

Questioned, if any other persons heard the above conversation, or knew anything relating to it.

Questioned if anyone else heard the conversation above or knew anything about it.

Answered, that the abovementioned Felipe Matheu heard a great part of it, as also Joseph Masquef, scrivener, who lived in the same house, Joseph Jordan, a servant, and two Alguacils, a father and son, who were in the company, and whose names he did not know.

Answered that the above-mentioned Felipe Matheu heard most of it, as did Joseph Masquef, the scribe, who lived in the same house, Joseph Jordan, a servant, and two alguacils, a father and son, who were present and whose names he did not know.

Questioned, if he had made this declaration out of any malice which he bore to the said Don Antonio.

Questioned if he had made this statement out of any malice toward Don Antonio.

Answered, that he had made it solely from the impulse of his conscience, and because he believed the above things were contrary to our Holy Faith. He affirmed that the whole was the truth, promised secrecy, and signed his name.

Answered that he had done it purely out of a sense of duty, and because he believed the things mentioned above went against our Holy Faith. He declared that everything was true, promised to keep it confidential, and signed his name.

Joaquim Gil.

Joaquim Gil.

Before me—

In front of me—

Dr Joseph Montes,
Presbyter Notary of the Holy Office.

Dr. Joe Montes,
Presbyter Notary of the Holy Office.


In the city of Valencia, on the seventeenth day of April, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, before Dr Lorenzo Ballester, Confessor to the secret prison of the Holy Office and Extraordinary Commissary for this investigation, appeared voluntarily and made oath to declare the truth, and preserve secrecy, Joaquim Gil, &c.

In the city of Valencia, on April 17, 1756, before Dr. Lorenzo Ballester, Confessor to the secret prison of the Holy Office and Extraordinary Commissary for this investigation, Joaquim Gil voluntarily appeared and swore to tell the truth and keep it confidential, etc.

Questioned, why he had demanded an audience.

Questioned why he had asked for a meeting.

Answered, on account of the declaration made by him before the present Commissary respecting a certain Don Antonio, of the company of Don Jorge Duran, in the regiment of Asturias. This man, in addition to the peculiarities of his person before described, had a scar above his left eyebrow, apparently the effect of a wound, and a dint of the size of a filbert in the top of his forehead, with black and rather short hair. He came to the house of the deponent on the fifteenth of this month according to agreement, and after some conversation gave him a strip of parchment, about a finger’s breadth wide and above a span long, this was slit through the middle lengthwise and had written on it the following words. ‘Ego + sum. Exe + homo consummatum est. Ego Juaginus Aprecor Dominum Nostri Jesu Christi in vitam eternam seculi seculorum libera me de omnibus rebus de ignis cautius et omnia instrumenta hominum detentat me hac die hac nocte custote rege et cuberna me Amen. This was rolled up in lead with a small piece of bone, and Don Antonio told him to wear it in the shape of a cross, next to his skin, near the heart, and it would shield him effectually from all thrusts with a sword. It was exhibited by the deponent.

Answered, regarding the statement he made before the current Commissary about a certain Don Antonio, who was with Don Jorge Duran in the Asturias regiment. This man, besides his previously described unique features, had a scar above his left eyebrow, likely from a wound, and a dent the size of a hazelnut on the top of his forehead, along with black, rather short hair. He visited the deponent's house on the fifteenth of this month as agreed, and after some conversation, gave him a strip of parchment, about an inch wide and more than a span long, which was slit down the middle lengthwise and had the following words written on it. ‘Ego + sum. Exe + homo consummatum est. Ego Juaginus Aprecor Dominum Nostri Jesu Christi in vitam eternam seculi seculorum libera me de omnibus rebus de ignis cautius et omnia instrumenta hominum detentat me hac die hac nocte custote rege et cuberna me Amen. This was rolled up in lead with a small piece of bone, and Don Antonio instructed him to wear it like a cross, against his skin, near the heart, claiming it would effectively protect him from all sword thrusts. It was shown by the deponent.

He also gave him another strip of parchment of half a finger in breadth, and above two yards long. At one extremity was drawn with ink a leg and foot, and at the other a heart with a cross above it. Other figures and letters were drawn in different parts. With this he proceeded to take divers measurements upon the body of the deponent, as, from one shoulder to the other, from the shoulder to the chin and nose, &c. This he informed him would secure him from being wounded, if he used it in the following manner. He was to rub it with the wax which dripped from the tapers burnt during the celebration of mass. This was to be done on nine several days during mass, keeping it under his cloak, and taking care that no one saw him. Afterwards it was to be worn in the shape of a cross, next the skin, near the heart. He gave him at the same time three bits of parchment, each about three fingers’ breadth long and one wide. Two of these contained each two lines of writing, and the other three. They were severally numbered on the back, 1, 2, 3. To these were added another, very small, also written over.

He also gave him another strip of parchment about half an inch wide and over two yards long. At one end, there was an ink drawing of a leg and foot, and at the other end, a heart with a cross above it. Other figures and letters were scattered throughout. With this, he began taking various measurements on the deponent's body, such as from one shoulder to the other, and from the shoulder to the chin and nose, etc. He told him this would protect him from being hurt if he used it in the following way. He was to rub it with the wax that dripped from the candles burned during mass. This needed to be done for nine consecutive days during mass, keeping it hidden under his cloak and making sure no one saw him. After that, it was to be worn in the shape of a cross next to the skin, close to the heart. At the same time, he gave him three pieces of parchment, each about three fingers long and one wide. Two of these had two lines of writing each, and the other had three. They were individually numbered on the back: 1, 2, 3. There was also an additional very small piece that was written on as well.

He informed him that by the help of these he could perform any kind of divination, and that if he wore the thinnest of these parchments upon his left little finger, under a white stone set in a ring, he would be directed by it in the following manner. Whenever the stone turned red, he might play at any game which was going on, except dice or quillas, and be sure to gain; but if the stone turned black, he would lose by playing. Before any such use, however, was made of the parchments, he was directed to put them in the shoe of his left foot, near the ankle, and to sprinkle them with the water used by the priest at mass. These parchments were also exhibited.

He told him that with these items, he could do any type of divination, and that if he wore the thinnest of these parchments on his left pinky finger, under a white stone set in a ring, it would guide him in the following way. Whenever the stone turned red, he could join any game that was happening, except dice or quillas, and would definitely win; but if the stone turned black, he would lose by playing. However, before using the parchments, he was advised to place them in the shoe of his left foot, near the ankle, and sprinkle them with the water used by the priest at mass. These parchments were also displayed.

The deponent requested Don Antonio to show him the book of magic which he had mentioned, but he declined, alleging that the deponent could not read nor understand it.

The person giving testimony asked Don Antonio to show him the book of magic that he had mentioned, but he refused, claiming that the person couldn't read or understand it.

Questioned, if he knew, or had heard that the said Don Antonio Adorno had any temporary insanity, or was given to wine, and if any other person was present during the last conversation.

Questioned whether he knew or had heard that Don Antonio Adorno had any temporary insanity or was prone to drinking, and if anyone else was present during their last conversation.

Answered, that he knew not whether he was subject to any such irregularities, and that no other person was present during their last interview. He declared that the whole of the declaration was the truth, and not uttered by him from malice or ill feeling, but solely in obedience to his conscience and oath. Secrecy was promised by him, and he added his signature.

Answered that he wasn't sure if he was involved in any irregularities, and that no one else was present during their last meeting. He stated that everything in his declaration was true and was not said out of malice or bad feelings, but simply in accordance with his conscience and oath. He promised to keep it secret and added his signature.

Joaquim Gil.

Joaquim Gil.

Before me—

In front of me—

Dr Joseph Montes, Presbyter Notary
of the Holy Office
.

Dr. Joe Montes, Presbyter Notary
of the Holy Office
.


In the city of Valencia, on the fourteenth day of April, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, before Dr Lorenzo Ballester, Presbyter, Confessor of the secret prison of the Holy Office, appeared, according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Joseph Sanches Masquefa, scrivener, residing in the house of Felipe Matheu, scrivener, of this city, a native of the city of Origuela, of age, as he stated, nineteen years.

In the city of Valencia, on April 14, 1756, before Dr. Lorenzo Ballester, a priest and confessor of the secret prison of the Holy Office, Joseph Sanches Masquefa, a scrivener living at the house of Felipe Matheu, also a scrivener in this city, appeared as summoned and swore to tell the truth and keep everything confidential. He stated that he was nineteen years old and originally from the city of Origuela.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was being called to appear.

Answered, that he did not know, but supposed it to be for the purpose of learning what he had heard of a conversation in which a certain soldier of the regiment of Asturias, in the garrison of this city, was engaged; this person, who, as he had been informed was named Don Antonio * * * and was by birth a Neapolitan, was of a middling height, somewhat full faced, dark complexioned, and about twenty or twentytwo years of age. On the evening of the eleventh of the present month, discoursing upon various subjects, this person remarked that he was acquainted with several arts, and in particular knew one by which he could ascertain who was the thief when a theft had been committed, and which he had practised on the following occasion. A soldier of his regiment had stolen two or three dollars from another, at which the sergeant was expressing his displeasure, and Don Antonio told him that if he would promise no harm should ensue to the thief or himself, he would discover who had stolen it. This the sergeant agreed to, and Don Antonio wrote the names of all who were suspected of the theft upon pieces of paper. These he put into the fire, where they were all consumed except the one bearing the name of the thief. This was seen by all present, and some of them endeavoured to snatch it from the flames but were unable. Don Antonio alone was able to perform this action, and when the name of the thief was read, he was searched and the money found in his stockings.

He replied that he didn’t know, but he guessed it was to find out what he had heard about a conversation involving a certain soldier from the Asturias regiment stationed in this city. This person, who he had been told was named Don Antonio * * *, was of average height, somewhat round-faced, dark-skinned, and about twenty or twenty-two years old. On the evening of the eleventh of this month, while discussing various topics, this person mentioned that he was skilled in several arts, particularly one that allowed him to find out who the thief was after a theft had taken place, which he had demonstrated in a recent incident. A soldier from his regiment had stolen two or three dollars from another soldier, prompting the sergeant’s displeasure. Don Antonio told him that if the sergeant promised no harm would come to the thief or to himself, he would reveal who had stolen it. The sergeant agreed, and Don Antonio wrote down the names of everyone suspected of the theft on pieces of paper. He then threw these into the fire, where they all burned except for the paper with the thief's name. Everyone present saw this, and some tried to grab it from the flames but couldn’t. Only Don Antonio was able to retrieve it, and when the name of the thief was read, he was searched, and the money was found hidden in his stockings.

This relation having been listened to by Felipe Matheu, he asserted that the thing could not be done unless by a league with the devil, and that it was a matter which ought to be laid before the Inquisition. Don Antonio replied that it was an action which he should not hesitate to perform immediately after confession and communion, for it was done by uttering words that had been spoken by Christ; that is to say, ‘Ego sum, Christus factus est homo, consummatum est,’ expressions which were good and holy. A conversation then ensued in Italian, between Don Antonio and Joseph * * * a servant in the house of Felipe Matheu, which was not understood by the deponent. The conversation was broken off by the said Matheu.

After Felipe Matheu heard this story, he claimed that it couldn't be done without a deal with the devil and that it should be reported to the Inquisition. Don Antonio responded that it was something he would not hesitate to do right after confession and communion, as it could be done by saying the words that Christ spoke; namely, ‘Ego sum, Christus factus est homo, consummatum est,’ phrases that were good and holy. A conversation then took place in Italian between Don Antonio and Joseph * * *, a servant in Felipe Matheu's house, which the witness could not understand. Felipe Matheu interrupted the conversation.

Questioned, if any other persons were present at this conversation, besides those already named.

Questioned if anyone else was present during this conversation, besides those already mentioned.

Answered, that there were also present Joseph Gil, a scrivener, in the same house, two Alguacils, one of whom was named Alba, and three soldiers of the regiment abovementioned, whose names he did not know.

Answered that Joseph Gil, a scrivener, was also present in the same house, along with two Alguacils, one named Alba, and three soldiers from the aforementioned regiment, whose names he didn’t know.

Questioned, if he knew whether the said Don Antonio was subject to any occasional insanity, or was given to wine.

Questioned whether he knew if Don Antonio had any occasional bouts of insanity or was prone to drinking.

Answered, that he knew not of his being subject to any such irregularities, and that the above conversation was maintained on his part with much seriousness. The above is the substance of what is known to him respecting the matter, and not related from malice toward the said Don Antonio, but solely according to his conscience and oath. It was read in his hearing and declared by him to be the truth. Secrecy was enjoined upon him, which he promised, and added his signature.

Answered that he was not aware of being subject to any such irregularities, and that he spoke seriously during the conversation. The above is what he knows about the matter, and not out of malice toward Don Antonio, but strictly according to his conscience and oath. It was read aloud to him, and he affirmed it to be the truth. He was instructed to keep it confidential, which he agreed to, and then he signed it.

Joseph Sanchez Y Masquefa.

Joseph Sanchez and Masquefa.

Before me—

In front of me—

Joseph Montes, Presbyter Notary
of the Holy Office
.

Joseph Montes, Presbyter Notary
of the Holy Office
.

[Here follow, in the original, the depositions of the other witnesses mentioned above as present on the occasion. These are omitted, as they do but repeat what has been already related.]

[Here are the statements from the other witnesses mentioned earlier who were present at the event. These are left out because they just repeat what has already been said.]

CALIFICACION.

RATING.

In the Holy Office of the Inquisition of Valencia, on the seventeenth day of May, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, the Inquisitor, Dr Don Inigo Ortiz de la Peña being at his morning audience, in which he presided alone, there appeared the Calificadores, Padre Francisco Siges, of the Order of Mercy, Padre Antonio Mira, Jesuit, Ex-Rector of the college of San Pablo, Padre Juan Bautista Llopis, of the Order of Mercy, and Padre Augustin de Vinaros, Ex-Provincial of the Convent of Capuchins, who, having conferred together respecting the acts and assertions now to be specified, qualified them in the following manner, viz.

In the Holy Office of the Inquisition of Valencia, on May 17, 1756, the Inquisitor, Dr. Don Inigo Ortiz de la Peña, was holding his morning audience, presiding alone. Present were the Calificadores: Father Francisco Siges from the Order of Mercy, Father Antonio Mira, a Jesuit and former Rector of the college of San Pablo, Father Juan Bautista Llopis from the Order of Mercy, and Father Augustin de Vinaros, former Provincial of the Convent of Capuchins. After discussing the acts and statements that will be outlined, they qualified them in the following way:

1st. The person in question, in the presence of many others, on the night of a certain day which is named, declared that he possessed the power when anything was stolen, to ascertain who was the thief; and in proof of this, the said person, on the same occasion declared that in a former instance, when a quantity of money had been stolen, and search was making for the thief, he offered, upon the condition that no harm should ensue to him or the culprit, to find him out; which being agreed to, he wrote the names of those whom he suspected of the theft upon papers and put them in a fire, when those containing the names of the innocent were consumed, and that of the guilty one remained. He then uttered certain words, which signified ‘Christ our Lord,’ by virtue of which the name of the delinquent was preserved from burning. And by virtue of these, words, ‘Ego sum; factus est Homo; consummatum est,’ the paper was drawn from the fire. The name of the thief was then read, and the money found upon him within his stockings.

1st. The person involved, in front of many others, on the night of a specific day that’s mentioned, claimed that he had the ability to identify the thief whenever something was stolen. To prove this, he stated that in a past instance, when a significant amount of money had been stolen and they were searching for the thief, he offered, on the condition that neither he nor the culprit would be harmed, to find out who it was. Once they agreed, he wrote down the names of those he suspected on pieces of paper and threw them into a fire. The papers with the names of the innocent were burned, while the one with the guilty person's name survived. He then spoke certain words that meant ‘Christ our Lord,’ which allowed the name of the wrongdoer to not burn. And with those words, ‘Ego sum; factus est Homo; consummatum est,’ the paper was taken out of the fire. The thief's name was then read, and the money was found on him in his stockings.

Declared unanimously that this contains a profession of superstitious necromancy, and a practice of the same, with the effects following; also an abuse of the sacred scripture.

It was unanimously declared that this involves a practice of superstitious necromancy and its effects, as well as a misuse of the sacred scripture.

2d. The assertions in the above article having been listened to, it was replied to this person that the thing could not be done without some pact with the devil, to which he answered that it was so honest and just a deed that he would perform it immediately after confession and communion, and even before the Inquisitors, inasmuch as it was done by repeating the words of Christ, which were the Latin expressions given in the first article. It was repeated that the thing could not be done in this manner, and that it ought to be denounced to the Inquisition; whereupon this person persisted in his assertions. He also stated that he knew another way of performing the same kind of divination, which was by collecting the ashes made by burning the papers, and rubbing them upon the back of his hand, where they would leave impressed the name of the culprit. He furthermore asserted that he knew another method, which he did not explain.

2d. After hearing the claims made in the article above, the person was told that what they were suggesting couldn’t be done without some sort of deal with the devil. In response, he insisted that it was such a honest and fair action that he would carry it out right after confession and communion, and even in front of the Inquisitors, since it was done by repeating the words of Christ, which were the Latin phrases given in the first article. They reiterated that this couldn’t be done in this way and that it should be reported to the Inquisition; however, this person held firm to his claims. He also mentioned that he knew another way to perform the same type of divination, which involved collecting the ashes from burnt papers and rubbing them on the back of his hand, where they would leave the name of the guilty person. He further claimed that he knew of another method, though he didn’t explain it.

Declared unanimously that this contains a confirmation of the preceding, with a heretical assertion, and a new profession of necromancy.

It was declared unanimously that this includes a confirmation of what came before, along with a heretical claim and a new declaration of necromancy.

3d. The same person continuing the above conversation, asserted that he possessed certain instruments which were useful for many things, and proceeded to take from his right breeches’ pocket a paper containing three or four folds of something, which were not distinctly seen by reason of the night. And it being demanded of him where he had learned his arts, he replied that he had obtained them from a book of magic in his possession, which taught him how to do whatever he desired.

3d. The same person continuing the conversation earlier claimed that he had some tools that were useful for many things, and then pulled out of his right pants pocket a piece of paper that was folded three or four times, which was hard to see in the dark. When asked where he had learned his skills, he replied that he got them from a magic book he owned, which taught him how to do whatever he wished.

Declared unanimously that this contains another profession like that already qualified.

It was unanimously agreed that this includes another profession similar to the one already qualified.

4th. He declared to the person to whom the above assertions were made, that out of the abovementioned book he could acquire the art of making himself invisible; also that in this manner a man could be made invulnerable to the thrust of a sword; in proof of which he would make trial upon the body of a dog or cat, that they might see the truth of it.

4th. He told the person he made those claims to that from the book he mentioned, he could learn how to become invisible; he also said that this way, a person could be made immune to a sword's stab. To prove it, he would test it on a dog or cat so they could see it was true.

Declared unanimously that this contains a new profession of necromancy.

It was unanimously declared that this introduces a new field of necromancy.

5th. The person who bore witness to these proceedings having asked him whether he knew any art respecting playing at ball, he replied that he did not at present, but would make researches and come to the house of the above person, where he would teach him other arts which he knew, to gain the favor of the ladies. This was agreed upon, and this person gave him directions to find his house, offering him money if he would make these disclosures to him, all with a view to give information of the same to the Holy Office, in order to purify our Holy Faith, and extirpate everything contrary thereto.

5th. The person who witnessed these events asked him if he knew any tricks for playing ball. He replied that he didn’t know any at the moment but would look into it and come to that person's house, where he would teach him other skills he knew to gain the favor of the ladies. They agreed on this, and the individual gave him directions to find his house, offering him money if he would share this information, all in order to report it to the Holy Office, to purify our Holy Faith and eliminate anything contrary to it.

Declared unanimously that this contains a profession of necromancy qualified as above, with the addition of an amatory necromantical practice.

It was unanimously stated that this involves a type of necromancy as described above, along with a romantic necromantic practice.

6th. Some days after this, in consequence of the above agreement, he went to the said person’s house, where he gave him a strip of parchment about a finger’s breadth wide, and a span long, slit through the middle and united at the extremity, on which was written the following. ‘Ego + sum, Exe + Homo, consummatum + est, Ego Joaquinus Aprecor Domini nostri Jesu Christi in vitam eternam seculi seculorum, libera me de omnibus rebus, de ignis cautus et omnia instrumenta hominum detenta me ach die, ach nocte, custode rege et gubername amen.’ This was rolled up within a piece of lead and a portion of bone, and, according to his direction, was to be worn next the skin, near the arm, in the shape of a cross. This would, as he asserted, secure the wearer against any thrusts with a sword. The articles have been exhibited.

6th. A few days later, following the agreement mentioned, he went to the person's house, where he handed over a piece of parchment about the size of a finger wide and a span long, split in the middle and joined at the end, which had the following written on it: ‘Ego + sum, Exe + Homo, consummatum + est, Ego Joaquinus Aprecor Domini nostri Jesu Christi in vitam eternam seculi seculorum, libera me de omnibus rebus, de ignis cautus et omnia instrumenta hominum detenta me ach die, ach nocte, custode rege et gubername amen.’ This was rolled up inside a piece of lead and a part of bone, and according to his instructions, it was to be worn close to the skin, near the arm, in the shape of a cross. He claimed that this would protect the wearer from any sword attacks. The items have been shown.

Declared unanimously that this contains a practice with instruments of superstitious necromancy, added to a doctrine for their application which is abusive of the sacred scripture and insulting to the holy cross.

It was unanimously stated that this involves the use of tools for superstitious necromancy, along with a doctrine for their application that misuses sacred scripture and disrespects the holy cross.

7th. On the same occasion, he gave to this person another piece of parchment, half a finger’s breadth wide, and above two yards long, at one end of which was drawn with ink a leg and foot, and at the other a heart surmounted by a cross, with other figures and letters in different parts. With this he took divers measures upon the body of the person abovementioned, from one shoulder to the other, from the shoulder to the chin and nose, from the chin to the stomach, measuring also the face, which he informed him was done to secure him from wounds. He directed him to rub it over with the wax which dripped from the tapers burnt during the celebration of mass. This was to be done on nine several days, and the operation was to be concealed from view by his cloak. The parchment was exhibited.

7th. On the same occasion, he gave this person another piece of parchment, about half an inch wide and over two yards long. At one end, there was an ink drawing of a leg and foot, and at the other end, a heart topped with a cross, along with other figures and letters scattered in different places. With this, he took various measurements of the mentioned person's body—across his shoulders, from shoulder to chin and nose, from chin to stomach, and he also measured the face. He explained that this was done to protect him from injuries. He instructed him to rub it with the wax that dripped from the candles during the mass. This had to be done over nine days, and the whole process should be kept hidden by his cloak. The parchment was shown.

Declared unanimously, that this contains an additional profession of necromancy, with an exhibition of additional necromantical instruments, and the method of using them, added to an insult to the holy sacrifice of the mass and the holy cross.

Declared unanimously that this includes an additional practice of necromancy, along with a display of extra necromantic tools and the ways to use them, which adds an insult to the holy sacrifice of the mass and the holy cross.

8th. On the same occasion, he gave to this person three bits of parchment three fingers’ breadth long, and one wide each; two of them containing each two lines of writing, and the other three, all numbered on the back; also another written parchment. He directed him to wear the thinnest of these pieces on the little finger of his left hand, under a white stone set in a ring, and informed him that when this stone turned red he might play at any game except dice or las quillas, with a certainty of winning, but if it should turn black he was to abstain from playing. The parchments abovementioned were, before this was done, to be placed inside his right shoe, next the ancle, and sprinkled with the Holy Water used at mass, after which they were to be worn next the heart. The parchments were exhibited.

8th. On the same occasion, he gave this person three pieces of parchment, each three fingers long and one finger wide; two of them had two lines of text each, and the other had three, all numbered on the back; he also provided another piece of parchment with writing. He instructed him to wear the thinnest of these pieces on the little finger of his left hand, under a white stone set in a ring, and told him that when the stone turned red, he could play any game except dice or las quillas, with a sure chance of winning, but if it turned black, he should avoid playing. Before doing this, the parchments were to be placed inside his right shoe, next to the ankle, and sprinkled with the Holy Water from mass, after which they were to be worn close to the heart. The parchments were shown.

Declared unanimously, that this contains an additional profession and doctrine of superstitious necromancy, with an additional method of practising it, added to a new insult to the sacred ceremonies of the mass.

It was declared unanimously that this includes an additional practice and belief in superstitious necromancy, along with a new method of performing it, which adds another insult to the sacred ceremonies of the mass.

9th. The said person having requested to see the book of magic which he declared was in his possession, he refused to exhibit the same, declaring that the person who made the demand would not be able to read or understand it, but that he had studied the whole in a certain place which he named.

9th. The person in question asked to see the book of magic that he claimed to have, but he refused to show it, stating that the person asking wouldn't be able to read or understand it. He said he had studied the entire book in a specific place that he mentioned.

Declared unanimously, that this contains a profession of possessing a book of magic, and studying the same for the purpose of practising it.

It was stated unanimously that this includes a declaration of having a book of magic and studying it to practice it.

Finally declared unanimously, that the person under qualification be pronounced under suspicion de levi.

Finally declared unanimously, that the person being qualified should be considered under suspicion de levi.

Fr. Francisco Siges,
P. Antonio Mira,
Fr. Juan Ba. Llopis,
Fr. Augustin de Vinaros.
Don Joachin de Esplugues Y Palavicino,
Secretary.

Fr. Francisco Siges,
P. Antonio Mira,
Fr. Juan Ba. Llopis,
Fr. Augustin de Vinaros.
Don Joaquin de Esplugues y Palavicino,
Secretary.


In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Valencia, on the twentieth day of May, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, the Inquisitors Licentiate Don Antonio, Pelegen Venero, and Don Inigo Ortiz de la Peña being at their morning audience, having examined the information received in this Holy Office against Don Antonio Adorno, a soldier in the regiment of Asturias, belonging to the company of Don Jorge Duran, by birth a Neapolitan, and a resident in this city, for the crimes of professing necromancy and amatory divination, and practising the same with insult to the holy sacrifice of the mass and the holy cross—

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Valencia, on May 20, 1756, the Inquisitors Licentiate Don Antonio, Pelegen Venero, and Don Inigo Ortiz de la Peña were in their morning session. They had reviewed the information received by this Holy Office against Don Antonio Adorno, a soldier in the Asturias regiment, part of Don Jorge Duran's company, who was originally from Naples and lived in this city. He was accused of practicing necromancy and love divination, and for doing so in a way that disrespected the holy sacrifice of the mass and the holy cross—

Ordered unanimously, that the said Don Antonia Adorno be confined in the secret prison of this Holy Office; that his property be sequestered; his papers, books, and instruments seized, and arranged for his accusation. Ordered further, that before execution, this be submitted to the members of His Majesty’s Council of the Holy General Inquisition.

Ordered unanimously, that Don Antonia Adorno be held in the secret prison of this Holy Office; that his property be confiscated; his papers, books, and tools taken, and prepared for his charges. It was also ordered that before implementation, this be presented to the members of His Majesty’s Council of the Holy General Inquisition.

Don Joachin de Esplugues Y Palavicino,
Secretary.

Don Joaquín de Esplugues y Palavicino,
Secretary.

[In this part of the trial are inserted the originals of fourteen letters, received from the different Inquisitions in the kingdom, stating that their records had been examined without finding anything against the prisoner. Also a letter from the Grand Council of the Inquisition at Madrid, confirming the above order.]

[In this part of the trial, the original fourteen letters are included, which were received from various Inquisitions throughout the kingdom. These letters state that their records were reviewed and found no evidence against the prisoner. There is also a letter from the Grand Council of the Inquisition in Madrid, confirming this order.]


In Council May 31st, 1756.

In Council May 31, 1756.

The Dicasts Ravazo, Berz, Barreda, and Herreros.

The Dicasts Ravazo, Berz, Barreda, and Herreros.

Let justice be executed according to the above order.

Let justice be carried out according to the order mentioned above.

TO OUR CALIFICATOR DR BOXO, AND THE FAMILIARS NAMED IN THIS LETTER.

TO OUR CALIFICATOR DR. BOXO, AND THE FAMILIARS MENTIONED IN THIS LETTER.

Don Antonio Adorno, the subject of the accompanying warrant of imprisonment, is a soldier in the company of Don Jorge Duran, belonging to the regiment of Asturias. He is a Neapolitan by birth, of a middling height, robust, dark complexioned, with a long scar over his left eyebrow, and a dint in the top of his forehead. His age is twentyfour or twentyfive years. In order to apprehend him, our Calificator, Dr Joseph Boxo, will conduct himself in the following manner:—

Don Antonio Adorno, who is the focus of the attached arrest warrant, is a soldier in Don Jorge Duran's company, part of the Asturias regiment. He was born in Naples, is of average height, sturdy build, has a dark complexion, a long scar over his left eyebrow, and a dent on the top of his forehead. He is about twenty-four or twenty-five years old. To capture him, our evaluator, Dr. Joseph Boxo, will proceed as follows:—

He will consult, with great secrecy and caution, accompanied by our Familiar Francisco Suñer, or, in his absence, any other Familiar in that neighborhood, as Notary, the Colonel or Commander of the regiment, where the said Don Antonio Adorno shall be found, and if necessary, exhibit to him the Warrant. His assistance is to be required in the apprehension, which being performed, his person is to be immediately identified. All the papers, books, and instruments found upon him are to be seized, as well as those which may be found among his baggage. Care should be taken that he may have no time to conceal anything, and all the effects seized, the Calificador will remove to his own house. At the same time, all his other property, if he possess any, will be sequestered, an inventory thereof being taken, and the whole left in the hands of such person as the Colonel or Commander may appoint for the safe keeping of the same, commanding him not to part with anything without our order. If any cash should be met with, the Calificador will secure it, as well as the clothes for the use of the prisoner, all which are to be transported to his house along with the papers, books, and instruments above specified.

He will consult, with great secrecy and caution, accompanied by our Familiar Francisco Suñer, or, if he's unavailable, any other Familiar in that area, acting as Notary, the Colonel or Commander of the regiment where the said Don Antonio Adorno can be found. If necessary, he will show the Warrant to him. His assistance is needed for the arrest, and once that's done, the person's identity must be confirmed immediately. All papers, books, and tools found on him should be seized, as well as anything discovered in his luggage. Care should be taken to ensure he has no time to hide anything, and all seized items will be taken to the Calificador's house. At the same time, any of his other property, if he possesses any, will be taken into custody, with an inventory created, and everything left with a person the Colonel or Commander appoints for safekeeping, instructing them not to give away anything without our permission. If any cash is found, the Calificador will secure it, along with clothes for the prisoner, all of which will be taken to his house with the aforementioned papers, books, and tools.

This done, the Familiar Suñer, or whoever shall act as Notary, will divest him of every kind of offensive weapon, and conduct him to the town of Arbos on horseback, without pinioning him, as this is only directed in cases where an escape is attempted. Two stout fellows armed will guard him on each side. At Arbos, he is to be delivered into the hands of our Familiar Raymundo Freiras, an inhabitant of that place. Should he not be at hand, the prisoner is to be brought onward to Vilafranca and committed to the care of our Familiar Pedro Batlle, along with the papers, books, instruments, money, and clothes of the prisoner, all which are to be brought from the place of his arrest, as well as the warrant for his imprisonment, a copy of the inventory of his goods, this letter, and the adjoined passport for the Gate of the Angel in this city. The transfer being made to any one of the abovementioned Familiars, a receipt will be taken, which it is to be transmitted to this tribunal, as also a bill of the expenses paid by the person receiving it, from the time he undertook the business till his return home, specifying the pay of the guard, horse hire, his own and the prisoner’s expenses.

Once this is done, the Familiar Suñer, or whoever acts as Notary, will remove all offensive weapons from him and take him to the town of Arbos on horseback, without restraining him, as restraint is only required if there’s an escape attempt. Two strong guards, armed, will escort him on each side. Upon arrival in Arbos, he will be handed over to our Familiar Raymundo Freiras, who lives there. If he’s not available, the prisoner will be taken to Vilafranca and handed over to our Familiar Pedro Batlle, along with the prisoner’s papers, books, tools, money, and clothes, all of which should be collected from where he was arrested, as well as the warrant for his imprisonment, a copy of the inventory of his belongings, this letter, and the attached passport for the Gate of the Angel in this city. Once the transfer is made to any of the mentioned Familiars, a receipt will be obtained, which must be sent to this tribunal, along with a bill for the expenses incurred by the person managing it, from the time he started the task until he returned home, detailing the guard's pay, horse rental, and both his and the prisoner’s expenses.

The Familiar of Arbos or Vilafranca, will, in the same manner, transport him with whatever he may receive from the Familiar of Reus, to this city, which he will enter at dusk just before the gates are shut. He will enter at the Gate of the Angel, and present the accompanying passport of the Governor to the Officer of the Guard. Should the Patrol demand to see it, it may be exhibited to them, after which he will proceed directly to this Royal Palace of the Inquisition, and inquire for the Alcayde. Into his hands will then be delivered the prisoner, and all the effects pertaining to him, together with the warrant of imprisonment, the inventory of the goods, and this letter. The next day he will come before this tribunal and give a relation of his proceedings. God preserve you.

The Familiar of Arbos or Vilafranca will similarly bring him, along with anything he receives from the Familiar of Reus, to this city, which he'll enter at dusk just before the gates close. He’ll go in through the Gate of the Angel and show the accompanying passport from the Governor to the Officer of the Guard. If the Patrol asks to see it, he can show it to them, after which he will head straight to the Royal Palace of the Inquisition and ask for the Alcayde. The prisoner, along with all their belongings, the warrant for imprisonment, the inventory of the goods, and this letter, will then be handed over to him. The following day, he’ll appear before this tribunal and report on his actions. God bless you.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, June 30th, 1756

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, June 30th, 1756

The Licentiate,
D. Joseph de Otero Y Cossio.
The Licentiate,
Don Manuel de Guell Y Serra.
Juan Antonio Almonacid, Sec’y.

The Licentiate,
D. Joseph de Otero Y Cossio.
The Licentiate,
Don Manuel de Guell Y Serra.
Juan Antonio Almonacid, Secretary.

ANSWER.

Please provide the text for me to modernize.

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SEÑORES.

MOST DISTINGUISHED GENTLEMEN.

Until the 10th of the present month I was not able to succeed in apprehending Don Antonio Adorno, as he did not make his appearance in this quarter before that date. The capture was made with great caution, the commander having contrived to deliver him into my hands in the prison of the regiment, from which place he proceeds this day, Tuesday, July 13th, under the care of the Familiar Rafel Bellveny, the Familiar Francisco Suñez being sick.

Until the 10th of this month, I was unable to capture Don Antonio Adorno, as he did not show up in this area before that date. The capture was executed with great care, with the commander managing to hand him over to me in the regiment's prison, from which he is being transported today, Tuesday, July 13th, under the supervision of Familiar Rafel Bellveny, since Familiar Francisco Suñez is ill.

No inventory of his property was taken, as none was to be found either upon his person or in his knapsack, except the papers herewith transmitted, and a book containing various documents respecting the nobility of the house of Adorno. No money has been found, and the prisoner is considerably in debt to the regiment. The commander has kept every article of his clothing, so that it has been necessary to purchase a suit for him. God preserve your Excellencies many years.

No inventory of his belongings was taken, as nothing was found on him or in his backpack, except for the papers included here and a book with various documents about the nobility of the house of Adorno. No money was found, and the prisoner owes a significant amount to the regiment. The commander has kept all his clothing, so it has been necessary to buy him a suit. May God bless your Excellencies for many years.

Dr Joseph Boxo, Calificador and
Commissary of the Holy Office
.

Dr. Joe Boxo, Evaluator and
Commissioner of the Holy Office
.

Reus, July 13th, 1756.

Reus, July 13, 1756.

FIRST AUDIENCE.

First Audience.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the fifth day of August, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, the Inquisitor, Licentiate Dr Joseph de Otero y Cossio, being at his morning audience, ordered to be brought out of prison, a person calling himself Don Antonio Adorno, a native of the city of Genoa, aged twentyseven years, who was sworn to declare the truth, and preserve secrecy as well on this as on all other occasions, till the decision of his cause.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on August 5, 1756, the Inquisitor, Licentiate Dr. Joseph de Otero y Cossio, while conducting his morning audience, ordered the release from prison of a man identifying himself as Don Antonio Adorno, a 27-year-old from Genoa, who was sworn to tell the truth and keep secrets on this and all other occasions until his case was resolved.

Questioned, his name, birthplace, age, occupation, and the date of his imprisonment.

Questioned were his name, birthplace, age, job, and the date of his imprisonment.

Answered, that he was born, as above stated, in the city of Genoa, that his age was twentyseven years, that he was a soldier in the infantry regiment of Asturias, company of Don Jorge Duran, and that he was arrested on the tenth of the last month.

Answered that he was born, as mentioned above, in the city of Genoa, that he was twenty-seven years old, that he served as a soldier in the infantry regiment of Asturias, company of Don Jorge Duran, and that he was arrested on the tenth of last month.

Questioned, who was his father, mother, grandfather, uncles, &c.

Questioned about who his father, mother, grandfather, uncles, etc., were.

[Here follows the genealogy of the prisoner.]

[Here is the family tree of the prisoner.]

Questioned, of what lineage and stock were his abovementioned ancestors and collateral relatives, and whether any one of them, or he himself, had ever been imprisoned or put under penance by the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Questioned about the lineage and background of his mentioned ancestors and relatives, and whether any of them, or he himself, had ever been imprisoned or punished by the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Answered, that his family was noble, as above stated, and that neither he, nor any one of them had ever been punished or put under penance by the Holy Office.

Answered that his family was noble, as mentioned above, and that neither he nor any of them had ever faced punishment or been subjected to penance by the Holy Office.

Questioned, if he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, and heard mass, confessed, and communed, at such times as the Church directed.

Questioned if he was a baptized and confirmed Christian, and if he attended mass, confessed, and took communion at the times the Church instructed.

Answered, Yes; and the last time he confessed was to Father Fr. Antonio ——, (his name he did not know) a barefoot Friar of the Convent of the Holy Trinity; and that he partook of the sacrament in this Convent in the city of Valencia, where his regiment was then stationed.

Answered, Yes; and the last time he confessed was to Father Fr. Antonio ——, (he didn’t know his name) a barefoot Friar from the Convent of the Holy Trinity; and that he took part in the sacrament at this Convent in the city of Valencia, where his regiment was stationed at the time.

Here the prisoner crossed himself, repeated the Pater Noster, Ave Maria, and Credo, in Spanish, without fault, and answered properly to all the questions respecting the Christian doctrine.

Here the prisoner made the sign of the cross, recited the Pater Noster, Ave Maria, and Credo in Spanish, without error, and correctly answered all the questions about Christian doctrine.

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

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

Answered, that he could read, write, and cipher, having learned of Dr Francisco Labatra, in Vienna; and that he had studied grammar in the Colegio de los Praxistas in this capital.

Answered that he could read, write, and do calculations, having learned from Dr. Francisco Labatra in Vienna; and that he had studied grammar at the Colegio de los Praxistas in this city.

Questioned, what were the events of his life.

Questioned about the events of his life.

Answered, that he was born in Genoa; and while a boy, was carried by his parents to Vienna, where he followed his studies as above stated. At the age of sixteen he entered as a cadet in a regiment of infantry. After serving here till twentytwo, the regiment was broken up, and he remained with his mother at Vienna for the space of a month. He then set out for Spain for the purpose of securing some property belonging to him by inheritance from his ancestors in Bellpuix and other parts of the kingdom. He landed at Barcelona, and proceeded to Bellpuix, Malaga, Granada, and Seville; but, failing in his attempts to obtain his property, he enlisted in the infantry regiment of Asturias then quartered in this city. In this regiment he visited several parts and cities of these kingdoms at their respective garrisons, and particularly the kingdom of Valencia, from whence he proceeded to Reus, where he was arrested.

He stated that he was born in Genoa; and as a child, he was taken by his parents to Vienna, where he continued his studies as mentioned above. At sixteen, he joined an infantry regiment as a cadet. After serving there until he was twenty-two, the regiment was disbanded, and he stayed with his mother in Vienna for a month. He then went to Spain to claim some property that he inherited from his ancestors in Bellpuix and other areas of the kingdom. He arrived in Barcelona and traveled to Bellpuix, Malaga, Granada, and Seville; however, after failing to secure his property, he enlisted in the Asturias infantry regiment, which was stationed in this city. In this regiment, he visited several locations and cities within the kingdoms at their respective garrisons, especially in the kingdom of Valencia, from where he went to Reus, where he was arrested.

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

Questioned if he knew or suspected why he was imprisoned.

Answered, that he supposed it to be on account of some acts he had performed to discover certain thieves in his company, which performances he had executed with a degree of mystery and mummery to create wonder. The facts were as follows.

Answered, that he thought it was because of some actions he had taken to identify certain thieves among his group, which he had done with a bit of mystery and theatrics to create intrigue. The facts were as follows.

In the Guard of the Duke of Berwick, at Valencia, some shirts and stockings were stolen, and the commanding officer requested the prisoner to make trial of one of his methods of discovering the thief, he having before been a witness of the operation of one of them. He accordingly assembled all the soldiers of the guard in a dark room, and informed them they must each one put his finger into a cup of water, and that the water would blacken the finger of the thief. Before the room was darkened he showed them the cup containing a quantity of clear water. They all agreed to the proposal, and the room was shut up so as to exclude every ray of light. The prisoner then conveyed a quantity of ink into the cup, and after making a preliminary harangue directed every one to dip his finger within. This they all did except one whom he supposed to be the thief. He wet his finger in his mouth lest it should be discovered that he had not complied with the direction.

In the Guard of the Duke of Berwick, in Valencia, some shirts and stockings were stolen. The commanding officer asked the prisoner to try one of his methods for finding the thief, since he had previously seen it in action. He gathered all the soldiers in a dark room and told them that they each needed to dip a finger in a cup of water, which would turn the finger of the thief black. Before darkening the room, he showed them the cup filled with clear water. They all agreed to the idea, and the room was sealed off to block any light. The prisoner then added ink to the cup, and after giving a brief speech, he instructed everyone to dip their fingers in. They all did this except for one soldier whom he suspected was the thief. To avoid detection, he wet his finger with his mouth instead of using the water.

They now threw open the windows and found every man’s finger black but that of the delinquent. The prisoner perceiving this and observing the agitation which he manifested, exclaimed to him, ‘You are the thief;’ and finally compelled him to pay for the stolen articles.

They opened the windows and saw that every man's finger was black except for the guilty one. The prisoner noticed this and, seeing the panic it caused, shouted at him, 'You’re the thief;' and ultimately forced him to pay for the stolen items.

In order more fully to impress them with the belief that this man was guilty, the prisoner directed the commander of the guard to write the name of each person on a piece of paper and burn it to ashes, informing him that this ashes would give the impression of the name of the one who was guilty, upon his hand. In order to effect this the prisoner wrote with a certain liquor upon his own hand the name of Juan Antonio ——, (his other name he did not remember) then showing himself to the company he washed his hands before them, (taking care, however, not to rub them much) and observed, ‘You see there is nothing now written upon my hand; but when this list is burnt it will exhibit there the name of the thief.’ The paper was then burnt, and he rubbed the ashes upon his hand, when the letters made their appearance, and the prisoner gained the reputation of a wizard, more especially in the conception of the said Juan Antonio.

To make them more convinced that this man was guilty, the prisoner told the guard commander to write each person's name on a piece of paper and then burn it to ashes, explaining that these ashes would reveal the name of the guilty party on his hand. To make this happen, the prisoner used a certain liquid to write the name Juan Antonio —— on his own hand (he couldn't remember the other name). Then, showing himself to the group, he washed his hands in front of them (careful not to rub them too much) and said, “You see, there’s nothing written on my hand now; but when this list is burned, it will show the name of the thief.” The paper was then burned, and he rubbed the ashes on his hand, causing the letters to appear, and the prisoner gained a reputation as a wizard, especially in the eyes of the aforementioned Juan Antonio.

The prisoner declared that in the harangue abovementioned, he made use of no prayers, and that the words which he uttered were made use of solely to astound and amaze the hearers.

The prisoner stated that in the previously mentioned speech, he used no prayers and that the words he spoke were only meant to astonish and amaze the listeners.

He was then informed that in this Holy Office it was not customary to imprison any one without sufficient information that he had said, done, or seen, or heard something contrary to the Holy Religion of God our Lord, and the Holy Mother Apostolic Roman Church, or against the proper and free jurisdiction of the Holy Office, in consequence of which he was to understand that he was imprisoned on account of some such information. Therefore he was exhorted in the name of God our Lord and his glorious and blessed Mother our Lady the Virgin Mary, to bethink himself and confess the whole truth in relation to the matter wherein he felt guilty, or knew of the guilt of others, without concealing anything or bearing false witness against any one, by doing which, justice should be executed, and his trial despatched with all brevity and mercy.

He was then told that in this Holy Office, it wasn't standard practice to imprison anyone without clear evidence that they had said, done, seen, or heard something against the Holy Religion of God our Lord, the Holy Mother Apostolic Roman Church, or against the proper and free authority of the Holy Office. Because of this, he was to understand that he was imprisoned due to such information. Therefore, he was urged in the name of God our Lord and his glorious and blessed Mother, the Virgin Mary, to reflect and confess the whole truth about the matter he felt guilty about or knew others were guilty of, without hiding anything or falsely accusing anyone. By doing this, justice would be served, and his trial would be resolved with all speed and mercy.

Answered, that he recollected nothing more, and that what he had stated above was the truth. His declarations were then read, and declared by him to be correctly recorded. He was then admonished to bethink himself and remanded to prison.

Answered that he remembered nothing else, and what he had said above was the truth. His statements were then read and confirmed by him to be accurately recorded. He was then advised to reflect on his situation and sent back to jail.

Signed by him,
M. Anto. Adorno.
Don Joseph de Noboa, Sec’y.

Signed by him,
M. Anto. Adorno.
Don Joseph de Noboa, Sec’y.

SECOND AUDIENCE.

SECOND AUDIENCE.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the seventh day of August, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, the Inquisitors, Licentiate Dr Joseph de Otero y Cossio, and Dr Manuel de Guell y Serra, being at their morning audience, ordered the abovementioned Don Antonio Adorno to be brought out of prison; which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on August 7, 1756, the Inquisitors, Licentiate Dr. Joseph de Otero y Cossio and Dr. Manuel de Guell y Serra, during their morning session, ordered that the aforementioned Don Antonio Adorno be brought out of prison. Once that was done and the prisoner was present, he was

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

Questioned if he remembered anything about his affair that he was required to disclose according to his oath.

Answered, No.

Answered, No.

He was then informed, that he was aware he had, in the preceding audience, been exhorted in the name of God, our Lord, &c.; and he was anew exhorted in the same manner, by conforming to which he would acquit himself like a Catholic Christian, and his trial should be despatched with all brevity and mercy; otherwise justice should be executed.

He was then told that he knew he had, in the previous audience, been urged in the name of God, our Lord, etc.; and he was urged again in the same way, by following which he would act like a Catholic Christian, and his trial would be conducted quickly and with mercy; otherwise, justice would be carried out.

Answered, that he had considered the exhortation, but had nothing to add, and what he had above related was the truth, according to the oath he had sworn. This declaration being read, was declared by him to be correctly recorded, and, exhorted to bethink himself, he was remanded to prison.

Answered that he had thought about the encouragement but had nothing more to say, and what he had shared earlier was the truth, based on the oath he had taken. After his statement was read, he confirmed that it was accurately recorded, and after being urged to reflect further, he was sent back to prison.

Signed by him,

Signed by him,

M. Anto. Adorno.
Don Joseph de Noboa, Sec’y.

M. Anton. Adorno.
Don Joseph de Noboa, Secretary.

THIRD AUDIENCE.

Third audience.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twelfth day of August, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, the Inquisitors, Licentiate Dr Joseph de Otero y Cossio, and Dr Manuel de Guell y Serra, being at their morning audience, ordered the said Don Antonio Adorno to be brought out of prison; which being done, and the prisoner present, he was

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twelfth day of August, 1756, the Inquisitors, Licentiate Dr. Joseph de Otero y Cossio and Dr. Manuel de Guell y Serra, were having their morning session when they ordered Don Antonio Adorno to be brought out of prison. Once that was done and the prisoner was present, he was

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

Questioned if he remembered anything about his affair, which he was required to reveal according to his oath.

Answered, No.

No.

He was then informed, that he was aware he had been exhorted in the preceding audience, &c.

He was then told that he knew he had been encouraged in the previous meeting, etc.

Answered, that he had considered the exhortation, but had nothing more to say.

Answered that he had thought about the encouragement, but had nothing else to add.

Straightway appeared the Licentiate Don Fausto Antonio de Astorquiza y Urreta, Inquisitor Fiscal of this Holy Office, and presented an accusation, signed by him, against the said Don Antonio Adorno, which accusation he formally swore was not offered through malice. Here follows the accusation.

Straight away, Licentiate Don Fausto Antonio de Astorquiza y Urreta, Inquisitor Fiscal of this Holy Office, showed up and presented an accusation, signed by him, against Don Antonio Adorno. He formally swore that the accusation was not made out of malice. Here follows the accusation.

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIRS,

DEAR SIRS,

I, the Inquisitor Fiscal, appear before your Excellencies, and accuse criminally Don Antonio Adorno, a native of the city of Genoa, aged twentyseven years, a soldier in the regiment of Asturias, and at the time of his arrest, in garrison, in the town of Reus, in this principality, now attached to the secret prison of this Holy Office, with his property sequestered, and present here in person—for that this person, being a baptized and confirmed Christian, and not having the fear of God, or the justice of your Excellencies before his eyes, has committed heavy crimes against our Holy Catholic Faith, by professing and practising various necromantical arts, with insult to the holy sacrifice of the mass, its sacred ceremonies, and the holy cross; also imparting his evil art and instruments to others, for their practice, with the like insult to the holy cross and holy sacrifice of the mass. On which account, I hold him at least to be suspected de levi in the faith, and accuse him of the whole, both in general and in particular.

I, the Inquisitor Fiscal, come before you, esteemed officials, to accuse Don Antonio Adorno, a 27-year-old from the city of Genoa, a soldier in the Asturias regiment, who was arrested while stationed in the town of Reus in this principality. He is currently held in a secret prison of this Holy Office, his property seized, and is present here in person. This individual, being a baptized and confirmed Christian, has shown a lack of fear for God and disregard for your justice, committing serious crimes against our Holy Catholic Faith by practicing various necromantic arts, which offend the holy sacrifice of the mass, its sacred ceremonies, and the holy cross. He has also shared his harmful practices and tools with others, further disrespecting the holy cross and the holy sacrifice of the mass. For these reasons, I consider him at least suspected de levi in faith, and I accuse him of these matters, both in general and in specific.

1. The said person, on a time specified, and in the company of certain persons named, declared that he was able when anything was stolen, to discover the thief, and in proof of this assertion, stated that he had formerly done this by writing the names upon papers, of some persons, among whom a sum of money had been stolen, and putting the papers into the fire, repeating the words, ‘Ego sum; factus est homo, consummatum est.’ The papers were consumed, except that bearing the name of the thief. None but the said person could take this paper out of the fire, and the money was found upon the one designated.

1. The person in question, at an agreed time and with certain other people present, claimed that he could identify the thief whenever something was stolen. To prove this claim, he recounted that he had previously done this by writing the names of some individuals, among whom money had been stolen, on pieces of paper, then putting the papers in the fire while saying, ‘Ego sum; factus est homo, consummatum est.’ The papers burned, except for the one with the thief's name. Only he could remove this paper from the fire, and the money was found with the person identified.

2. Some one objecting to him, that this could not be done without some pact with the devil, he replied that it was so justifiable an act, that he would perform it immediately after mass or communion, and it being declared a matter to be laid before the Inquisition, he affirmed that he would do it in presence of the Inquisitors.

2. When someone objected that this couldn't be done without some deal with the devil, he replied that it was such a justifiable act that he would do it right after mass or communion. And since it was said that this needed to be brought before the Inquisition, he stated that he would do it in front of the Inquisitors.

3. Furthermore, he asserted that he could execute the above purpose by rubbing the ashes of the papers upon his hand, where it would leave impressed the name of the thief; also, that he knew another method which he did not explain. I request that he may be questioned what this method is, where he learned it, and whether he has practised these two last, uttering the words before specified.

3. Furthermore, he claimed that he could achieve this goal by rubbing the ashes of the papers on his hand, which would leave the name of the thief imprinted there. He also mentioned that he knew another method, but he didn't explain it. I ask that he be questioned about what this method is, where he learned it, and if he has practiced the last two methods, saying the words mentioned earlier.

4. Continuing the conversation with the abovementioned person, he informed him that he possessed certain instruments of use in various ways, and in fact showed him something folded up, which he took out of his pocket. And, on being asked whence he obtained the knowledge of these arts, replied that he learned them from a book of magic in his possession, which enabled him to do whatever he pleased. I request that he may be questioned respecting this book of magic, as well as the contents of the abovementioned envelope.

4. Continuing the conversation with the person mentioned earlier, he told him that he had some tools he could use in different ways, and actually showed him something folded up that he took out of his pocket. When asked where he got the knowledge of these skills, he replied that he learned them from a book of magic he owned, which allowed him to do whatever he wanted. I request that he be asked about this book of magic, as well as the contents of the previously mentioned envelope.

5. He told this person that he could learn from the same book how to make himself invisible, as well as invulnerable to the thrust of a sword.

5. He told this person that they could learn from the same book how to make themselves invisible, as well as invulnerable to the stab of a sword.

6. Being questioned by this person whether he knew any art relative to playing at ball, he answered, not then, but that he would come to his house, and reveal to him a secret for gaining the favor of the ladies.

6. When this person asked him if he knew any tricks for playing ball, he replied that he didn’t at the moment, but he would come to his house and share a secret for winning the ladies' favor.

7. He went accordingly to this house, and there gave to the said person a strip of parchment bearing these words, ‘Ego + sum. Exe + homo consummatum + est. Ego Juaginus Aprecor Domini Nostri Jesu Christi in vitam eternam seculi seculorum libera me de omnibus rebus de ignis cautus et omnia instrumenta hominum detenta me ach die ach nocte custode rege et guberna me Amen.’ This was rolled up with a piece of lead and bone, and directed to be worn, in the shape of a cross, next the skin, near the heart, which would make the wearer invulnerable. I request that this parchment may be examined, and the prisoner questioned respecting it.

7. He went to the house and gave the person a piece of parchment with these words on it, ‘I am. The man is complete. I, Juaginus, pray to our Lord Jesus Christ for eternal life, free me from all things from the fire, and all the tools held against me, day and night, guard and govern me. Amen.’ This was rolled up with a piece of lead and bone and was to be worn in the shape of a cross next to the skin, near the heart, to make the wearer invulnerable. I ask that this parchment be examined and the prisoner be questioned about it.

8. He also gave the same person another strip of parchment, containing various letters and figures, taking measures with it upon his body, for the purpose of securing him from wounds. He directed him to rub this over with the wax which dripped from the tapers during mass, and afterwards to wear it next his skin. I request that this may likewise be examined, and the prisoner questioned respecting it.

8. He also gave the same person another strip of parchment, containing various letters and figures, using it on his body to protect him from injuries. He instructed him to rub it with the wax that dripped from the candles during mass, and then to wear it next to his skin. I ask that this be investigated as well, and the prisoner questioned about it.

9. He furthermore gave to the same person four other written parchments, directing him to wear one of them upon the little finger of his left hand under a white stone set in a ring. When this stone turned red, he might play at any game except dice or las quillas, and be sure to win; but, if it turned black, he was not to play. He directed him further to put these parchments in his right shoe and sprinkle them with holy water, after which they were to be worn near the heart. I request that these also may be examined, and the prisoner questioned concerning them.

9. He also handed that same person four other written scrolls, instructing him to wear one of them on the little finger of his left hand beneath a white stone set in a ring. When this stone turned red, he could play any game except dice or las quillas and would be sure to win; however, if it turned black, he was not to play. He also told him to place these scrolls in his right shoe and sprinkle them with holy water, after which they were to be worn close to the heart. I request that these be examined as well, and that the prisoner be questioned about them.

10. The same person requesting to see the abovementioned book of magic, he refused him, alleging that he could not read or understand it, but that he, the prisoner, had studied the whole. I request that farther investigations may be made respecting this book.

10. The same person who asked to see the book of magic mentioned above was turned down, with the explanation that he couldn’t read or understand it, but the prisoner claimed to have studied it thoroughly. I ask that further investigations be conducted regarding this book.

11. On another occasion, when some articles had been stolen, he discovered the thief in this manner. Collecting all the suspected persons in a dark room, he made a harangue, and ordered each man to dip his finger into a cup containing water, informing them that the water would blacken the finger of the thief. Before this was executed, he conveyed some ink into the cup. Afterwards the windows were opened with another harangue, and each man’s finger was found black with the exception of one who had not obeyed the direction. This the prisoner judged to be the thief. Without doubt the abovementioned harangues were conformable to the rest of his actions, and I request that he may be examined concerning them.

11. On another occasion, when some items had been stolen, he figured out who the thief was in this way. He gathered all the suspects in a dark room, gave a speech, and told each person to dip their finger into a cup of water, claiming that the water would turn the thief's finger black. Before this was done, he secretly added some ink to the cup. Later, he opened the windows and gave another speech, and they found that everyone’s finger was black except for one person who hadn’t followed the instructions. The prisoner concluded that this person must be the thief. Undoubtedly, the speeches mentioned were consistent with his other actions, and I request that he be questioned about them.

12. Furthermore he directed that the names of the persons present on the above occasion, should be written upon a paper and burnt. The ashes he rubbed over his hand, where it left marked the name of the delinquent, which the prisoner had previously written there with a certain liquor, in such a manner that it could not be seen.

12. He also instructed that the names of everyone present at that time should be written down and burned. He then rubbed the ashes on his hand, which revealed the name of the wrongdoer, a name that the prisoner had previously written there with a special liquid that made it invisible.

13. In the audiences which have been held respecting him, he has been exhorted to declare the truth and confess his crimes, which he has not done, but endeavoured to hide the enormities so recently committed by him, thus rendering himself unworthy of that mercy which your Excellencies extend to those who confess with sincerity, and deserving a punishment corresponding to his great offences.

13. In the hearings that have taken place about him, he has been urged to tell the truth and admit his wrongdoings, which he hasn't done. Instead, he has tried to cover up the serious crimes he just committed, making himself undeserving of the mercy that your Excellencies show to those who sincerely confess and deserving of a punishment that matches his significant offenses.

Therefore, I request and entreat your Excellencies to accept the confession of the said prisoner, so far as in my favor, and no farther, and to regard as fully proved my accusation, or such part thereof as may suffice to obtain a sentence, condemning the prisoner as perpetrator of the above crimes to the heaviest punishments thereto assigned by the sacred canons, pontifical bulls, common laws, and edicts of this realm, for a punishment to him, and a terror and example to others.

Therefore, I request and urge your Excellencies to accept the confession of the mentioned prisoner, to the extent that it benefits me, and not beyond that. I ask you to consider my accusation as fully proven, or at least enough to secure a sentence condemning the prisoner as the perpetrator of the aforementioned crimes to the harshest penalties outlined by the sacred canons, pontifical bulls, common laws, and edicts of this realm, as a punishment for him, and a warning and example to others.

Furthermore I request your Excellencies that without any diminution of my proofs, the prisoner may, if necessary, be put to rigorous torture, to be continued and repeated till he confess all his crimes and accomplices.

Furthermore, I ask your Excellencies that without any weakening of my evidence, the prisoner may, if needed, be subjected to severe torture, to be carried on and repeated until he confesses all his crimes and those who helped him.

The Licentiate,

The Licentiate,

Don Fausto Antonio de Astorquiza y Urreta.

Don Fausto Antonio de Astorquiza y Urreta.


This accusation having been presented and read, the said Don Antonio Adorno was formally sworn to answer thereto, and declare the truth; and the same being again read, article by article, he answered as follows.

This accusation having been presented and read, the said Don Antonio Adorno was formally sworn to respond to it and state the truth; and the same being read again, article by article, he replied as follows.

To the head of the accusation he replied that he was the same Don Antonio Adorno mentioned therein, and that although he in reality performed what has been laid to his charge, yet he never imagined it to be contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith, nor supposed it to be necromantic or superstitious; that he never had practised anything out of disrespect for the mass, nor had uttered sacred language for a superstitious purpose, nor imparted evil doctrine or instruments to others for this end; therefore he ought not to be suspected in the faith.

To the main accusation, he responded that he was indeed Don Antonio Adorno mentioned in it, and that while he did what he was accused of, he never thought it was against our Holy Catholic Faith, nor did he believe it was necromancy or superstition; that he never practiced anything out of disrespect for the mass, nor spoke sacred words for a superstitious reason, nor shared harmful teachings or tools with others for that purpose; therefore, he should not be suspected in his faith.

To the first article, he answered, that it was true, and that the circumstances occurred in the city of Valencia, in the house of a person whose name he could not recollect, but only that he resided in the Calle del Mar, near a Convent of Nuns. He made the assertions to give the company a high opinion of him. There were present on this occasion, three soldiers and an officer, who, with the prisoner, formed the patrol, a scrivener and two Alguacils, who also were attached to the patrol in Valencia. The operation which he described, he had heard of in the city of Inspruck in Germany. He had once practised it on the occasion of three dollars being stolen from Matheo Suarez, his sergeant. He wrote the names of some persons upon pieces of paper, and on the back of each, the words ‘Ego sum: exe homo: consummatum est.’ These were thrown into the fire, but the experiment did not succeed, for they were all burnt. He did this in private, and merely to satisfy his curiosity, without imagining it to be superstitious.

To the first question, he replied that it was true, and that the events took place in the city of Valencia, in the house of someone whose name he couldn't remember, only that they lived on Calle del Mar, near a convent of nuns. He made these claims to impress the group. There were three soldiers and an officer present, who, along with the prisoner, made up the patrol, as well as a scrivener and two alguacils, who were also part of the patrol in Valencia. The operation he described, he had heard about in the city of Innsbruck in Germany. He had once attempted it when three dollars were stolen from Matheo Suarez, his sergeant. He wrote the names of some people on pieces of paper, and on the back of each, he put the words ‘Ego sum: exe homo: consummatum est.’ He threw these into the fire, but the experiment failed, as they all burned. He did this privately, just to satisfy his curiosity, never thinking it was superstitious.

To the second article, he answered, that it was true he had made the assertions contained therein, as he could not believe the act to be evil, in which the words of Christ were used.

To the second article, he replied that it was true he had made the statements in it, as he couldn’t see the act as wrong when it involved the words of Christ.

To the third article, he answered, that it was true he had spoken what is therein stated, and that the divinations mentioned, were those he had confessed in the first audience, but that he had not made use of any prayers in these operations, although on the abovementioned occasions he gave those present to understand that various words were to be uttered.

To the third article, he replied that it was true he had said what was written there, and that the prophecies mentioned were those he had admitted in the first meeting, but that he had not used any prayers in these actions, even though on the occasions mentioned, he led those present to believe that certain words were to be spoken.

To the fourth article, he answered, that it was true the conversation and acts therein described took place; that it happened in Valencia, with the scrivener abovementioned. The paper which he took from his pocket, contained some bits of bone and a bullet battered to pieces. As to what he asserted respecting the book of magic, he had done it to measure the degree of credulity of the said scrivener, who readily swallowed all his tales, and offered him money to learn the abovementioned arts. He never possessed any such book of magic.

To the fourth article, he replied that it was true the conversation and events described happened; that it took place in Valencia, with the mentioned scrivener. The paper he took from his pocket included some fragments of bone and a battered bullet. Regarding his claims about the book of magic, he made those up to gauge how gullible the scrivener was, who eagerly believed all his stories and even offered him money to learn those mentioned arts. He never had any book of magic.

To the fifth article, he answered, that what it contained with respect to the security from the thrust with a sword, was true, but as to what it stated respecting his assertion of making himself invisible, he had no recollection of any such thing.

To the fifth article, he replied that the part about protecting himself from a sword thrust was true, but regarding the claim about making himself invisible, he had no memory of that at all.

To the sixth article, he answered, that it was true.

To the sixth article, he responded that it was true.

To the seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth articles, he answered, that they were true. The parchments described by the Fiscal, and now exhibited, were recognised by him for the same he gave to the scrivener, with whom he held the conversation described. This man’s name was Joachin. He was so desirous of obtaining a knowledge of the things related by the prisoner, that he furnished him with the parchment for the purpose. It was all done by the prisoner, to divert himself with the credulity of this person, and upon the parchments was written, among other expressions, these words in the German language, ‘tu pist aynor tas tu tost claupt;[17] that is, ‘you are a fool to believe this,’ by which it might be easily perceived that his only object was to impose upon him.

To the seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth articles, he replied that they were true. The documents presented by the Prosecutor, which are now shown, were recognized by him as the same ones he gave to the writer, with whom he had the conversation mentioned. This man's name was Joachim. He was so eager to learn about the things the prisoner was talking about that he provided him with the documents for that purpose. The prisoner did all this to amuse himself with this person's gullibility, and written on the documents, among other phrases, were these words in German, ‘tu pist aynor tas tu tost claupt;[17] meaning ‘you are a fool to believe this,’ which clearly showed that his only goal was to trick him.

It being now late, the audience closed, and the above having been read to the prisoner, was declared by him to be correctly recorded, and the truth, according to the oath which he had sworn.

It was now late, the audience was over, and after the above had been read to the prisoner, he stated that it was recorded accurately and was true, according to the oath he had taken.

Signed by him,

Signed by him.

M. Anto. Adorno.
Don Joseph de Noboa, Sec’y.

M. Anton. Adorno.
Don Joseph de Noboa, Secretary.


In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the thirteenth day of August, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, the Inquisitors, Licentiate Don Joseph de Otero y Cossio, and Don Manuel de Guell y Serra, being at their morning audience, ordered the abovementioned Don Antonio Adorno to be brought out of prison; which being done, he was ordered to continue his answers to the accusation under the oath which he had already sworn.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on August 13, 1756, the Inquisitors, Licentiate Don Joseph de Otero y Cossio and Don Manuel de Guell y Serra, during their morning session, ordered the aforementioned Don Antonio Adorno to be brought out of prison. Once that was done, he was instructed to continue his responses to the accusation under the oath he had already taken.

To the eleventh and twelfth articles he answered that they were true, and that the circumstances took place in the manner described by him in the first audience, but that the harangues he made, had only for their object to create wonder in the hearers, and that he used no prayers nor sacred words.

To the eleventh and twelfth articles, he responded that they were true and that the events occurred as he described in the first audience. However, he stated that the speeches he gave were only meant to amaze the listeners and that he did not use any prayers or sacred words.

To the thirteenth article he answered that he had confessed everything, and that he promised a thorough amendment of his follies into which he had been drawn by his ignorance, and desire to gain a little money to relieve his misery.

To the thirteenth article, he responded that he had confessed everything and promised to completely change his mistakes, which he had made due to his ignorance and a desire to earn a little money to ease his suffering.

To the conclusion he answered that he again implored the mercy of the Holy Office for what he had confessed, which was all he had done, and that although he were put to the torture he could say nothing more. The above being the truth according to the oath he had sworn, and the whole having been read in this audience, was declared to be what he had confessed, and was signed by him.

To wrap up, he replied that he once again asked for the mercy of the Holy Office for what he had confessed, which was all he had done, and that even if he were tortured, he could say nothing more. The above was the truth according to the oath he had taken, and everything had been read in this meeting, confirmed as what he had confessed, and signed by him.

M. Antonio Adorno.
Don Joseph de Noboa, Sec’y.

M. Antonio Adorno.
Don Joseph de Noboa, Secretary.

SENTENCE.

SENTENCE.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the fourteenth day of August, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, the Inquisitors, Licentiate Don Joseph de Otero y Cossio and Don Manuel de Guell y Serra being at their morning audience, and having examined the proceedings against Don Antonio Adorno as far as the accusation and answers thereto—

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on August 14, 1756, the Inquisitors, Licentiate Don Joseph de Otero y Cossio and Don Manuel de Guell y Serra, were having their morning session, and after reviewing the case against Don Antonio Adorno up to the accusation and his responses—

Ordered, unanimously, that this person be severely reprehended, admonished, and warned, in the Hall of the Tribunal with closed doors, and that he be banished perpetually from the Spanish dominions at a date to be fixed upon, and that he be informed that if he fail to comply punctually with every order, he will be severely punished and proceeded against with all the rigor of justice;—that this trial be suspended for the present and the sentence submitted to the Council.

Ordered, unanimously, that this individual be seriously reprimanded, warned, and cautioned in the Tribunal Hall with closed doors, and that he be permanently exiled from the Spanish territories on a date to be determined. He is to be informed that if he fails to comply fully with every order, he will face severe punishment and be dealt with according to the full extent of the law;—that this trial be put on hold for now and the sentence be presented to the Council.

Don Joseph de Noboa, Sec’y.

Don Joseph de Noboa, Sec’y.

In the Council, September 4th, 1756.

In the Council, September 4, 1756.

Señores, Barreda, Ravazo, and Herreros.

Gentlemen, Barreda, Ravazo, and Herreros.

Let justice be executed according to the above sentence.

Let justice be carried out based on the previous statement.

EXTRACTS

FROM THE REGISTER OF THE PRISONS.

March, 1730.

March 1730.

No. 8. Juan Panisso. Prison of the Martyrs. Maintenance, two sueldos and the bread of the Contractor.

No. 8. Juan Panisso. Prison of the Martyrs. Maintenance, two salaries, and the Contractor's bread.

Juan Panisso, a native and inhabitant of this city, a married man, in custody in the secret Prison of this Holy Office, with his property sequestrated, for uttering heretical speeches. Respecting this prisoner, information was forwarded last January, that proceedings were on foot for taking the depositions of the witnesses against him, with a view to their publication. The audience for this purpose was held on the twentyninth of this month, and the prisoner answered to the charges with a full denial. In this state the case remains at present.

Juan Panisso, a local resident of this city, a married man, is currently in custody at the secret Prison of this Holy Office, with his belongings confiscated for making heretical statements. Last January, information was sent out that proceedings were underway to take witness statements against him for publication. The hearing for this was held on the twenty-ninth of this month, and the prisoner fully denied the charges. The case remains in this state for now.

April, 1730.

April 1730.

The prisoner was furnished with the publication of the testimony, and allowed to confer with his counsel. He drew up articles of defence, and in this state the case remains.

The prisoner was provided with the published testimony and allowed to meet with his lawyer. He prepared defense documents, and the case remains in this condition.

June, 1730.

June 1730.

The prisoner’s defence was received on the third of this month, and the audience for communication with his counsel was held on the eighth, when his final defence was made. On the ninth, sentence was passed with the assistance of the Ordinary, unanimously, that the prisoner should be put to the regular torture, before the execution of which, it was resolved that the case should be referred to your Highness, which was done on the tenth. The matter remains in this state waiting for the decision of your Highness.

The prisoner's defense was submitted on the third of this month, and the meeting to discuss it with his lawyer took place on the eighth, when his final arguments were presented. On the ninth, sentence was issued with the help of the Ordinary, and it was agreed unanimously that the prisoner should undergo the regular torture. Before carrying that out, it was decided to refer the case to your Highness, which was done on the tenth. The situation is currently on hold, awaiting your Highness's decision.

August, 1730.

August 1730.

On the first of July we received the order of your Highness to put the prisoner to the torture ad arbitrium. On the twelfth an audience was held, in which a sentence to that effect was passed. The prisoner was informed of the same, and admonished in the customary manner, but persisted in his denial. He was then put to the torture,[18] but suffered the whole without confessing anything. On the fifteenth, with the assistance of the Ordinary, his case was definitively judged by a sentence pronounced unanimously, that the prisoner hear his own condemnation read in the hall of the Tribunal with open doors; that he make an abjuration de levi, be severely reprehended and warned, absolved ad cautelam, and be banished from this city, Madrid, and the court of his Majesty, to a distance of eight leagues, for the space of five years, the three first of which to be spent in the royal garrison of this city. This sentence was referred to your Highness the same day, and on the fourteenth of August, the answer received in which your Highness ordered that the prisoner be brought into the hall of the Tribunal, and there, with closed doors, be severely reprehended and warned, that he be admonished to abstain from the like offences in future, and forthwith dismissed. This was executed on the same day, together with the audience for binding him to secrecy, and making inquiries respecting the prison. The prisoner was then dismissed.

On July 1st, we received your Highness's order to torture the prisoner ad arbitrium. On the 12th, an audience was held, during which a sentence of that nature was passed. The prisoner was informed and warned as usual, but he continued to deny everything. He was then tortured,[18] yet he endured it all without confessing anything. On the 15th, with the help of the Ordinary, his case was finally judged, and a unanimous sentence was pronounced: the prisoner would hear his own condemnation read in the Tribunal hall with open doors; he was to make an abjuration de levi, be severely reprimanded and warned, absolved ad cautelam, and banished from this city, Madrid, and the court of his Majesty, for eight leagues, for five years, the first three of which would be spent in the royal garrison of this city. This sentence was sent to your Highness the same day, and on August 14th, we received your response ordering that the prisoner be brought into the Tribunal hall where, with closed doors, he would be severely reprimanded and warned, and admonished to refrain from similar offenses in the future, and then immediately dismissed. This was carried out on the same day, along with the hearing to bind him to secrecy and to investigate the prison. The prisoner was then dismissed.

Dr Don Miguel Vizente Cebrian y Augustin.

Dr. Don Miguel Vizente Cebrian and Augustin.

March, 1730.

March 1730.

Isabel Boxi, alias Modroño. Prison of Sta. Maria. Maintenance, two sueldos and the bread of the Contractor.

Isabel Boxi, also known as Modroño. Sta. Maria Prison. Maintenance, two salaries and the contractor's bread.

Isabel Boxi, alias Modroño, widow, native of Vilaseca, in the diocese of Tarragona, aged sixtythree years, confined in the secret prison of this Holy Office, with her property sequestered, for witchcraft and superstition. Respecting this prisoner your Highness was informed in the month of January, that the witnesses were giving their testimony against her for publication. Nothing was done in all February, and part of the present month, with respect either to this or the other cases, for this reason; the Inquisitor, Licentiate Don Balthasar Villarexo has been out of health most of this month, and I have been in the same state all the month of February. For the same reason, also, no account was transmitted the last month, there being no proceedings to relate. At present, we have done nothing more than hold an audience for the publication of the testimony against the above prisoner, and shall proceed with this case after the holidays.

Isabel Boxi, also known as Modroño, a 63-year-old widow from Vilaseca in the Tarragona diocese, is being held in a secret prison by this Holy Office, with her assets seized, on charges of witchcraft and superstition. Concerning this prisoner, Your Highness was informed in January that witnesses were providing testimonies against her for publication. Nothing was done throughout February and part of this month regarding this or other cases because the Inquisitor, Licentiate Don Balthasar Villarexo, has been unwell for most of this month, and I have been in poor health throughout February as well. For the same reason, no report was sent last month since there were no proceedings to discuss. Currently, we have only held an audience to publish the testimony against the aforementioned prisoner, and we will continue with this case after the holidays.

April, 1730.

April 1730.

The publication of the testimony was done on the eighteenth and twentyfourth of this month, on which occasions the prisoner made her answers to the charges, and denied the whole. In this state the case remains at present.

The testimony was published on the eighteenth and twenty-fourth of this month, during which the prisoner responded to the charges and completely denied them. The case remains in this state for now.

May, 1730.

May 1730.

The publication was communicated to the prisoner, and she conferred with her counsel, and drew up her defence. Sentence was passed, and the same referred to your Highness.

The publication was shared with the prisoner, and she discussed it with her lawyer and prepared her defense. The sentence was given, and it was forwarded to your Highness.

June, 1730.

June 1730.

On the third of this month, the order of your Highness respecting the prisoner was received, which having confirmed the sentence, an auto was given in the church of Santa Agueda on the eighteenth of this month, the prisoner being present in penitential garments, with the insignia of her offences. Her sentence was read and she made an abjuration de levi, after which she was absolved ad cautelam.[19] On the nineteenth, she received a scourging, and on the twentieth, after being reprehended, admonished, and threatened, she was informed that she must pass three years of confinement, in Vique, and be banished seven years more from Tarragona, Barcelona, and Madrid. On the same day, the audience was held for binding her to secrecy and ascertaining the state of her connexion with the prison. The day following she was despatched to Vique where she now remains in the custody of a learned person who is to instruct her in the Catholic Faith.

On the third of this month, we received your Highness's order regarding the prisoner, which confirmed the sentence. An auto was held in the church of Santa Agueda on the eighteenth of this month, where the prisoner appeared in penitential clothing, displaying the insignia of her offenses. Her sentence was read, and she made an abjuration de levi, after which she was absolved ad cautelam.[19] On the nineteenth, she was subjected to a flogging, and on the twentieth, after being reprimanded, warned, and threatened, she was informed that she must spend three years in confinement in Vique and be banished for another seven years from Tarragona, Barcelona, and Madrid. On the same day, her audience was held to bind her to secrecy and determine the status of her connections with the prison. The following day, she was sent to Vique, where she now remains under the care of a knowledgeable person assigned to instruct her in the Catholic Faith.

Dr Don Miguel Vizente Cebrian y Augustin.

Dr. Don Miguel Vizente Cebrian y Augustin.

March, 1730.

March 1730.

No. 3
Ana Vila y Campas. Prison of La Cruz. Maintenanace, two sueldos and the bread of the Contractor.

No. 3
Ana Vila y Campas. Prison of La Cruz. Maintenance, two salaries, and the contractor's bread.

Ana Vila y Campas, a native and inhabitant of this city, aged thirtyfive years, and a widow, confined in the secret prison of this Holy Office, with her goods in sequestration, for witchcraft and superstitious impostures. With relation to this prisoner, your Highness was informed in the month of January, that the depositions were collecting against her. The audience has since been held, and after the holidays, the cause will be carried on.

Ana Vila y Campas, a 35-year-old widow and resident of this city, is being held in the secret prison of this Holy Office, with her possessions being confiscated, for witchcraft and fraudulent superstitions. Regarding this prisoner, Your Highness was informed in January that evidence was being gathered against her. The hearing has since taken place, and after the holidays, the case will proceed.

April, 1730.

April 1730.

On the seventh and twentyfirst of this month, the audience for publication was held, in which state the case remains at present.

On the seventh and twenty-first of this month, the audience for publication took place, and that’s where the case stands right now.

May, 1730.

May 1730.

The prisoner communicated with her counsel, answered to the charges, and was sentenced. The sentence was referred to your Highness.

The prisoner spoke with her lawyer, responded to the charges, and was sentenced. The sentence was referred to your Highness.

June, 1730.

June 1730.

On the thirteenth day of this month, the order of your Highness confirming the sentence, was received, in consequence of which an auto was given in the church of Sta Agueda, where the prisoner was present, in penitential garments, with the proper insignia of her offences. Her sentence was read, she made an abjuration de levi, and was absolved ad cautelam. On the nineteenth, she was scourged, and on the twentieth, was reprehended, admonished, and severely threatened, after which the audience was held for binding her to secrecy, and making inquiry respecting the prison. On the night of the same day, she was carried to the casa de la Galera, where she is to be confined for ten years, at the expiration of which term, she is to be banished perpetually from this city and Madrid, for the distance of eight leagues. She remains at present in the charge of a learned person, who will instruct her in the Catholic Faith.

On the thirteenth day of this month, your Highness's order confirming the sentence was received, which led to an auto being held in the church of Sta Agueda, where the prisoner was presented in penitential clothing, wearing the proper insignia of her offenses. Her sentence was read, she made a minor abjuration de levi, and was absolved ad cautelam. On the nineteenth, she was whipped, and on the twentieth, she was reprimanded, warned, and harshly threatened. After that, an audience was convened to bind her to secrecy and to investigate the prison situation. That same night, she was taken to the casa de la Galera, where she will be confined for ten years, after which she will be permanently banished from this city and Madrid, for a distance of eight leagues. She is currently under the care of an educated person who will teach her the Catholic Faith.

February, 1736.

February 1736.

Joseph Fernandez in the secret prison of this tribunal, for having written and spoken divers heresies, blasphemies, and insults against our Holy Faith.

Joseph Fernandez is in the secret prison of this tribunal for writing and speaking various heresies, blasphemies, and insults against our Holy Faith.

Distitute.

Destitute.

Maintenance, two sueldos, and the bread of the Contractor.

Maintenance, two salaries, and the Contractor's share of the profits.

Prison of the Innocents.

Prison of the Innocents.

Joseph Fernandez, a native of the town of Santa Llina, in the bishopric of Urgel, aged eighteen years, formerly an apothecary, and latterly a soldier in the cavalry regiment of Calatrava, taken from the Royal prison of this city of Barcelona, and transported to the secret prison of this tribunal, on the twentieth of the present month of February. This prisoner made a spontaneous confession on the fifteenth of January of the present year, declaring that he had made an explicit league with the devil, and had granted him his soul. He furthermore stated that he had uttered, on many occasions, divers impious and heretical sayings against God, and against Christ and his Holy Mother. This confession was ratified on the eighteenth and twentyfirst of the month; and on the twentyeighth, in consequence of his confession, a sentence was passed, that the said Joseph Fernandez be reprehended, admonished, and warned; that he make an abjuration de vehementi, be absolved ad cautelam, and intrusted to the charge of a Calificador or learned person, for the purpose of being instructed in the mysteries of our Holy Faith, ratifying his previous confession, which sentence was ordered to be referred to your Highness, and transmitted the same day.

Joseph Fernandez, an eighteen-year-old from the town of Santa Llina in the Urgel bishopric, who used to be an apothecary and later served as a soldier in the Calatrava cavalry regiment, was taken from the Royal prison in Barcelona and moved to the secret prison of this tribunal on the twentieth of February. This prisoner made a spontaneous confession on January fifteenth of this year, stating that he had formed a pact with the devil and had given him his soul. He also mentioned that he had made various impious and heretical comments against God, Christ, and his Holy Mother on many occasions. This confession was confirmed on the eighteenth and twenty-first of the month, and on the twenty-eighth, following his confession, it was decided that Joseph Fernandez should be reprimanded, admonished, and warned; that he should make a formal renunciation de vehementi, be granted absolution ad cautelam, and be placed under the guidance of a Calificador or learned person, for the purpose of being taught the mysteries of our Holy Faith, confirming his previous confession, which decision was ordered to be sent to your Highness and transmitted the same day.

On the eighteenth of February, the answer of your Highness was received, with a confirmation of the sentence, which was not put in execution, in consequence of the prisoner’s having written several letters to the Inquisitor Don Balthasar Villarexo, which letters contained insulting, heretical, and blasphemous matter against our Holy Catholic Religion, as well as contemptuous and insolent language against the said Inquisitor. For this reason an order was issued for his imprisonment, and the said Joseph Fernandez was, on the twentieth of the same month, taken from the Royal Prison, where he was then confined. On the twentysecond and twentythird, an audience was held, in which he confessed that the letters were his, and that he had written them for the purpose of getting free from the Royal Prison, and the garrison where he was confined for desertion. He having named several persons in prison, before whom he had uttered heretical speeches, a commission was expedited on the twentyeighth to take their depositions. The cause is delayed till the depositions are completed.

On February 18th, your Highness's response was received, confirming the sentence, which wasn't carried out because the prisoner had written several letters to the Inquisitor Don Balthasar Villarexo. These letters contained insulting, heretical, and blasphemous content against our Holy Catholic Religion, as well as disrespectful and arrogant language against the Inquisitor. Because of this, an order was issued for his imprisonment, and Joseph Fernandez was taken from the Royal Prison where he was held on the 20th of the same month. On the 22nd and 23rd, a hearing was held in which he admitted that the letters were his and that he wrote them to try to get out of the Royal Prison and the garrison where he was held for desertion. He named several individuals in prison who had heard him make heretical statements, and on the 28th, a commission was sent to take their testimonies. The case is on hold until the testimonies are complete.

April, 1736.

April 1736.

On the twentysecond of March, the depositions of several witnesses were received, and some of them were ratified ad perpetuam rei memoriam, as the deponents in question were about to depart for the garrisons, to which they were condemned. A meeting of the Calificadores was held on the twelfth of April, and the proceedings examined. On the thirteenth, an order was issued that the prisoner should be taken from the intermediate prison, which he then occupied, and transferred to the secret prison. On the seventeenth, nineteenth, and twentieth, audiences were held, in which he confirmed what he had before declared in the audiences of the twentysecond and twentythird of February; namely, that his confession of leaguing with the devil and giving up his soul, was wholly fictitious, having been fabricated by him for the purpose of getting free from the garrison of Oran, where he was confined. He further confessed, that he had, in reality, uttered speeches against our Holy Faith, but that this also was done for the purpose above stated, and not with any belief in his own assertions. On the twentyseventh of the present month, an audience was held, in which the prisoner nominated for his Curador, Dr Joseph Viñals, who accepted the trust, and was allowed to exercise it. On the same day, the prisoner, in the presence of his Curador, ratified his confession without adding or diminishing anything, and the prisoner having been admonished in the regular manner, the accusation against him was presented.

On March 22nd, the testimonies of several witnesses were collected, and some of them were confirmed ad perpetuam rei memoriam, since the witnesses were about to leave for the military posts where they had been assigned. A meeting of the Calificadores took place on April 12th to review the proceedings. On the 13th, an order was issued to move the prisoner from the interim prison where he was held to a secret prison. On the 17th, 19th, and 20th, hearings were conducted, during which he reiterated what he had previously stated in the hearings on February 22nd and 23rd; specifically, that his confession of colluding with the devil and surrendering his soul was entirely false, having been fabricated by him to escape from the garrison of Oran, where he was detained. He further admitted that he had indeed made statements against our Holy Faith, but that this was also done for the same reason, without any genuine belief in his own claims. On the 27th of this month, a hearing was held during which the prisoner appointed Dr. Joseph Viñals as his Curador, who accepted the role and was permitted to act on his behalf. On the same day, in the presence of his Curador, the prisoner reaffirmed his confession without adding or omitting anything, and after being formally cautioned, the charges against him were presented.

May, 1736.

May 1736.

The prisoner answered to the accusation on the twentyseventh and thirtieth of April, confessing the charges to be true, repeating as before, that he had spoken the words as a means of being liberated from his confinement in the garrison of Oran, and without any bad intention. Having appointed the abovementioned Dr Joseph Viñals for his counsel, he conferred with the prisoner respecting his case on the second day of the present month. The counsel declared that he was ready for the proofs and a definitive decision, whereupon a commission was ordered for a ratification of the testimony in plenario. On the eleventh, the ratifications were received, and on the twentyfifth and twentyninth, audiences were held, in which a regular and formal publication of the testimony was performed.

The prisoner responded to the accusations on April 27th and 30th, admitting that the charges were true and reiterating, as before, that he had said those words to gain his freedom from the Oran garrison, with no bad intentions. Having chosen Dr. Joseph Viñals as his lawyer, he discussed his case with him on the second of this month. The lawyer stated that he was ready for the evidence and a final decision, after which a commission was arranged to confirm the testimony in plenario. On the eleventh, the confirmations were received, and on the twenty-fifth and twenty-ninth, hearings took place, where a formal and official announcement of the testimony was made.

September, 1736.

September 1736.

On the first of June, publication was made of several letters written by the prisoner to different persons. On the fifth, the answers of the prisoner to the charges were ratified before Dr Joseph Viñals, his Curador, and the prisoner communicated with the counsel respecting his defence. On the thirtieth, the defence was offered by the prisoner’s counsel, and a commission was granted to make the inquiries requested therein. On the eighteenth of July, the twentyeighth of August, and first of September, the result of these inquiries was received in the tribunal. On the fourth of September, an audience was held, and the prisoner informed that the matters for his defence were arranged, to which he answered, that he had nothing further to offer, and was ready for the decision. One of the charges against him, being that he had affirmed the physicians had pronounced him disordered in his mind, sometime in the last year, an order was issued for the physicians of the prisons to examine him. On the twentyfifth of September, a paper was received from the two physicians declaring that they had examined him, and that he was not then, nor had been at any time previous, in a state of mental alienation.

On June 1st, several letters written by the prisoner to different people were published. On the 5th, the prisoner’s responses to the charges were confirmed before Dr. Joseph Viñals, his Curador, and the prisoner consulted with his lawyer regarding his defense. On the 30th, the defense was presented by the prisoner’s lawyer, and a commission was authorized to conduct the requested inquiries. On July 18th, August 28th, and September 1st, the results of these inquiries were submitted to the tribunal. On September 4th, a hearing took place, and the prisoner was informed that everything needed for his defense was organized, to which he replied that he had nothing more to add and was ready for a decision. One of the charges against him was that he had claimed doctors had declared him mentally unfit sometime last year, prompting an order for the prison doctors to examine him. On September 25th, a document was received from the two doctors stating that they had examined him and that he was neither currently nor had ever been in a state of mental disorder.

December, 1736.

December 1736.

On the eleventh of October, an audience was held, at which the Ordinary attended, and sentence was passed, that the condemnation of the prisoner be read before him in the hall of the tribunal with open doors; that he make an abjuration de levi, and be banished eight leagues from this city and Madrid, for the space of three years, the first of which to be passed in confinement in some garrison to be fixed upon for that purpose; also that he be severely reprehended, admonished, and warned, and returned to the confinement from which he was taken, when brought to the prison of this tribunal. Ordered also, that before the execution of the above sentence, it be referred to your Highness, which was done on the thirteenth of October. The matter is now in waiting for the answer.

On October 11th, there was a gathering where the Ordinary was present, and it was decided that the prisoner's sentence would be read aloud in the tribunal's hall with the doors open. The prisoner was to make a light abjuration and be banished eight leagues from this city and Madrid for three years, with the first year spent in confinement at a garrison designated for that purpose. Additionally, he was to be strongly reprimanded, warned, and returned to the confinement from which he was taken when he was brought to this tribunal's prison. It was also ordered that, before carrying out this sentence, it be referred to your Highness, which was done on October 13th. The matter is currently waiting for a response.

January, 1737.

January 1737.

On the eleventh of this month, the answer of your Highness was received with the order respecting the prisoner, in execution of which, his sentence was read to him in the hall of the tribunal, and he made an abjuration de levi, was absolved ad cautelam, admonished, reprehended, and warned, after which he was sentenced to ten years banishment from this city and the Court, to the extent of eight leagues, the first five years of his banishment to be passed in confinement in the garrison of Oran. The same day an audience was held to bind the prisoner to secrecy, and make inquiries respecting the prison; after which he was sent to the Royal Prison of this city.

On the eleventh of this month, your Highness's response was received along with the order regarding the prisoner. In accordance with this, his sentence was read to him in the tribunal hall, and he made a formal renunciation de levi, was absolved ad cautelam, admonished, reprimanded, and warned. After that, he was sentenced to ten years of exile from this city and the Court, not to exceed eight leagues, with the first five years spent in confinement at the garrison of Oran. On the same day, an audience was held to ensure the prisoner would keep the matter confidential and to gather information about the prison; afterward, he was sent to the Royal Prison of this city.

Secret prison of the Inquisition of Barcelona, January thirtyfirst, 1737.

Secret prison of the Inquisition of Barcelona, January 31, 1737.

Don Francisco Antonio de Montoyer.

Don Francisco Antonio de Montoyer.

January, 1737.

January 1737.

Miguel Antonio Dundana, alias Miguel Antonio Maleti, in the secret prison of this tribunal, for heretical speeches.

Miguel Antonio Dundana, also known as Miguel Antonio Maleti, in the secret jail of this court, for heretical statements.

Prison of St. Bartholomé.

St. Bartholomé Prison.

Destitute.

Impoverished.

Maintenance, two sueldos, and the bread of the Contractor.

Maintenance, two salaries, and the contractor's payments.

Miguel Antonio Dundana, alias Maleti, a native of the city of Coni, in Piedmont, aged twentyfour years, a soldier in the regiment called the Queen’s Dragoons, confined in the secret prison of this tribunal on the sixth day of December last, for heretical speeches. On the tenth, fourteenth, and seventeenth of the same month, the customary audiences were held, in which the prisoner confessed nothing to the point. On the last day he nominated for his counsel, Dr Manuel Bonvehi, who accepted the trust, and the confessions of the prisoner were ratified. The accusation was then presented, to the several articles of which the prisoner replied on the sixteenth and nineteenth of the same month, declaring that some of them were false, and some true; but that he had uttered the words in mere jest. On the twentieth, an audience was held, in which the prisoner conferred with his counsel concerning his defence, and ratified the answers made to the articles of the accusation, making an end by calling for the proofs. On the same day, letters were sent to the other Inquisitions, requesting that their records might be inspected to know if any proceedings existed against this person. On the eleventh of the present month, a commission was granted to ratify the testimony for a decisive trial.

Miguel Antonio Dundana, known as Maleti, a 24-year-old from the city of Coni in Piedmont, a soldier in the Queen’s Dragoons regiment, was locked up in this tribunal's secret prison on December 6 for making heretical statements. On the 10th, 14th, and 17th of that month, the usual hearings took place, where the prisoner didn't confess to anything substantial. On the last day, he chose Dr. Manuel Bonvehi as his lawyer, who took on the case, and the prisoner's confessions were confirmed. The charges were then presented, and the prisoner responded to various points on the 16th and 19th, claiming that some were false and some true, but that he had said the words in jest. On the 20th, a hearing was held where the prisoner discussed his defense with his lawyer and confirmed the responses to the charges, concluding by asking for evidence. On the same day, letters were sent to the other Inquisitions, asking them to check their records to see if there had been any proceedings against this individual. On the 11th of this month, a commission was approved to confirm the testimony for a final trial.

March, 1737.

March 1737.

On the sixteenth of this month, the ratifications of the testimony were received in the tribunal, the business having been delayed on account of the great diversity of quarters occupied by the regiment of the Queen’s Dragoons.

On the sixteenth of this month, the confirmations of the testimony were received in the court, as the process had been delayed due to the wide range of locations occupied by the Queen’s Dragoons regiment.

May, 1737.

May 1737.

On the eighth, ninth, and tenth of April, the testimony was given in publication, and a copy of the same given to the prisoner, that he might arrange his defence by the help of his counsel. On the eleventh, an audience was held, in which he conferred with Dr Manuel Bonvehi, his advocate, and on the second of May, an audience was held, in which his defence was received. On the ninth of the same month, the commission and papers relating to the affair, were sent for.

On April 8th, 9th, and 10th, the testimony was published, and a copy was given to the prisoner so he could prepare his defense with the help of his lawyer. On the 11th, a meeting took place where he discussed things with Dr. Manuel Bonvehi, his lawyer, and on May 2nd, another meeting was held where his defense was presented. On the 9th of the same month, the commission and documents related to the case were requested.

June, 1737.

June 1737.

The papers were not received this month, on account of the difficulty in finding the requisite persons, but it is expected the business will be accomplished shortly.

The papers weren't received this month due to the challenge of locating the necessary people, but it's anticipated that the matter will be resolved soon.

July, 1737.

July 1737.

On the sixth of this month, the papers were received, and on the eighth the prisoner communicated with his counsel. On the seventeenth, the testimony against him was attested in plenario, and his condemnation confirmed. On the twentyninth, the proceedings of the trial were examined, and the Reverend Father M. Fr. Mariano Anglasell being present in the capacity of Judge Ordinary of the bishopric of Solsona, it was unanimously ordered that the prisoner be put to the regular torture; which sentence was ordered to be previously submitted to your Highness.

On the sixth of this month, the documents were received, and on the eighth, the prisoner spoke with his lawyer. On the seventeenth, the evidence against him was confirmed, and his conviction was upheld. On the twenty-ninth, the trial records were reviewed, and the Reverend Father M. Fr. Mariano Anglasell was present as the Judge Ordinary of the bishopric of Solsona. It was unanimously decided that the prisoner should undergo the standard torture, and this decision was to be submitted to your Highness beforehand.

September, 1737.

September 1737.

On the thirtieth of August, your Highness confirmed the above sentence, and ordered that the torture should be given ad arbitrium, to extort a confession of the acts and intentions of the prisoner. The papers relating to the trial which had been forwarded, were received back on the seventh of the present month. The prisoner being under the hands of the physician, on account of his health, the torture could not be applied till the twentieth, when the physician having certified that he was then in a condition to endure it, an audience was held, and the charges against the prisoner repeated, to which he answered that he had nothing to reply, further than what had been already said. He was then apprised of the sentence against him, and despatched to the torture room, where he confessed that he had uttered many of the assertions imputed to him, but that it was done in sport, and at times when his companions had intoxicated him, and he was not conscious of what he said, believing in his heart the contrary to what he had uttered.

On August 30th, your Highness confirmed the previous verdict and instructed that torture should be used at will to extract a confession about the prisoner’s actions and motives. The documents related to the trial that had been sent over were received back on the 7th of this month. Since the prisoner was under a doctor’s care due to health issues, the torture couldn't be applied until the 20th. When the doctor certified that he was fit to endure it, a session was held, and the charges against the prisoner were repeated. He responded that he had nothing to add beyond what he had already stated. He was then informed of his sentence and sent to the torture room, where he confessed that he had made many of the statements attributed to him, but claimed he did so in jest and at times when his friends had drunk him under the table, and he was unaware of what he was saying, truly believing the opposite of what he had expressed.

On the twentyfifth, an audience was held, in which he confirmed without alteration, what he had confessed under the torture, adding that he had made other assertions of the like nature, all for the motive above stated, and without entertaining inwardly any belief contrary to the precepts of the Holy Mother Catholic Church. In this manner the prisoner attempted to palliate his heretical speeches. On the twentyseventh, his confessions having been examined, they were attested, and the censure previously passed upon him confirmed, by which he was declared to be strongly suspected in the faith. On the twentyeighth, a final decision was given in the presence of Father P. Mro. Fr. Mariano Anglasell as Ordinary, and the prisoner was sentenced unanimously to be brought into the hall of the tribunal, and there, with open doors before the Secret Ministers, and with the insignia of his offences, to hear his condemnation read, make an abjuration de vehementi, be absolved ad cautelam, be severely reprehended, admonished, and warned, and then to be banished from this city, Madrid, the Court of His Majesty, and the town of Guisona and Tarragona, to a distance of eight leagues, for the period of eight years; the first five of them to be spent in confinement, in some garrison in Africa, to be fixed upon for this purpose, and that he be previously intrusted to the care of some learned person to receive instruction in the faith.

On the twenty-fifth, an audience was held, where he confirmed without change what he had confessed under torture, adding that he had made other similar statements, all for the reasons stated above, and without holding any internal belief that contradicted the teachings of the Holy Mother Catholic Church. In this way, the prisoner tried to soften his heretical remarks. On the twenty-seventh, his confessions were reviewed, validated, and the previous censure against him was upheld, declaring him strongly suspected of heresy. On the twenty-eighth, a final decision was made in the presence of Father P. Mro. Fr. Mariano Anglasell as Ordinary, and the prisoner was unanimously sentenced to be brought into the tribunal hall, where, with open doors before the Secret Ministers and with the symbols of his offenses, he would hear his condemnation read, make an abjuration de vehementi, be absolved ad cautelam, be severely reprimanded, admonished, and warned, and then to be banished from this city, Madrid, the court of His Majesty, and the towns of Guisona and Tarragona, for a distance of eight leagues, for a period of eight years; the first five of which were to be spent in confinement at a garrison in Africa, to be designated for this purpose, and that he be placed under the care of a knowledgeable person to receive instruction in the faith.

November, 1737.

November 1737.

On the sixteenth of October your Highness was pleased to order that the prisoner attend at an auto de fe if one should occur soon, otherwise to be led to some church in the guise of a penitent, and there hear his sentence read, make an abjuration de levi, be severely reprehended, admonished, and warned, and banished for life from Spain, after passing five years of confinement in the garrison of Oran, where he should be put under the care of some learned person, to receive instruction in the mysteries of our Holy Faith. On the third of November, the sentence was executed in the church of Sta Agueda. The same day he was sworn to secrecy, and despatched to the Royal Prison of this city, thence to be transported to his confinement in Oran. A letter was sent to Father Fr. Pablo de Colindus at that place, intrusting to him the instruction of the prisoner.

On October 16th, your Highness ordered that the prisoner attend an auto de fe if one should occur soon, otherwise he should be led to a church dressed as a penitent, where he would hear his sentence read, make a simple abjuration, be severely reprimanded, advised, and warned, and banished for life from Spain after serving five years in confinement in the garrison of Oran. During this time, he would be under the care of a knowledgeable person to learn the mysteries of our Holy Faith. On November 3rd, the sentence was carried out in the church of Sta Agueda. On the same day, he took an oath of secrecy and was sent to the Royal Prison in this city, from where he would be transported to his confinement in Oran. A letter was sent to Father Fr. Pablo de Colindus at that location, entrusting him with the instruction of the prisoner.

Inquisition of Barcelona, Nov. 28th, 1737.

Inquisition of Barcelona, Nov. 28, 1737.

Don Francisco Antonio de Montoya y Zarate.

Don Francisco Antonio de Montoya y Zarate.

July, 1739.

July 1739.

Juan Bautista Segondi, imprisoned for the crime of searching for treasures. Prison of San Francisco Xavier.

Juan Bautista Segondi, locked up for the crime of hunting for treasures. San Francisco Xavier Prison.

Maintenance, two sueldos, and the bread of the Contractor.

Maintenance, two salaries, and the Contractor's pay.

Juan Bautista Segondi, a native of the town of Perpignan in France, and an inhabitant of this city, aged fortytwo years, a married man, and by trade a watchmaker, confined in the secret prison of this tribunal, with a sequestration of his property, on the fourteenth of July, for superstitious and necromantical practices. He was assigned two sueldos and the bread of the Contractor, on account of the Treasury, as little of the prisoner’s property was secured. On the fifteenth, the first audience was held, in which he confessed that he had used the hazel rod for the purpose of discovering the situation of water, metals, and mines, inheriting the capacity to practise this art, from his being a seventh son, without the intervention of a female, and being born in the month of May. He stated that he had heard his father declare such persons could make the abovementioned discoveries, by holding the hazel rod in their hands. On the twentieth and twentyfourth, audiences were held, in which he confessed nothing more. The accusation was then presented against him, the several specifications of which he granted to be true. On the twentyfourth, he was furnished with a copy of the accusation, and nominated for his counsel, Dr Joseph Vila. On the twentyseventh, an audience was held, in which he communicated with his advocate, respecting his defence, and the cause was received for proof in a full trial. A commission was granted for the ratification of the testimony.

Juan Bautista Segondi, a native of Perpignan, France, who lived in this city, was 42 years old, married, and worked as a watchmaker. He was held in the secret prison of this tribunal, with his property confiscated, on July 14, due to charges of superstitious and necromantic practices. He was given two sueldos and bread from the Contractor, paid for by the Treasury, as very little of the prisoner’s property was protected. On the fifteenth, the first hearing took place, where he admitted to using a hazel rod to find water, metals, and mines, claiming he inherited this ability as a seventh son born without a female sibling in the month of May. He mentioned that he had heard his father say such individuals could discover the mentioned things by holding the hazel rod. On the twentieth and twenty-fourth, more hearings were held, but he confessed nothing new. The accusations were then presented to him, and he admitted to the truth of the various charges. On the twenty-fourth, he received a copy of the accusation and named Dr. Joseph Vila as his legal counsel. On the twenty-seventh, another hearing was held, where he discussed his defense with his attorney, and the case was allowed to proceed to a full trial for evidence gathering. A commission was authorized to confirm the testimony.

August, 1739.

August 1739.

The testimony having been ratified, it was given, in publication, on the nineteenth of this month, at which time, and on the twentyfirst, the prisoner replied thereto, by confessing the truth of the charges, and an additional one, of the same kind, being produced against him, it was also given in publication. On the twentysixth, an audience was held, in which the testimony, and the responses of the prisoner were read to his advocate, Dr Joseph Vila, and arrangements were made for the defence.

The testimony was confirmed and published on the nineteenth of this month. On the twenty-first, the prisoner responded by admitting the truth of the charges, and another similar charge was also published against him. On the twenty-sixth, a hearing took place where the testimony and the prisoner’s responses were read to his lawyer, Dr. Joseph Vila, and plans were made for the defense.

September, 1739.

September 1739.

On the ninth of this month, the defence was offered, and on the twelfth, the cause was judged before Father Mro. Fr. Mariano Anglasell, as Judge Ordinary, and sentence was passed upon the prisoner; which was, that he be brought into the hall of the Tribunal, and there, with open doors, hear his condemnation read, make an abjuration de levi, be severely reprehended, admonished, and warned, and apprised, that if he commit the smallest act of the nature of his former offences, he shall incur the penalty of two hundred lashes. It was also ordered, that the sentence, before execution, be submitted to your Highness.

On the ninth of this month, the defense was presented, and on the twelfth, the case was decided before Father Mro. Fr. Mariano Anglasell as Judge Ordinary, and a sentence was pronounced on the prisoner. The verdict was that he should be brought into the courtroom, and there, with open doors, hear his condemnation read, make a declaration de levi, be severely reprimanded, cautioned, and warned, and informed that if he commits even the smallest act similar to his previous offenses, he will face a punishment of two hundred lashes. It was also ordered that the sentence, before being carried out, be submitted to your Highness.

October, 1739.

October 1739.

The confirmation of the sentence having been received on the ninth of this month, it was put in execution on the thirteenth, on which day audience was held to swear secrecy respecting the prisons.

The confirmation of the sentence was received on the ninth of this month, and it was carried out on the thirteenth, the day when an audience was held to swear secrecy regarding the prisons.

Inquisition of Barcelona, Oct. 31st, 1739.

Inquisition of Barcelona, Oct. 31, 1739.

Don Francisco Antonio de Montoya y Zarate.

Don Francisco Antonio de Montoya y Zarate.

July, 1731

July 1731

Joseph Oliver. Prison of La Cruz.

Joseph Oliver. Prison of La Cruz.

Destitute.

Impoverished.

Maintenance, two sueldos, and the bread of the Contractor.

Maintenance, two salaries, and the contractor's fees.

Joseph Oliver, a native of this city, aged twentyseven years, a married man, and by occupation a husbandman. Proceedings were instituted against this person, and his actions having been attested to, he was ordered, on the eleventh of this month, to be imprisoned, with a sequestration of his property, for performing superstitious and magical cures. On the fifteenth of this month, he was confined in the secret prison of this Holy Office; and on the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth, audiences were held, in the last of which, the accusation against him was presented. In the aforementioned audiences, and in his answers to the accusation, he confessed the most of his crimes. On the twentieth and twentyfirst, he communicated with his counsel, and the case was admitted for proof in a full trial. The customary preparations being made, and the testimony ratified, the proofs are preparing for publication, and in this state the case remains.

Joseph Oliver, a thirty-year-old man from this city, married and working as a farmer, faced legal action. After his actions were confirmed, he was sentenced on the 11th of this month to imprisonment, along with a confiscation of his property, for engaging in superstitious and magical healing. On the 15th of this month, he was taken to the secret prison of this Holy Office; and on the 17th, 18th, and 19th, hearings were held, with the accusation against him presented on the last day. During these hearings, and in his responses to the charges, he admitted to most of his wrongdoing. On the 20th and 21st, he met with his lawyer, and the case was accepted for a full trial. With the usual preparations made and the testimony confirmed, the evidence is being prepared for publication, and the case currently remains in this state.

August, 1731.

August 1731.

On the eighteenth and twentyfirst of this month, the audience for publication was held, and the prisoner having answered to the charges, the audience for communication with his counsel, was held on the twentyseventh. By the advice of his advocate, the prisoner concluded his defence without alleging anything in his own justification. In this state the case remains.

On the 18th and 21st of this month, the hearing for publication took place, and after the prisoner responded to the charges, the meeting to communicate with his lawyer was held on the 27th. Following his lawyer's advice, the prisoner finished his defense without presenting any arguments for his own justification. This is how the case currently stands.

September, 1731.

September 1731.

On the sixth of this month, judgment was pronounced before the Ordinary, and the prisoner was unanimously sentenced to attend at an auto de fe if one should take place soon, otherwise at some church, in penitential guise, with the insignia of his crimes; and there hear his condemnation read, make an abjuration de levi, be severely reprehended, admonished, and warned, and be banished eight leagues from this city, Madrid, and the Court of His Majesty, for the period of ten years, being first confined three years in the garrison of this city of Barcelona. It was also ordered, that, before the execution of the sentence, it be submitted to your Highness.

On the sixth of this month, a judgment was delivered before the Ordinary, and the prisoner was unanimously sentenced to attend an auto de fe if one occurs soon, otherwise at some church, dressed in penitential attire with the markings of his crimes; there he will hear his condemnation read, make a formal renunciation de levi, be severely reprimanded, admonished, and warned, and be banished eight leagues from this city, Madrid, and the Court of His Majesty, for ten years, starting with three years confined in the garrison of this city of Barcelona. It was also ordered that, before carrying out the sentence, it be submitted to your Highness.

October, 1731.

October 1731.

On the first of this month, the answer of your Highness was received, ordering that the prisoner should hear his condemnation, and undergo the first part of his sentence in the hall of the tribunal, then to be banished as above specified, for the period of five years. This order was executed on the fifth, when the prisoner was sworn to secrecy respecting the prisons, and forthwith despatched.

On the first of this month, your Highness's response was received, directing that the prisoner should hear his sentence and serve the initial part of it in the tribunal hall, before being exiled as previously stated, for five years. This order was carried out on the fifth, when the prisoner was sworn to secrecy about the prisons, and was then sent off.

Dr Don Miguel Vizente Cebrian y Augustin.

Dr. Don Miguel Vizente Cebrian y Augustin.

December, 1732.

December 1732.

Blas Ramirez, a native of the village of Paya, in La Huerta, bishopric of Murcia, a soldier in the regiment of dragoons of Tarragona, aged thirtytwo years. Sent prisoner to this Holy Office, by Dr Jacinto Christofol, Curate of the town of La Selva, in the archbishopric of Tarragona, and Commissary of the Holy Office. A letter accompanied the prisoner from this Commissary, dated the eighth of November, and another of the same date was received from Dr Joseph Solano, chaplain of the regiment abovementioned. In both of these it was stated that the said Blas Ramirez had made a league with the devil, according to his own spontaneous confession. The aforementioned Dr Joseph Solano having communicated the case to the Archbishop of Tarragona, he was directed by him to transmit information of the same to the Commissary Dr Jacinto Christofol, who apprehended the said Blas Ramirez, and sent him under a guard to this Holy Office. On the thirteenth of November, Luis Pusol, the Familiar, gave him in charge to the Alcayde of the secret prisons, and on the same day the Inquisitor Fiscal offered a request that he might be kept in the carceles comunes, till the letter of the above Dr Joseph Solano should be examined, and his reasons explained for putting him into the hands of the Commissary as an offender against the faith, as well as to ascertain if there existed other evidence against him besides his confession. On the sixteenth a commission for making investigations upon this head was granted to Dr Mariano Morlaus, Commissary of the Holy Office, in the town of Tarragona, as the regiment abovementioned was quartered in that town and the neighbourhood. On the twentieth the commission was returned with the information that the abovementioned Dr Joseph Solano had left that place for Logroño, there to remain till Lent.

Blas Ramirez, a native of the village of Paya in La Huerta, bishopric of Murcia, is a soldier in the dragoons regiment from Tarragona, thirty-two years old. He was sent as a prisoner to this Holy Office by Dr. Jacinto Christofol, the Curate of La Selva in the archbishopric of Tarragona and Commissary of the Holy Office. A letter accompanied him from this Commissary, dated November 8th, and another from Dr. Joseph Solano, chaplain of the regiment mentioned earlier. Both letters stated that Blas Ramirez had made a pact with the devil, according to his own confession. After Dr. Joseph Solano informed the Archbishop of Tarragona about the case, the Archbishop instructed him to relay the information to Commissary Dr. Jacinto Christofol, who then detained Blas Ramirez and sent him under guard to this Holy Office. On November 13th, Luis Pusol, the Familiar, delivered him to the Alcayde of the secret prisons, and on the same day, the Inquisitor Fiscal requested that he be kept in the carceles comunes until the letter from Dr. Joseph Solano could be reviewed, along with his reasons for turning him over to the Commissary as someone who had committed an offense against the faith, to see if there was any other evidence against him besides his confession. On the 16th, a commission to investigate this matter was granted to Dr. Mariano Morlaus, the Commissary of the Holy Office in Tarragona, since the aforementioned regiment was stationed in and the surrounding area. On the 20th, the commission returned with the information that Dr. Joseph Solano had left that place for Logroño, where he would remain until Lent.

In the meantime the prisoner requested an audience, which was granted on the nineteenth of November, and he made the following declaration. When he was a youth he lived with the Curate of his village, and performed the offices of cooking, sweeping the house, and such other work as is usually performed by women, on which account some people called him a hermaphrodite, which, however, was not the fact. After his master died he suffered much poverty and mortification on account of the ridicule which this brought upon him. He joined the religious orders of St Francis and St Dominic, but was expelled from both when the report became current that he was a hermaphrodite. Finding himself overwhelmed with vexation and poverty, he at last invoked the devil to assist him in his misfortunes, offering him his soul if he would change his appearance into that of a woman, that he might earn a living by prostitution. The devil accordingly appeared to him several times, first in a human shape and afterwards in that of a monstrous animal. He demanded a certificate of the possession of his soul, which he was unwilling to grant, but offered to give him his word to surrender himself after seven years, if the devil would grant him his conditions. He afterwards repented of his iniquitous practices, and sought a remedy for his soul by following the directions of the Rector of the town of La Selva, Commissary of the Holy Office, and those of the Chaplain of his regiment, Dr Joseph Solano, which persons, in consequence of his confessions, transmitted him a prisoner to this Holy Office. A request has been made that letters be sent to the Inquisition of Navarre, demanding an examination of the said Dr Joseph Solano.

In the meantime, the prisoner asked for a meeting, which was allowed on November 19th, and he made the following statement. When he was younger, he lived with the Curate of his village and took on tasks like cooking, cleaning the house, and other chores typically done by women. Because of this, some people called him a hermaphrodite, which was not true. After his master passed away, he faced a lot of poverty and humiliation because of the mockery that came with it. He joined the religious orders of St. Francis and St. Dominic but was expelled from both when rumors spread that he was a hermaphrodite. Feeling overwhelmed with frustration and poverty, he eventually called upon the devil for help with his troubles, offering his soul in exchange for a transformation into a woman so he could make a living through prostitution. The devil appeared to him several times, first in a human form and then as a monstrous creature. He asked for a certificate of possession of his soul, which the prisoner was hesitant to provide but offered his word to give himself up after seven years if the devil met his demands. He later repented for his sinful actions and sought a remedy for his soul by following the guidance of the Rector of the town of La Selva, the Commissary of the Holy Office, and Dr. Joseph Solano, the Chaplain of his regiment. Based on his confessions, these individuals sent him as a prisoner to this Holy Office. A request has been made for letters to be sent to the Inquisition of Navarre, asking for an investigation into Dr. Joseph Solano.

April, 1733.

April 1733.

Letters were sent to the Tribunal of the Inquisition of Logroño, requesting an examination of Dr Joseph Solano, who was residing in that district. On the twentieth of November, a letter was received from Dr Mariano Morlans, Commissary of the Holy Office in the town of Tarrega, bishopric of Solsona, stating that a priest of that town was ready to denounce the prisoner, from what he had heard of the colonel of his regiment respecting his compact with the devil. On the twentysecond of the same month, a commission was demanded for the above mentioned Dr Mariano Morlans to examine the said priest, and summon the colonel referred to, as a witness against the prisoner. On the eleventh of December following, the said Commissary Morlans transmitted the information against the prisoner, gathered from thirteen witnesses, most of whom deposed that they positively knew the prisoner to be a woman, and one of them stated that he had asked the prisoner how she could, being a woman, procure such a thick beard. She replied that she had produced it with the help of an ointment; that she had been seduced and abandoned in her youth; that she afterwards dressed herself like a man, and turned soldier.

Letters were sent to the Inquisition Tribunal in Logroño, asking for an investigation into Dr. Joseph Solano, who was living in that area. On November 20th, a letter arrived from Dr. Mariano Morlans, the Commissary of the Holy Office in Tarrega, which is in the bishopric of Solsona. He mentioned that a priest from that town was prepared to report the prisoner based on what he heard from the colonel of his regiment regarding his deal with the devil. On November 22nd of the same month, a request was made for a commission for Dr. Mariano Morlans to question the priest and call the colonel as a witness against the prisoner. On December 11th, Commissary Morlans sent the information against the prisoner, collected from thirteen witnesses. Most of them testified that they were certain the prisoner was a woman, and one witness even mentioned asking the prisoner how, being a woman, she could have such a thick beard. She replied that she grew it using an ointment; that she had been seduced and abandoned in her youth; and that she later dressed like a man and became a soldier.

Another of the witnesses deposed that the prisoner informed him she was once a boy, and entertained a wish to become a female from her attachment to a young man. That the devil appeared to her in the shape of a handsome youth, and demanded what she wanted; to which she replied that she wished for the shape of a female. This the devil granted her, and they made a compact, by virtue of which she was to be alternately male and female, changing sex every seven years; which alteration she had effected by means of a certain herb.

Another witness testified that the prisoner told him she used to be a boy and wanted to become a woman because she was in love with a young man. She said that the devil appeared to her as a handsome young man and asked what she wanted. She responded that she wished to look like a woman. The devil granted her wish, and they made a deal where she would alternate between being male and female, changing her sex every seven years; she achieved this change using a specific herb.

On the seventeenth of December, the Inquisitor Fiscal requested that the acts and declarations of the prisoner might be attested, and this having been done in a junta of four Calificadores, the same persons unanimously presented the prisoner as a wizard, sorcerer, and one holding an explicit compact with the devil.

On December 17th, the Inquisitor Fiscal asked for the acts and statements of the prisoner to be recorded, and after this was done in a meeting of four Calificadores, the same individuals unanimously declared the prisoner to be a wizard, sorcerer, and someone who had a clear pact with the devil.

The information above specified having been received distinct from the prisoner’s own declaration, in the audience which he had requested, the Inquisitor Fiscal petitioned that he might not be tried as an Espontaneo,[20] on account of what he had concealed in his confession, that he might be removed into the secret prison, and his trial instituted forthwith. On the eighteenth of the same month, orders were issued for confining him in the secret prison, and commencing his trial. Three audiences were held, in which he confessed nothing beyond what he had declared in his first confession on the thirteenth of November. On the twentyfirst of January the accusation was presented, and an audience was held the same day, when the prisoner replied to the charges. On the two following days the acts which he had omitted in his confession were attested, and the prisoner declared that although in the bargain which he had made with the devil he had offered to surrender up his soul, yet he had not paid him any worship, nor abjured our Holy Faith, notwithstanding he internally consented to the delivery of his soul, and in consequence departed from our Holy Faith and God our Lord.

The information mentioned above was received separately from the prisoner’s own statement during the hearing he requested. The Inquisitor Fiscal asked that he not be tried as an Espontaneo,[20] because of what he had hidden in his confession, that he be moved to a secret prison, and that his trial begin immediately. On the eighteenth of the same month, orders were given to confine him in the secret prison and start his trial. Three hearings took place, during which he confessed nothing beyond what he had stated in his initial confession on the thirteenth of November. On the twenty-first of January, the charges were presented, and a hearing was held the same day, where the prisoner responded to the accusations. In the following two days, the actions he had left out in his confession were confirmed, and the prisoner stated that although in the deal he made with the devil he had offered to give up his soul, he had not shown him any worship, nor renounced our Holy Faith, even though he internally agreed to surrender his soul, and as a result, turned away from our Holy Faith and God our Lord.

The prisoner was furnished with a copy of the accusation, and on the twentyfourth conferred with his counsel, reserving his defence till after the publication of the testimony. The case was then admitted for proof, and the witnesses residing at a great distance, and in various places, the ratification of the testimony was delayed for some time. The business being finally accomplished, publication of the testimony was made on the thirteenth and fourteenth of April. In the audiences which were held on those days, the prisoner declared nothing of consequence. The audience for communication with his counsel was held on the sixteenth, and that for the defence will be held as soon as possible.

The prisoner was provided with a copy of the charges, and on the twenty-fourth, he talked with his lawyer, deciding to hold off on his defense until after the testimony was published. The case was then accepted for evidence, and since the witnesses lived far away and in various locations, confirming the testimony took a while. Once everything was finally done, the testimony was published on the thirteenth and fourteenth of April. During the hearings on those days, the prisoner didn't say anything significant. The audience for communication with his lawyer took place on the sixteenth, and the defense hearing will be held as soon as possible.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

[Here occurs a chasm in the manuscript.]

[Here occurs a gap in the manuscript.]


July, 1740.

July 1740.

Juan Ginesta, confined in the secret prison.

Juan Ginesta, locked up in the secret prison.

Prison of the Martyrs.

Martyrs' Prison.

Maintenance, two sueldos and the bread of the Contractor.

Maintenance, two salaries, and the contractor's pay.

Juan Ginesta, a native of this city, aged twentyfive years, was confined in the secret prison on the sixth of June, with sequestration of property, for performing magical cures and deceptive tricks, and uttering speeches against our Holy Faith. The first audience was held on the eighth, when he confessed that he had taught a person to perform cures by the application of certain remedies, and the uttering of a prayer; and also that he had practised the same arts himself. On the ninth, another audience was held, in which he confessed other practices of the same nature, and that he had uttered many speeches, by way of joke and pastime. On the fifteenth, the third audience was held, in which he declared, that having been questioned several times whether he had been in the Inquisition, he had answered, Yes. The accusation against him was presented on the eighteenth, at which time, and on the twentyfirst and twentyfifth, the prisoner answered to the charges, confessing the performance of the cures imputed to him, and the mode of executing them, denying withal some parts of the accusation. On the twentyfifth, he was ordered to be furnished with a copy of the accusation for the purpose of making his defence within three days. He nominated for his advocate Dr Manuel Bonvehi. On the twentyseventh, an audience was held, in which the prisoner communicated with his counsel respecting his defence. The Inquisitor Fiscal demanded ratification of the testimony, and the case was admitted for proof in a full trial. The testimony was then ratified and given in publication on the thirteenth, fifteenth, and nineteenth of July. On the twentythird an audience was held, in which the prisoner conferred with his counsel. The publication of the testimony was read to him, and he was furnished with the necessary papers for drawing up the defence. On the twentyninth an audience was held, when the prisoner’s counsel presented the defence, and demanded investigations; for which purpose a commission was granted on the same day.

Juan Ginesta, a twenty-five-year-old native of this city, was imprisoned in the secret prison on June 6th, with property confiscated, for performing magical cures and tricks, and making statements against our Holy Faith. The first hearing took place on the 8th, where he admitted to teaching someone how to perform cures using certain remedies and a prayer; he also confessed to practicing the same methods himself. On the 9th, another hearing was held, where he revealed other similar practices and mentioned having made many remarks in jest and for amusement. The third hearing occurred on the 15th, in which he stated that after being asked multiple times if he had been in the Inquisition, he answered affirmatively. The charges against him were presented on the 18th, and on the 21st and 25th, the prisoner responded to the accusations, admitting to performing the alleged cures and the methods he used, while denying some aspects of the charges. On the 25th, he was instructed to receive a copy of the charges to prepare his defense within three days. He chose Dr. Manuel Bonvehi as his advocate. On the 27th, a hearing was conducted where the prisoner discussed his defense with his counsel. The Inquisitor Fiscal requested the ratification of the testimony, and the case was accepted for a full trial. The testimony was then ratified and published on July 13th, 15th, and 19th. On the 23rd, a hearing took place in which the prisoner met with his counsel. The publication of the testimony was read to him, and he was provided with the necessary documents for preparing his defense. On the 29th, a hearing was held where the prisoner’s counsel presented the defense and requested investigations; a commission was granted for this purpose on the same day.

September, 1740.

September 1740.

The result of the investigations was presented on the third of August, and on the eighth, were communicated to the prisoner’s counsel, when the defence was concluded. On the eleventh, before the Judge Ordinary, the Most Reverend Father, M. Fr. Mariano Anglasel Merzenario, sentence was passed that the prisoner be brought into the hall of the tribunal, and there, with closed doors, in the presence of the Secret Ministers, hear his condemnation read, be reprehended, admonished, and warned, and afterwards banished eight leagues from this city, Madrid, and the Court of His Majesty, for the period of two years; which sentence was submitted to your Highness on the thirteenth of the same month, and on the tenth of September the answer was received ordering the first part of the sentence to be executed as above specified, and the prisoner to be banished for one year. This was carried into execution on the eleventh of September, and the audience held for binding the prisoner to secrecy and taking the customary precautions respecting the prison; after which an order was despatched to the Alcayde to take him from his confinement.

The results of the investigations were presented on August 3rd, and on the 8th, they were shared with the prisoner’s lawyer, at which point the defense was concluded. On the 11th, before the Judge Ordinary, the Most Reverend Father, M. Fr. Mariano Anglasel Merzenario, a sentence was delivered that the prisoner be brought into the courtroom, where, with closed doors, in the presence of the Secret Ministers, he would hear his condemnation read, be reprimanded, admonished, and warned, and then banished eight leagues from this city, Madrid, and the Court of His Majesty for a period of two years. This sentence was submitted to your Highness on the 13th of the same month, and on September 10th, the response was received, ordering the first part of the sentence to be carried out as stated, and the prisoner to be banished for one year. This was executed on September 11th, along with the hearing to bind the prisoner to secrecy and take the usual precautions regarding the prison; afterward, an order was sent to the Alcayde to remove him from confinement.

Inquisition of Barcelona, Sept. 27th, 1740.

Inquisition of Barcelona, Sept. 27, 1740.

Don Francisco Antonio de Montoya y Zarate.

Don Francisco Antonio de Montoya y Zarate.

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS.

Augustin Tamarit, a physician, of the town of Salas, was imprisoned in the Inquisition on the third of July, 1757, and tried for heretical speeches. The following are some of the articles of the accusation, with the imputed assertions qualified; that is, their character and tendency formally pronounced by the officers of the Inquisition.

Augustin Tamarit, a doctor from the town of Salas, was jailed by the Inquisition on July 3, 1757, and put on trial for heretical statements. Below are some of the charges against him, along with a description of the statements in question; specifically, their nature and intent as officially declared by the Inquisition officials.


In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentyninth day of March, one thousand seven hundred and fiftysix, at the morning audience, the Inquisitors Licentiate Don Joseph Otero y Cossio, Licentiate Dr Manuel de Guell y Serra as Calificadores, and Father Mariano Alberich, Jesuit, Fray Augustin Voltas, Dominican, Fray Raphael Talavera, Minim, and Fray Buenaventura de Lanuza, Observante, all of this Holy Office—having read article by article the following propositions, qualified them in the following manner.

In the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on March 29, 1756, during the morning session, the Inquisitors Licentiate Don Joseph Otero y Cossio, Licentiate Dr. Manuel de Guell y Serra serving as evaluators, and Father Mariano Alberich, Jesuit, along with Fray Augustin Voltas, Dominican, Fray Raphael Talavera, Minim, and Fray Buenaventura de Lanuza, Observante, all from this Holy Office—having reviewed each of the following propositions, qualified them in the manner described below.

A certain person, a native of these kingdoms, has asserted,

A certain person, a local from these kingdoms, has claimed,

That the Moors were wealthy, prosperous, and in the enjoyment of plentiful rain, directly the reverse of us Christians, and concluded by saying ‘What remains for us but to join the Moors?’ On another occasion he asserted that it was better to be bad than good, as good people were generally poor, and bad ones rich.

That the Moors were rich, thriving, and had plenty of rain, which was the complete opposite of us Christians, and he wrapped it up by saying, ‘What do we have left but to join the Moors?’ On another occasion, he claimed that it was better to be bad than good since good people were usually poor, while bad ones were rich.

The first part of this proposition is scandalous, savouring of Molinism and apostacy. The last is heretical.

The first part of this proposal is shocking, hinting at Molinism and betrayal of faith. The last part is heretical.

Speaking of the bishops, he said, in answer to a question, ‘What power have they to ordain priests?’

Speaking of the bishops, he replied to a question, "What authority do they have to ordain priests?"

This proposition is insulting to the episcopal dignity, and by the way in which it is expressed, the inference is drawn that it is virtually heretical.

This suggestion is disrespectful to the authority of bishops, and the way it's stated implies that it's almost heretical.

That the friars and ecclesiastics devoured the people, and that the king ought to take them into his service, by which means he would have soldiers enow.

That the friars and clergy exploited the people, and that the king should take them into his service, which would provide him with enough soldiers.

This is scandalous, and insulting to the ecclesiastical and secular state.

This is outrageous and disrespectful to both the church and the government.

That the figures of the Saints were said to work miracles, and if this were the fact, let one of them be thrown into the river to see if he could save himself.

That the images of the Saints were said to perform miracles, and if that’s true, let one of them be thrown into the river to see if he can save himself.

Blasphemous and virtually heretical.

Profane and almost heretical.

That it was a great pity for a man to be obliged to tell another, meaning the Confessor, everything he did, and that it would be better to speak into a hole and stop it up, for ‘what good did confession do?’ That he went to confession but once a year, signifying that but for constraint he would not go at all.

That it was really unfortunate for a guy to have to tell another person, meaning the Confessor, everything he did, and that it would be better to talk into a hole and block it up, because "what's the point of confession?" He went to confession just once a year, indicating that if it weren't for pressure, he wouldn't go at all.

This is heretical, as it is a scorning of the Divine institution of sacramental confession.

This is heretical because it disrespects the divine institution of sacramental confession.

Speaking of the supplications which are made for rain, he asked, ‘What use is there in running after these Saints, and what power have they to make it rain? What is the use of carrying in procession these images?’ meaning several, and among others that of Nuestra Señora del Coll, ‘as they are nothing but bits of wood or stone.’

Speaking of the prayers said for rain, he asked, ‘What’s the point of chasing after these Saints, and what power do they have to make it rain? What’s the point of parading these statues?’ meaning several, including that of Nuestra Señora del Coll, ‘since they’re just pieces of wood or stone.’

A heretical blasphemy.

A shocking blasphemy.

Speaking of the Bull of the Santa Cruzada, he asserted that if he was sovereign, he would hang every one who received the Bull.

Speaking of the Bull of the Santa Cruzada, he claimed that if he were in charge, he would hang anyone who accepted the Bull.

This is insulting, et sapiens hæresin.

This is insulting, and a wise heir.

Speaking of the chapels and hermitages in the village where he lived, he asked ‘What do those images do there?’ meaning, ‘Why do not people destroy them?’

Speaking of the chapels and hermitages in the village where he lived, he asked, "What are those images doing there?" meaning, "Why don't people destroy them?"

A heretical blasphemy.

A radical blasphemy.

Others saying to him ‘Let us go to mass,’ he answered by asking, ‘What could they get by hearing mass?’ thus disturbing the devotions of the hearers, and scorning this holy performance.

Others said to him, "Let us go to mass," and he responded by asking, "What do you get from hearing mass?" This disrupted the worshippers' devotion and showed his contempt for this sacred act.

Considered in connexion with the other assertions, this is scandalous, and sapiens hæresin.

When looked at alongside the other claims, this is outrageous and wise heir.

Speaking of Indulgences, he said with some contempt, that he should value six dineros more than all the Indulgences together, and that they were good for nothing.

Speaking of Indulgences, he said with some disdain, that he would value six coins more than all the Indulgences combined, and that they were worthless.

Scandalous and heretical.

Shocking and controversial.

Speaking of prodigies and miracles, he said that from the time of Christ to the present day there had been no miracles, that he knew this well, since he had conversed with a learned person. On another occasion, discoursing on the same subject, he said, that God had never performed a miracle, and he knew it, making at the same time the sign of the cross upon his forehead.

Speaking of prodigies and miracles, he stated that from the time of Christ until now, there had been no miracles, and he was certain of this since he had talked to an educated person. On another occasion, discussing the same topic, he claimed that God had never performed a miracle, and he was sure of it, while simultaneously making the sign of the cross on his forehead.

Heretical.

Unorthodox.

Speaking of tithes, he asserted that, were it not for compulsion, he would not pay tithes, and that it would be better for people to enjoy the fruit of their labors themselves, and not the ecclesiastics.

Speaking of tithes, he claimed that if there wasn't any pressure, he wouldn't pay tithes, and that it would be better for people to enjoy the benefits of their work themselves, rather than letting the clergy have it.

Insulting and scandalous.

Disrespectful and outrageous.

Speaking of burials and supplications for the dead, he asserted that when he died he would as willingly be interred in common, as in consecrated ground, and that but for compulsion he would not have a mass said for his soul.

Speaking of funerals and prayers for the dead, he claimed that when he died he would just as willingly be buried in a regular cemetery as in sacred ground, and that if he weren’t forced to, he wouldn’t want a mass said for his soul.

Sapit hæresin.

Sap it, Harrison.

He spoke with disrespect of the Holy Inquisition, and said that the Inquisition corrected none but madmen and fools, making them declare just what was desired, and then punishing them.

He spoke disrespectfully about the Holy Inquisition, claiming that it only targeted madmen and fools, forcing them to say exactly what it wanted and then punishing them.

Scandalous and insulting to the Holy Tribunal.

Scandalous and disrespectful to the Holy Tribunal.

The bells tolling for a dead person, some one said to him, ‘Let us say a paternoster for the dead,’ to which he replied with contempt, ‘To what purpose all these prayers for the dead?’ The other person answering that they were supplications for his soul if in Purgatory, inasmuch as the souls, which do not go to heaven or hell, are detained in Purgatory, he replied scoffingly to this effect: ‘Who has ever been in Heaven, Hell, or Purgatory, to tell us what becomes of the souls of the dead?’ adding, that sooner than die he would be transformed to a horse, an ant, or any other animal, for dead men never come back, and that when dead he would as willingly be buried in rubbish as in consecrated ground.

The bells were ringing for someone who had died, and someone said to him, “Let's say a paternoster for the dead.” He scoffed and replied, “What’s the point of all these prayers for the dead?” The other person explained that they were prayers for the person's soul if it was in Purgatory, since souls that don’t go to heaven or hell stay in Purgatory. He mocked this idea and said, “Who has ever been to Heaven, Hell, or Purgatory to tell us what happens to dead souls?” He added that before he would die, he would prefer to be transformed into a horse, an ant, or any other animal because dead people never come back, and that when he was dead he would just as willingly be buried in garbage as in holy ground.

Heretical.

Out of line.

Speaking of supplications for rain, he said they were good for nothing, and that it was nonsense to waste money for this purpose, for whether supplications were made or not, it would rain and shine just as it did in other parts of the world; that the rain depended upon the clouds, and God did not concern himself about it, adding, ‘Search in what part God exists to make it rain;’ and some one answering him, he repeated that they must get this error out of their heads, about supplicating for rain, as it was of no effect.

Speaking of prayers for rain, he said they were pointless and that it was foolish to spend money on them, because whether or not people prayed, it would rain and shine just like it does in other places; that the rain depended on the clouds, and God wasn't involved in it, adding, ‘Find out where God is to make it rain;’ and when someone responded to him, he reiterated that they needed to get the idea of praying for rain out of their minds, as it had no effect.

Scandalous and heretical.

Scandalous and heretical.

That St Thomas committed errors like the rest, and that it was useless to cite the authority of the Holy Fathers, for they were not to the purpose.

That St. Thomas made mistakes just like everyone else, and it was pointless to reference the authority of the Holy Fathers, because they were not relevant.

Scandalous and insulting to the Holy Fathers.

Outrageous and disrespectful to the Holy Fathers.

That we could not be certain that the supplications produced rain or cured sickness, and that it was superstitious to believe so as the vulgar did.

That we couldn’t be sure that our prayers brought rain or healed sickness, and that it was superstitious to think so, like most people did.

Heretical.

Radical.

The person who uttered the above sayings is declared unanimously to be a scandalous, presumptuous, and insulting blasphemer of the Saints, Holy Fathers, the Pope, and Ecclesiastical State, and to be suspected de vehementi.

The person who made the above statements is unanimously considered to be a scandalous, presumptuous, and disrespectful blasphemer of the Saints, Holy Fathers, the Pope, and the Church, and is suspected de vehementi.

Mariano Alberich.
Fr. Rafael Talavera.
Fr. Augustin Voltas.
F. Buenaventina de Lanuza.
Juan Antonio Almonacid, Sec’y.

Mariano Alberich.
Fr. Rafael Talavera.
Fr. Augustine Voltas.
F. Buenaventura de Lanuza.
Juan Antonio Almonacid, Secretary.

[Dr Tamarit, however, was fortunate enough to escape with a penance, the customary reprimands and threats in case of repeating his offences, and an imprisonment of about three months.]

Dr. Tamarit, however, was lucky enough to get away with just a penalty, the usual warnings and threats in case he repeated his mistakes, and about three months in prison.


In the town of Cardona, in the bishopric of Celsona, on the thirtieth of May, one thousand six hundred and fortyeight, in the afternoon, appeared voluntarily, before the Revered Joseph Riera, Presbyter and Commissary of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, and Dr Pablo Serra, Presbyter Rector of the said town of Cardona, and Notary, sworn, a woman calling herself Vitoria Sala, wife of Hermenter Sala, who came, as she stated, to give information of something relating to the Holy Office.

In the town of Cardona, in the bishopric of Celsona, on May 30, 1648, in the afternoon, a woman named Vitoria Sala, wife of Hermenter Sala, voluntarily appeared before the Revered Joseph Riera, Presbyter and Commissary of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, and Dr. Pablo Serra, Presbyter and Rector of Cardona, and notarized that she had come to provide information concerning the Holy Office.

Questioned, what she had to declare.

Questioned, what did she have to say?

Answered, that about a year ago, while she was confessing herself in the church of San Diego, of the aforesaid town of Cardona, to Father Fr. Felix Coll, a regular Ecclesiastic of St Francisco, and at that time Conventual of the Convent of San Diego, on many occasions during the act of confession or immediately after, and while in the confessionary, he had told her that he should ruin her, and many times he practised touching her face, thighs, and back. On one occasion he endeavored to feel of her bosom but she prevented him. At other times he touched and squeezed her with his hands, and in one instance attempted to kiss her, which she avoided by turning away her head. He told her that she must not discover these things to any other confessor, for he did not behave thus with any bad intention, but for the purpose of removing her scruples, and that it would be for her benefit.

Answered, that about a year ago, while she was confessing in the church of San Diego, in the town of Cardona, to Father Fr. Felix Coll, a member of the St. Francisco order and at that time a Conventual of the Convent of San Diego, on several occasions during or right after confession, he had told her that he would ruin her. Many times, he touched her face, thighs, and back. Once, he tried to feel her chest, but she stopped him. At other times, he squeezed her with his hands, and on one occasion, he attempted to kiss her, which she avoided by turning her head away. He told her that she must not reveal these things to any other confessor, insisting that he didn't act with bad intentions but to help her remove her scruples, claiming it would be beneficial for her.

The deponent was informed that the Promoter Fiscal of the Holy Office presented her as a witness in a cause under his direction against the said Father Fr. Felix. She was directed to give attention while her deposition was read word for word, and she declared that it was all true, and that she had nothing to add, diminish, or alter, respecting it, as it was the truth, and if necessary she was ready to repeat it anew against the said Father Fr. Felix Coll; that she did not make the declaration out of malice or ill will, but solely to discharge her conscience. The said Vitoria not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name.

The witness was told that the Prosecutor of the Holy Office had named her as a witness in a case he was overseeing against Father Fr. Felix. She was asked to pay attention while her statement was read out loud, and she confirmed that everything was true and that she had nothing to add, remove, or change about it, as it was the truth. If needed, she was prepared to repeat her testimony against Father Fr. Felix Coll; she stated that her declaration was not made out of malice or ill will, but purely to clear her conscience. Since Vitoria was unable to write, I, the Commissary, sign on her behalf.

Joseph Riera, Presbyter Commissary.

Joseph Riera, Presbyter Commissary.

Before me—

In front of me—

Pablo Serra, Presbyter, Rector of Cardona,
sworn Notary
.

Pablo Serra, Priest, Head of Cardona,
official Notary
.


In the town of Cardona, in the bishopric of Celsona, on the fourth of August, one thousand six hundred and ninetyeight, before the Reverend Joseph Riera, Commissary of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, appeared, according to summons from Celadonio Siejas, sworn Nuncio of the Holy Office, a woman calling herself Vitoria Salas, an inhabitant of the town of Cardona, in the bishopric of Celsona, aged, as she stated, thirtyfive years, more or less. She was formally sworn to declare the truth and preserve secrecy.

In the town of Cardona, in the diocese of Celsona, on August 4, 1698, before the Reverend Joseph Riera, Commissary of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, a woman named Vitoria Salas, a resident of Cardona in the diocese of Celsona, appeared as summoned by Celadonio Siejas, sworn Nuncio of the Holy Office. She claimed to be around thirty-five years old. She was formally sworn to tell the truth and keep everything confidential.

Questioned, if she knew why she was summoned to appear.

Questioned if she knew why she had been called to appear.

Answered, that she supposed it to be on account of the following statement which she had made to the Inquisition. She had confessed herself in the chapel of San Luis, or the church of the Convent of San Diego, in the town of Cardona, to Father Fr. Felix Coll, of the order of St. Francisco, then residing in the said convent, and, during confession or immediately after, while in the confessionary of that chapel, where he was deputed to hear confessions from February till September, 1697, he, at various times to the number of twenty or twentyfive, touched her with his hands, squeezed her face and neck, and on one occasion attempted to kiss her, but she prevented him by turning away her head. Also, on another occasion, he told her that he should ruin her, and that she must not speak of it or discover it to any one, as he did not act from any bad intention, but that all was done for her benefit. He further told her that he wanted to go to her house.

Answered that she believed it was due to the following statement she made to the Inquisition. She had confessed in the chapel of San Luis, or the church of the Convent of San Diego, in the town of Cardona, to Father Fr. Felix Coll, of the order of St. Francis, who was then living in that convent. During confession, or immediately after, while in the confession booth of that chapel, where he was assigned to hear confessions from February to September 1697, he, at various times totaling twenty or twenty-five, touched her with his hands, squeezed her face and neck, and on one occasion tried to kiss her, but she stopped him by turning her head away. Also, on another occasion, he told her that he would ruin her and that she should not mention it or tell anyone, claiming that he had no bad intentions and that everything was done for her benefit. He also mentioned that he wanted to visit her house.

Questioned, if she knew that this person had solicited any others during confession or immediately before or after.

Questioned if she knew whether this person had asked anyone else for confession, either right before or after.

Answered, that she had no knowledge of any such matter, but had been told by Marianna Guer y Savall, that the same Father Fr. Felix Coll had squeezed her hands in the act of confession several times.

Answered that she didn’t know anything about it, but had been told by Marianna Guer y Savall that Father Fr. Felix Coll had squeezed her hands several times during confession.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent. She was enjoined secrecy, which she promised. I sign in her name,

The above is the truth according to the oath of the witness. She was instructed to keep it confidential, which she agreed to. I sign on her behalf,

Before me—

Before me—

Vitoria Sala.
Dr Pablo Serra Presbyter,
Rector of Cardona, &c.

Vitoria Room.
Dr. Pablo Serra Pastor,
Principal of Cardona, &c.


MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

DEAR SIR,

When the guilty acknowledge their offences and repent with sorrow, God accepts them and grants them his most holy grace; and inasmuch as I have been so unfortunate as to commit some offences which relate to this Holy Tribunal, I transmit the following confession of them, not being able to present myself in person.

When those who are guilty admit their wrongdoings and truly regret them, God accepts them and gives them His divine grace; and since I have unfortunately committed some offenses related to this Holy Tribunal, I am submitting the following confession of those offenses, as I cannot appear in person.

I was accustomed frequently in the town of Cardona, to hear the confessions of a married woman named Vitoria Sala. I never took any great liberties with her, but touched her a few times while in the confessionary. Neither I nor she had any bad intention in this, but as I perceived that she was affected with some internal inquietude, I took her by the hand and touched her face and bosom with the other, as also her neck; this I did thirty or forty times. These slight faults I confess before God and the Holy Tribunal on account of the scandal which they may occasion. I cast myself at the feet of your Excellency, hoping to have my offences overlooked with love and charity, and promising henceforth the amendment of my errors. Trusting in this my conscience remains quiet, and I continue secure in my obedience, praying to God for the prosperity of your Excellency.

I often listened to the confessions of a married woman named Vitoria Sala in the town of Cardona. I never overstepped any boundaries with her, but I did touch her a few times while in the confession booth. Neither of us had any bad intentions in this, but I noticed that she seemed troubled, so I took her hand and touched her face and chest as well as her neck; I did this around thirty or forty times. I confess these minor offenses before God and the Holy Tribunal due to the scandal they might cause. I lay myself at your Excellency's feet, hoping my mistakes will be forgiven with kindness and understanding, and I promise to correct my errors going forward. Trusting in this, my conscience is at ease, and I remain secure in my obedience, praying to God for your Excellency's prosperity.

Gerona, September fourteenth, 1697.

Gerona, September 14, 1697.

Your most humble servant, who kisses the feet of your Excellency,

Your most humble servant, who kisses your Excellency's feet,

Fr. Felix Coll

Fr. Felix Coll


MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

Most Honorable Sir,

Since my letter of the fourteenth of September, to your Excellency, I have conducted myself with great circumspection on account of the charges I made to your Excellency against myself for faults committed against the Holy Tribunal. And as I am hindered from presenting myself at the feet of your Excellency, I again place myself in the same condition, under the shelter and patronage of the Holy Tribunal, in order that your Excellency, as the father of all piety and clemency, may clear my conscience and soul. Your Excellency must know then, that during a year which I lived in the town of Cardona as preacher of the convent, I was in the practice of confessing a certain female named Vitoria Sala, who was afflicted with many scruples, and in order to remove them at the pressing instances of her husband, I suffered myself to be led away by the devil so far as to behave with much impropriety towards her, as on many occasions when she was at my feet, I uttered to her very unchaste language, touching her bosom and face with my hands. This I did to the amount of seventy times or thereabout. Also, being without the confessionary, I gave her many embraces, and solicited her to love me. Although it be true that I practised these evil deeds, yet by the mercy of God I did not injure her honor or reputation.

Since my letter to your Excellency on September fourteenth, I have been very careful because of the accusations I made against myself concerning faults committed against the Holy Tribunal. Since I cannot present myself before your Excellency, I place myself again under the protection of the Holy Tribunal, hoping that your Excellency, as the embodiment of compassion and kindness, may clear my conscience and soul. Your Excellency should know that during the year I spent in the town of Cardona as a preacher at the convent, I regularly confessed a woman named Vitoria Sala, who struggled with many scruples. In an effort to help her, urged by her husband, I allowed myself to be led astray and behaved improperly towards her. On many occasions, as she knelt at my feet, I spoke to her in very inappropriate ways and touched her bosom and face with my hands. I did this around seventy times or so. Additionally, outside the confessional, I gave her many embraces and encouraged her to love me. Although I acknowledge that I committed these wrongdoings, by the grace of God, I did not harm her honor or reputation.

Furthermore at the same time I was so forgetful of my duty, that, falling unhappily in company with a female named Marianna Guer y Savall, who came to the holy confessionary to confess her faults to me, which faults were committed in my own person, the devil was so crafty that he caused me, a miserable sinner, to be led away in ten or twelve instances to speak language of endearment to her, and touch her bosom and face. These, father of all clemency, are my depraved actions in the Holy Sacrament of penitence. Instead of directing these two souls in the way of salvation, I led them to the devil by reason of my incontinence, malice, and little fear of God. And now, as God has granted me time, place, and occasion, I throw myself, like another Prodigal Son, at your feet, that like a loving father you may extend toward me whatever may be requisite to punish my heavy sins and offences, promising henceforth, to amend my evil ways, that the light of God may shine more clear. May God prosper and guard the infinite years of your Excellency.

Furthermore, at the same time I was so forgetful of my duty that, unfortunately, I found myself in the company of a woman named Marianna Guer y Savall. She came to confess her sins to me, which sins were my own. The devil was so clever that he led me, a miserable sinner, to speak affectionately to her and to touch her chest and face on ten or twelve occasions. These, Father of all mercy, are my wicked actions in the Holy Sacrament of penance. Instead of guiding these two souls toward salvation, I led them to the devil because of my lack of self-control, malice, and little fear of God. Now, as God has granted me time, place, and opportunity, I throw myself at your feet, like another Prodigal Son, so that, like a loving father, you may extend toward me whatever is necessary to punish my serious sins and offenses, promising from now on to change my wicked ways so that God's light may shine more clearly. May God prosper and protect the endless years of your Excellency.

Barcelona, May seventeenth, 1698.

Barcelona, May 17, 1698.

Your most unworthy servant, who kisses
the feet of your Excellency,
Fr. Felix Coll.

Your most unworthy servant, who kisses
the feet of your Excellency,
Fr. Felix College.

P. S. Although I write from this city, yet I have come hither to throw myself at the feet of your Excellency. My residence is in the Convent of St Francisco in Gerona.

P. S. Even though I'm writing from this city, I've come here to humbly present myself to your Excellency. I live in the Convent of St. Francisco in Gerona.


In the Imperial College of Tortosa, on the eighteenth day of March, seventeen hundred, the Inquisitor Licentiate, Don Juan Joseph Hualte presiding sole in the afternoon audience, having examined the information and proceedings in this Inquisition against Fr. Felix Coll, an Ecclesiastic and Confessor, of the Order of St Francisco, and a resident in the Convent of that order in Gerona,

In the Imperial College of Tortosa, on March 18, 1700, the Inquisitor Licentiate, Don Juan Joseph Hualte, presiding alone in the afternoon session, having reviewed the information and proceedings in this Inquisition against Fr. Felix Coll, an ecclesiastic and confessor of the Order of St. Francis, and a resident of the convent of that order in Gerona,

Ordered that he be reprehended, admonished, and directed to refrain from confessing females in private; submitting this sentence to the Council.

Ordered that he be reprimanded, warned, and instructed to stop confessing women in private; submitting this sentence to the Council.

Before me—

In front of me—

Don Juan de Castilla.

Don Juan de Castilla.

[Further proceedings were carried on against this person, but suspended by his death.]

Further legal actions were taken against this person, but they were put on hold after his death.


In the town of Besahi, on the twentysecond day of February, one thousand seven hundred and eightyfour, before me, Estevan Castanir, Presbyter and Curate of the Parochial Church of St Vicente, and me, Lorenzo Terrader, Presbyter and Canon of the Collegial Church of Besahi, Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth, and preserve secrecy, Juan Ricart, porter royal, a native of the above town, of age, as he stated, thirtyfive years or thereabout.

In the town of Besahi, on February 22, 1784, before me, Estevan Castanir, Presbyter and Curate of the Parochial Church of St. Vicente, and me, Lorenzo Terrader, Presbyter and Canon of the Collegial Church of Besahi, Notary, sworn to keep confidentiality and carry out our duties honestly, appeared, as summoned, and took an oath to tell the truth and maintain secrecy, Juan Ricart, royal porter, a local native of the town, who stated he was around thirty-five years old.

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

Questioned if he knew why he was summoned to appear.

Answered, that he could conjecture nothing.

Answered that he could guess nothing.

Questioned, if he knew that any person had said aught which was, or appeared to be contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Doctrine.

Questioned if he knew of any person who had said anything that was, or seemed to be, contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Doctrine.

Answered, No.

No.

He was then given to understand that information had been received and sworn to in this Holy Office, that a certain person had, accompanied by others, been to a certain castle in search of enchanted money; that they had signed a compact with the devil; that on reading a book the devil had appeared to them and promised them riches; and that he, the said Juan Ricart could give intelligence of these and many other things. For this reason he was admonished, in the name of our Lord and his glorious and blessed Mother, to bethink himself and declare the whole truth.

He was informed that information had been received and confirmed in this Holy Office, stating that a certain person, along with others, had gone to a particular castle in search of enchanted money; that they had made a pact with the devil; that upon reading a book, the devil had appeared to them and promised them wealth; and that he, Juan Ricart, could provide details about these and many other matters. For this reason, he was urged, in the name of our Lord and his glorious and blessed Mother, to reflect and reveal the whole truth.

Answered, that in June or July, 1783, he learned that Narcisso Mañalich, Advocate, with some associates were about to visit the devil in search of money; which information he had communicated to the Alcalde of this town; that these persons went to the castle of Madremaña, where the devil appeared to them. They read from a book, and the devil asked what they wanted. The one who was reading (name not known) answered, ‘Twentyfive millions.’ The devil replied they must give themselves to him. They signed the agreement, and were allowed six years to live. They then demanded the money and were told that they must bring him a certain stone (piedra de espiritu). They went afterwards to the castle of Esponella, read the book, and the devil came. He asked what they wanted. They answered, the money which he had promised. He asked for the stone, and they replied that some one had stolen it. He then exclaimed, ‘Fulfil your promise, and I will fulfil mine,’ and disappeared. All this the deponent learned from the account of Mañalich and his companions.

Answered that in June or July 1783, he learned that Narcisso Mañalich, an advocate, along with some associates, was about to visit the devil in search of money; this information was communicated to the Alcalde of this town. These individuals went to the castle of Madremaña, where the devil appeared to them. They read from a book, and the devil asked what they wanted. The person reading (name not known) answered, ‘Twenty-five million.’ The devil replied they must give themselves to him. They signed the agreement and were granted six years to live. They then requested the money and were told they had to bring him a specific stone (piedra de espiritu). They later went to the castle of Esponella, read the book, and the devil appeared. He asked what they wanted. They responded with the money he had promised. He asked for the stone, and they replied that someone had stolen it. He then exclaimed, ‘Fulfill your promise, and I will fulfill mine,’ and disappeared. All this the deponent learned from the account of Mañalich and his companions.

Some days afterwards, the greater part of the same persons were assembled at the house of Juan Traver de Ursall, in Barcelona, where the deponent was present to watch their proceedings, by the direction of the Alcalde of Besahi. He was also to endeavour to get possession of the book, and have them all apprehended. The other persons present were the said Mañalich, Juan Fraver de Ursall, his wife, a young man of the family, and Monsieur Josef. It was resolved in the meeting, to choose a new reader, and practise further operations. A person in the town of Junquera was elected, and it was resolved to go to the castle of Benda, on the next Tuesday. The deponent went to the Alcalde with this intelligence, and he despatched a party, with the deponent, to lie in wait for them at a place on their route, but they had taken the alarm and avoided the deponent’s company. The deponent was informed by Tomas Riera that he had gone by night to Gerona, to get some nails out of the coffin of a child of three or four years, and that on beginning to dig, there appeared to him many visions. Mañalich told the deponent that he believed the devil never cheated any one, but performed all his promises. The abovementioned Tomas Riera had slept with Monsieur Josef, and he was accustomed to hold conversations with the devil in his own language; and the persons aforementioned had informed the deponent that Monsieur Josef had obtained money of the devil.

A few days later, most of the same people gathered at the house of Juan Traver de Ursall in Barcelona, where the witness was present to observe their activities, following the instructions of the Alcalde of Besahi. He was also supposed to try to seize the book and have them all arrested. The other people present included Mañalich, Juan Fraver de Ursall, his wife, a young man from the family, and Monsieur Josef. During the meeting, they decided to choose a new reader and carry out further actions. A person from Junquera was selected, and they planned to go to the castle of Benda the following Tuesday. The witness informed the Alcalde about this, and he sent a team, with the witness, to wait for them at a spot along their route, but they had been warned and avoided the witness's group. The witness learned from Tomas Riera that he had gone at night to Gerona to take some nails from the coffin of a child who was three or four years old, and that as he began to dig, he saw many visions. Mañalich told the witness that he believed the devil never deceived anyone but fulfilled all his promises. The mentioned Tomas Riera had slept with Monsieur Josef, and he was used to having conversations with the devil in his own language; the aforementioned people had told the witness that Monsieur Josef had received money from the devil.

Questioned, what was the age, personal appearance, &c., of the said Narcisco Mañalich, and of all the others. [Here follows the description.]

Questioned about the age, personal appearance, etc., of the said Narcisco Mañalich, and of all the others. [Here follows the description.]

The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent, &c.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the person giving the testimony, etc.

Juan Ricart, Porter Royal

Juan Ricart, Porter Royal

Before me—

In front of me—

Lorenzo Terrader, Canon, and Presbyter
Notary, appointed for this investigation
.

Lorenzo Terrader, Canon and Priest
Notary assigned to this investigation
.


In the town of Besahi, bishopric of Gerona, on the twentyfourth day of February, one thousand seven hundred and eightyfour, before the abovementioned officers sworn to preserve secrecy and perform well our duties, appeared, according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Miguel Berga, advocate, a native of this town, aged thirtythree years.

In the town of Besahi, part of the Gerona bishopric, on February 24, 1784, before the aforementioned officers sworn to keep confidentiality and carry out our responsibilities, Miguel Berga, advocate, a thirty-three-year-old native of this town, appeared as summoned and took an oath to tell the truth and maintain secrecy.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was being asked to appear.

Answered, that he supposed it to be on account of Mañalich’s affair.

Answered that he thought it was because of Mañalich’s situation.

Questioned, if he had written any letter or communication to the Holy Office of the Inquisition, giving an account of any crime within his knowledge; what were the contents of that paper or communication, and by whose hand was it written.

Questioned whether he had written any letter or communication to the Holy Office of the Inquisition reporting any crime he knew of; what did that document say and who wrote it?

Answered, that he had written three letters to Dr Ignacio Sans Pabordre, at Figueras; that in the first, dated July fourteenth, 1783, he stated that the said Mañalich had told him he had gone twice with his associates to the castle of Esponella after money, and that both times the devil had appeared to them; that they had all signed a bargain with him, and were promised the money when they returned to the castle.

Answered that he had sent three letters to Dr. Ignacio Sans Pabordre in Figueras; in the first one, dated July 14, 1783, he mentioned that Mañalich had told him he had gone to the castle of Esponella twice with his associates to get money, and that both times the devil had shown up; they all signed a deal with him and were promised the money when they returned to the castle.

The second, dated August fourth, 1783, stated that Mañalich had declared that the sixth day of that month was fixed upon to visit the castle of Monroig, in search of money.

The second, dated August 4, 1783, stated that Mañalich had declared that the sixth day of that month was set to visit the castle of Monroig, in search of money.

The third, dated the thirteenth of the same month, informed that he had seen Mañalich, but could give no further intelligence respecting the affair, and that something more might be learned from Juan Ricart.

The third, dated the thirteenth of the same month, stated that he had seen Mañalich but couldn’t provide any more information about the situation, and that more could be discovered from Juan Ricart.

The deponent went on to declare that Josef Llonella informed him that he and the said Mañalich, accompanied by Jaime Gubert, a young man of Besahi, went to Montpelier to meet a Jew, in order to learn from him the means of obtaining money by diabolical art. The Jew gave them a maggot within a tube, and told them a maggot must be added to the tube every day to be eaten, and that if they swore, which they did, to make a league with the devil, and perform what he directed them, written upon a paper, they should have what money they pleased. They signed in blood an agreement with the devil, written in his own characters, and promised never to go to confession. Notwithstanding they did everything according to the Jew’s directions, they got nothing.

The witness went on to say that Josef Llonella told him that he and Mañalich, along with Jaime Gubert, a young guy from Besahi, traveled to Montpelier to meet a Jew, hoping to learn how to get money through dark magic. The Jew gave them a maggot in a tube and explained that they had to add a maggot to the tube every day to be consumed. He also said that if they swore— which they did— to make a pact with the devil and follow his instructions, which were written on a piece of paper, they would obtain whatever money they desired. They signed a blood agreement with the devil, written in his own characters, and promised never to go to confession. Despite following all the Jew’s instructions, they ended up with nothing.

The deponent continued in these words;—‘Some time afterwards I called upon Mañalich, endeavouring to bring him into the company of the abovementioned Dr Pabordre Sans, or Dr Revira, Canon of the Cathedral of Gerona, but he replied to me that he would not see either of them till he got the money; and furthermore informed me that they and the devil had fixed upon the sixteenth of August for the time to receive the treasure; that the devil appeared to them dressed in red, and promised if one of their number were given up to him, they should have thirtyone millions; that Mañalich offered himself, and the devil gave him eight years to live, but this period was not to begin till the money was received. I exclaimed, “The devil will deceive you.” He answered that the devil’s promises were truer than the Faith, and further told me that to raise the devil, the following things were necessary;—a book which directed everything that was to be said, a loadstone, a piedra de espiritu, six nails from the coffin of a child of three years, six tapers of rosewax made by a child of four years, the skin and blood of a young kid, an iron fork with which the kid was to be killed, camphorated high proof brandy, lignumvitæ charcoal to make a fire, and hazel rods. Intelligence of all this I gave to Sr Domero Gerones, the Vicar Boada, and the Alcayde. The Alcayde sent Juan Ricart, his porter, to join them, and learn the day fixed upon for going, after the money, in order that he might take them prisoners. This Juan Ricart went with them for some days, and gave notice when the Jew arrived who was to read the book. The Alcayde set a watch for them, which was discovered, and the Jew escaped.

The witness continued with these words: “Some time later, I visited Mañalich, trying to bring him together with the aforementioned Dr. Pabordre Sans or Dr. Revira, Canon of the Cathedral of Gerona, but he told me he wouldn't meet either of them until he got the money. He also told me that they and the devil had decided on August sixteenth as the time to receive the treasure; that the devil appeared to them dressed in red and promised that if one of their group was given over to him, they would receive thirty-one million. Mañalich volunteered himself, and the devil granted him eight years to live, but that period wouldn’t begin until the money was received. I said, 'The devil will deceive you.' He replied that the devil's promises were truer than faith, and he also explained that to summon the devil, the following were needed: a book that specified everything to be said, a lodestone, a piedra de espiritu, six nails from the coffin of a three-year-old child, six candles made of rosewax by a four-year-old child, the skin and blood of a young kid, an iron fork to kill the kid, high-proof brandy with camphor, lignum vitae charcoal for the fire, and hazel rods. I relayed all this information to Sr. Domero Gerones, the Vicar Boada, and the Alcayde. The Alcayde sent his porter, Juan Ricart, to join them and learn the date set for going after the money so he could take them captive. Juan Ricart went with them for a few days and notified us when the Jew arrived to read the book. The Alcayde set a watch on them, which was discovered, and the Jew escaped.”

‘After this, I endeavoured again to bring Mañalich into company with Dr Pabordre Sans. This I effected, but found that Mañalich would not declare the truth to the Doctor. He gave me to understand that he still retained the book and instruments enumerated above, and they should let the business lie by for some time, without speaking about it, and then renew it and get the money of the devil. Afterwards, when I censured his conduct, he tried to make me believe that all he had told me was a fabrication, but I have always believed it to be the truth.’

‘After this, I tried again to get Mañalich to meet with Dr. Pabordre Sans. I succeeded, but I found that Mañalich wouldn't tell the truth to the Doctor. He indicated to me that he still had the book and the instruments mentioned above and that they should just let things sit for a while without discussing it, then bring it up again to get the money from the devil. Later, when I criticized his actions, he tried to convince me that everything he had told me was made up, but I've always believed it to be true.’

The above having been read to the deponent, is declared by him to be correctly recorded, and the truth according to the oath sworn by him.

The above having been read to the witness, he states that it is accurately recorded and true according to the oath he has sworn.

Signed,

Signed,

Miguel Antentas y Berga, Advocate.

Miguel Antentas y Berga, Lawyer.

Before me—

In front of me—

Lorenzo Terrader, Presbyter and Canon,
Notary in this investigation
.

Lorenzo Terrader, Priest and Canon,
Notary in this inquiry
.

In the town of Besahi, on the thirtieth day of May, one thousand, seven hundred and eightyfour, before the abovementioned officers, sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully their duties, appeared, according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Josef Gircos, Advocate of Besahi, a native and inhabitant of the said town, of age, as he stated, thirtysix years or thereabout.

In the town of Besahi, on May 30, 1784, before the aforementioned officers, who were sworn to keep secrets and carry out their duties faithfully, Josef Gircos, an Advocate of Besahi, a native and resident of that town, appeared as summoned and took an oath to tell the truth and keep secrets. He stated that he was around thirty-six years old.

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

Questioned whether he knew or guessed why he had been summoned to appear.

Answered, No.

No.

Questioned, if he knew that any person had said or done aught which was, or appeared to be contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith, and Evangelical Doctrine.

Questioned if he knew of anyone who had said or done anything that was, or seemed to be, contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Doctrine.

Answered, No.

No.

He was then given to understand that information had been received and sworn to in this Holy Office, that certain persons, Narciso Mañalich and Josef Llorella, had been at Montpelier to visit a Jew, &c. [Here follows a recapitulation of the preceding testimony.]

He was then informed that it had been reported and confirmed in this Holy Office that certain individuals, Narciso Mañalich and Josef Llorella, had been in Montpelier to visit a Jew, etc. [Here follows a recapitulation of the preceding testimony.]

Answered, that he had heard the same from Narciso Mañalich, and what he knew of the matter was the following;—‘About eighteen months since, this person and Josef Llorella y Saler, of this town, left the place, accompanied by a young man named Gubert. To what place they went, and whether they kept company all the way, I do not know. They were gone about three weeks, and shortly after their return I heard Miguel Antentas y Berga, Advocate, of this town, declare that they had been to Montpelier, in France, to meet a Jew who was to show them how to obtain money by diabolical arts; that the Jew gave Mañalich a maggot in a tube, to which he was to add a new maggot every day to be eaten, and that the Jew told them they might have as much money as they wanted by swearing a pact with the devil, and doing what he prescribed to them upon a written paper. One of the conditions was, never to go to confession. For these instructions I think the said Antentas told me they paid the Jew seven or nine Louis d’ors. On their return from Montpelier, at a village or place near Bisbal, they made trial of one of the Jew’s methods of obtaining money. This was done at a spot where two roads crossed each other. A trench was dug in the ground and a hen killed, with the blood of which they all wrote their names on a paper and placed the same in the trench, taking care, as the Jew directed them, not to be frightened. Notwithstanding they complied with all these directions, the money did not appear.

Answered that he had heard the same from Narciso Mañalich, and what he knew about the situation was as follows;—‘About eighteen months ago, this person and Josef Llorella y Saler, from this town, left the area accompanied by a young man named Gubert. I don't know where they went or if they were together the whole time. They were gone for about three weeks, and shortly after their return, I heard Miguel Antentas y Berga, the town’s advocate, say that they had been to Montpelier, France, to meet a Jew who was supposed to teach them how to get money through dark arts; that the Jew gave Mañalich a maggot in a tube, which he was to add to daily, eating one each day, and that the Jew told them they could acquire as much money as they wanted by making a pact with the devil and following his written instructions. One of the conditions was to never go to confession. For these instructions, I think Antentas told me they paid the Jew seven or nine Louis d’ors. Upon their return from Montpelier, at a village or place near Bisbal, they tried one of the Jew’s money-making methods. This was done at a spot where two roads crossed. They dug a trench in the ground and killed a hen, using its blood to write their names on a piece of paper, which they placed in the trench, ensuring, as the Jew directed, that they wouldn't get scared. Despite following all these instructions, the money did not appear.

‘After their return to this town, they went with some others to the castle of Esponella, where the book was read for the purpose of raising the devil. Here the devil appeared in the shape of a man dressed in flesh colored clothes, and, as Antentas told me, with large eyes. The devil asked what they wanted, to which Mañalich or some other replied, “Money, good money, and not enchanted.” The devil told them they should have it if one of the number would give himself up, but this no one of them was willing to do.

‘After they returned to this town, they went with a few others to the castle of Esponella, where they read the book to summon the devil. The devil appeared in the form of a man wearing flesh-colored clothes, and as Antentas told me, he had large eyes. The devil asked what they wanted, to which Mañalich or someone else replied, “Money, good money, and not enchanted.” The devil told them they could have it if one of them would offer himself up, but none of them was willing to do that.

‘Llorella related the affair to his wife, and she gave information of it to Antonio Rigalt, that he might assist in extricating her husband from such a desperate business. Rigalt consulted Antentas and they concluded to lay the case before the Inquisition, which was done.

‘Llorella told his wife about the situation, and she informed Antonio Rigalt so he could help free her husband from such a dire predicament. Rigalt spoke with Antentas, and they decided to present the case to the Inquisition, which they did.

‘What Antentas knew of the affair he learnt of Rigalt, Llorella, and Mañalich. Afterwards, when Llorella repented of his connexion with the others, and left their company, I think I heard him say, at the house of Antentas, that he had seen, shortly before, in the possession of Mañalich, the paper which the Jew gave them, and that the devil appeared to them in a flesh colored dress, with large eyes and sharp finger nails. I was afterwards told by Antentas that Mañalich, seeing Llorella had left them and they could not proceed with their undertaking according to the direction of the Jew, who informed them that if one of the number died or left them they must get another, made choice of an uncle of Traver beforementioned, for this purpose.

‘What Antentas knew about the situation, he learned from Rigalt, Llorella, and Mañalich. Later, when Llorella regretted his association with the others and left their group, I think I heard him say at Antentas's house that he had recently seen, in Mañalich's possession, the paper the Jew had given them, and that the devil appeared to them in a flesh-colored outfit, with large eyes and sharp fingernails. Antentas later told me that Mañalich, realizing Llorella had abandoned them and they could not continue with their plan as directed by the Jew—who had informed them that if one of their group died or left, they needed to find a replacement—chose an uncle of Traver, as mentioned earlier, for this purpose.

‘Mañalich then resolved to give himself up to the devil according to his demand, stipulating for some years’ grace. This matter was discussed by the company at the castle of Esponella, in connexion with a plan for getting thirtyone millions, or some such sum, from the devil. The plan, however, failed in this manner. On the night of Monday, before St John’s day, in 1783, the company, or part of them, met at the house of Traver, but Mañalich being suddenly taken sick, could not accompany them to the castle.

‘Mañalich then decided to sell his soul to the devil as he requested, asking for a few years’ delay. This issue was talked about by the group at the castle of Esponella, along with a scheme to get thirty-one million, or something like that, from the devil. However, the plan failed in this way. On the night of Monday, before St. John’s day in 1783, the group, or part of them, gathered at Traver's house, but Mañalich suddenly fell ill and couldn’t join them at the castle.

‘Antentas also informed me, that he told Mañalich that the devil would deceive him, and that he could not make any man rich. To this he replied that the devil fulfilled all his promises, and that if he once got the money of him, he would go to confession nevertheless, and so would cheat the devil. He also told me, in the month of August of the same year, that Mañalich had resolved to make an attempt for the money again, at the abovementioned castle, or at another, called the castle of Buadella; that he deferred it on account of the affair having become noised abroad. Since this time I have heard nothing of him or his undertakings, except that he proposed another journey to Montpelier, and offered two hundred pounds to Simon Escaellar or Ventura to accompany him.’

‘Antentas also told me that he mentioned to Mañalich that the devil would trick him and that he couldn’t make anyone rich. Mañalich replied that the devil keeps all his promises, and if he ever got money from him, he would go to confession and still outsmart the devil. He also told me in August of that same year that Mañalich had decided to try for the money again, either at the previously mentioned castle or another one called the castle of Buadella; he put it off because word had gotten out. Since then, I haven't heard anything about him or his plans, except that he suggested another trip to Montpelier and offered two hundred pounds to Simon Escaellar or Ventura to join him.’

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the deponent, who declares that he has not spoken out of malice, but solely in obedience to his conscience, and having been read to him, is declared to be correctly recorded.

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the person giving the statement, who says that he hasn’t spoken out of spite, but only in accordance with his conscience, and after being read to him, is confirmed to be accurately recorded.

Signed—

Signed—

Josef Gircos, Advocate.

Josef Gircos, Advocate.

Before me—

In front of me—

Lorenzo Terrader Presbyter,
Notary in this investigation
.

Lorenzo Terrader Priest,
Notary in this investigation
.

*  *  *  * 

*  *  *  *

Don Leonardo Vidal, assistant to a founder of brass cannon, aged twentythree years, a native of San Estevan de Ripollet, in the diocese of Barcelona, and residing in la Rambla, near the theatre, next door to a tallow chandler’s, to discharge his conscience, and for no other purpose, gives the following information to the Holy Office.

Don Leo Vidal, assistant to a founder of brass cannons, twenty-three years old, originally from San Estevan de Ripollet in the diocese of Barcelona, and living on la Rambla, next to the theater, next to a tallow chandler’s, to clear his conscience, and for no other reason, provides the following information to the Holy Office.

Antonio Suarez, the keeper of a coffee-house, opposite the Theatre in la Rambla, has in one of his rooms six or eight pictures, rather coarsely done, two of which contain indecent figures. All of these the informant has seen, but remembers only one, which represents a young man taking hold of a female who has her bosom indecently exposed. The said Antonio is about fifty years of age, lame and splayfooted, with one arm partly crippled and the fingers contracted.

Antonio Suarez, the manager of a coffee shop across from the Theatre on la Rambla, has six or eight paintings in one of his rooms, done in a rather crude style, with two of them featuring inappropriate images. The informant has seen all of them but only recalls one, which depicts a young man grasping a woman who has her breast exposed. Antonio is around fifty years old, has a limp, flat feet, and one arm is partially crippled with contracted fingers.

Also, with the same motive, he gives information that Dr Manuel Portius, Presbyter, a public teacher of Latin and the Humanities, aged thirtyeight years, of a low stature, and with a somewhat long nose, living in the Baxada de San Miguel, in the third story of a house, the corner of which is occupied by a baker, has several pictures, colored and uncolored, among which are some representing females whose bosoms are scandalously exposed, and others with improper representations. One of these has this title; ‘L’Abbé a la Toilette,’ and exhibits with other figures, a priest in his calotte, very nicely dressed in the clothes of a layman, seated at the side of a lady, with whom he appears to be talking about dress. All these pictures of Dr Manuel Portius are handsomely executed, and consequently the more provocative and scandalous. They are hung upon the walls of his cabinet or study, in view of every one who enters, and particularly of his pupils, the number of whom, as I understand, amounts to nearly thirty.

Also, for the same reason, he shares that Dr. Manuel Portius, a priest and public teacher of Latin and the Humanities, who is thirty-eight years old, short in stature, and has a somewhat long nose, lives in the Baxada de San Miguel on the third floor of a building, the corner of which is occupied by a bakery. He owns several pictures, both colored and uncolored, including some that depict women with scandalously exposed bosoms, and others with inappropriate imagery. One of these is titled ‘L’Abbé a la Toilette,’ which features a priest in a cap, dressed nicely in layman’s clothing, sitting beside a lady, seemingly discussing fashion. All these pictures belonging to Dr. Manuel Portius are artistically rendered, making them even more provocative and scandalous. They are displayed on the walls of his study, clearly visible to everyone who enters, especially his students, who total nearly thirty, as I hear.

Furthermore, he gives information that Don Felipe Crame, a captain in the royal artillery, tall, light complexioned, red haired, and blind of one eye, aged thirtyfive years, being in conversation with the informant and three others, whose names will be hereafter specified, made the following observation:—‘A Spanish officer whom I hold in estimation, has said that it was not the will of God that there should be any kings, which could be proved by a passage from scripture.’ This passage he quoted, which was not to the purpose, but only, as I remember, stated that God told the Israelites that a king was not convenient for them. The name of this officer, the said Don Felipe Crame did not mention, and nothing else respecting him is known to the informant.

Furthermore, he informs us that Don Felipe Crame, a captain in the royal artillery, tall, light-skinned, red-haired, and blind in one eye, aged thirty-five, was in conversation with the informant and three others, whose names will be specified later, made the following statement:—‘A Spanish officer I respect has said that it was not God's will for there to be any kings, which could be supported by a scripture passage.’ The passage he quoted was irrelevant, but as I recall, it only stated that God told the Israelites that having a king was not suitable for them. Don Felipe Crame did not mention the name of this officer, and the informant does not know anything else about him.

The persons who heard these observations from the mouth of the said Don Felipe Crame, were Don Manuel Pe, an assistant of the cannon founder, and Don Antonio de la Torre, clerk of the director of the foundry. There are also others who have some knowledge of the same; namely, Don Manuel Brito, and Don Alexandro Vicente, assistants in the foundry.

The people who heard these remarks from Don Felipe Crame were Don Manuel Pe, an assistant to the cannon maker, and Don Antonio de la Torre, the clerk for the director of the foundry. There are also others who are somewhat familiar with the same information, including Don Manuel Brito and Don Alexandro Vicente, assistants in the foundry.

The informant undertook to make an accusation in the name of the above persons. He also apprized the said Don Felipe Crame, that he was under an obligation to denounce his friend, and as the informant knows not whether this has been performed, he gives the present information in order fully to discharge his conscience.

The informant agreed to make a complaint on behalf of the people mentioned above. He also informed Don Felipe Crame that he was required to report his friend, and since the informant isn’t sure if this has happened, he is providing this information to completely clear his conscience.

Barcelona, February fourth, 1793.

Barcelona, February 4, 1793.

Leonardo Vidal.

Leonardo Vidal.

TO OUR COMMISSARY, THE REVEREND ANTONIO FONT, PRESBYTER.

TO OUR COMMISSARY, THE REVEREND ANTONIO FONT, PASTOR.

We herewith transmit you a letter, received by us, from Don Leonardo Vidal, assistant to a founder of cannon, and a resident in this city. We hereby commission you to summon him to appear before you, and ascertain according to form whether the letter be his, causing him to specify clearly every circumstance of person, place, and time, relating thereto. This done in due form, and before a Presbyter in your confidence to serve as Notary, you will forward the minutes of the examination to us along with these papers. Our Lord preserve you many years.

We are sending you a letter that we received from Don Leonardo Vidal, who is an assistant to a cannon founder and lives in this city. We ask you to summon him to appear before you and determine whether the letter is indeed his by having him clearly specify every detail regarding the person, place, and time related to it. Once this is done properly, and in front of a trusted Presbyter to act as Notary, please send us the minutes of the examination along with these documents. May our Lord grant you many years.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, February seventh, 1793.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, February 7, 1793.

Dr Don Pedro Diaz de Valdes.
The Licentiate,
Don Manuel de Merra y Paniagua.
Dr Don Joseph Francisco Gonzales de Noboa,
Secretary.

Dr. Don Pedro Diaz de Valdes.
The Licentiate,
Don Manuel de Merra y Paniagua.
Dr. Don Joseph Francisco Gonzales de Noboa,
Secretary.

*    *    *   

Please provide the text to modernize.

TO THE REVEREND CURATE OF THE PARISH OF ST MARTIN DE PROVENSAL.

TO THE REVEREND CURATE OF THE PARISH OF ST MARTIN DE PROVENSAL.

Information has been received in this Holy Office, that Antonio Axis, and Josefa, his wife, who perform cures, and practise various superstitions, have taken up their abode in Clot, in the district of St Martin de Provensal. The tribunal have, in consequence, ordered that a letter be despatched, ordering you to make investigations respecting these facts, and also respecting the life and conduct of the said persons, whether they obey the precepts of the church, and attend at confession and communion. Our Lord preserve you many years.

Information has been received in this Holy Office that Antonio Axis and his wife, Josefa, who perform healing and practice various superstitions, have settled in Clot, in the St. Martin de Provensal area. As a result, the tribunal has ordered that a letter be sent to you, instructing you to investigate these matters, as well as the lifestyle and behavior of these individuals, to determine if they follow the church's teachings and partake in confession and communion. May our Lord grant you many more years.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, September ninth, 1803.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, September 9, 1803.

Dr Don Cyro Valls y Geli, Sec’y.

Dr. Don Cyro Valls y Geli, Secretary.


ANSWER.

Got it! Please provide the text you'd like me to modernize.

In obedience to the orders of the Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition, which God preserve in all its strength, dated the ninth of this month, I have made the following investigation. I summoned before me Joseph Masvidal of this village, and made him swear not to divulge to any one the questions I asked him, and also to declare to me the truth. I demanded who informed him that Antonio Axis could cure his disorder. He answered, Felipe Cadena of this place, and Pablo Marine of the Llano de Barcelona. Felipe Cadena stated that the said Antonio had cured him by cutting off the crest of a black cock, taking from it three drops of blood, mixing it with water and making him drink it, adding that if a priest were in the house, it would be necessary to go out of doors to practise the operation.

In accordance with the orders of the Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition, which God preserve in all its strength, dated the ninth of this month, I have conducted the following investigation. I called in Joseph Masvidal from this village and made him swear not to reveal the questions I asked him and to tell me the truth. I asked him who told him that Antonio Axis could cure his ailment. He replied that it was Felipe Cadena from this place and Pablo Marine from the Llano de Barcelona. Felipe Cadena said that Antonio cured him by cutting off the crest of a black cock, taking three drops of blood from it, mixing that with water, and making him drink it, adding that if a priest was in the house, it was necessary to go outside to perform the operation.

I demanded what medicines the said Antonio prescribed him. He replied that the first was a white onion and five plantain leaves. These were cut up and placed upon his stomach, which relieved his pain, a symptom which the wife of Antonio pronounced good. The cure, however, not being effected, he was ordered to procure a partridge, twentyfive needles, and a new pot, all of them to be bought and carried home with the left hand. The needles were to be stuck into the partridge with great fury, and the whole put into the pot. Then at midnight the sick man was to set it on the fire with the left hand, and with the left hand keep stirring the fire till two o’clock in the morning. He informed him that during this, the tables and plates would put themselves in motion, but that he must not be frightened, as he should be present himself. All these directions were followed, and there were also present at the time, Francisco Vintro, and Francisco Siralt, his brothers-in-law, to keep him in courage during the operation. At two o’clock he took it off the fire, but found himself no better. Antonio’s wife, Josefa, directed broth to be made for him, he being as thin and spare as if he had suffered a long illness. This was done the next morning, when he found himself exceedingly weak and fatigued. A similar case occurred, as he believes, to a tavern keeper in Barcelona, which is known to the Reverend Father F. Juan Mesados.

I asked what medicines the mentioned Antonio prescribed for him. He answered that the first was a white onion and five plantain leaves. These were chopped up and placed on his stomach, which eased his pain, something Antonio's wife said was a good sign. However, since he wasn’t completely cured, he was told to get a partridge, twenty-five needles, and a new pot, all of which needed to be bought and carried home with his left hand. He was to stab the needles into the partridge with great intensity and put the whole thing in the pot. Then, at midnight, the sick man was to place it on the fire with his left hand and keep stirring the fire with his left hand until two o’clock in the morning. He was informed that during this time, the tables and plates would move on their own, but he shouldn’t be scared as he was supposed to be present himself. All these instructions were followed, and there were also present at the time, Francisco Vintro and Francisco Siralt, his brothers-in-law, to help keep his spirits up during the process. At two o’clock, he took it off the fire, but found himself no better. Antonio’s wife, Josefa, instructed that broth be made for him, as he was as thin and frail as if he had been ill for a long time. This was done the next morning, when he felt extremely weak and exhausted. He believes a similar case happened to a tavern keeper in Barcelona, which is known to the Reverend Father F. Juan Mesados.

His health not improving for the space of three months, he saw Axis again, who made signs of the cross upon the parts of his body where he felt pain, but this had no more effect than the preceding experiments. Axis then told him that he was possessed by five companies and five captains of evil spirits, that the companies amounted to five hundred in number, and might be easily cast out, but the five captains were not so easily got rid of. He proceeded to exorcise them, and Masvidal fell to screaming and behaving like one possessed. The little ones, as he called them, being despatched, he went to work upon the captains, and the first night, after supper, about nine o’clock, he began to make signs of the cross, and talk in unintelligible language. He then gave two loud screams, so horrible as to frighten every one; and Axis affirmed that they were heard in the farthest regions of the air by the other spirits. On this occasion, the two brothers-in-law, beforementioned, were present.

His health not improving for three months, he saw Axis again, who made the sign of the cross over the areas of his body that hurt, but this had no more effect than the previous attempts. Axis then told him that he was possessed by five groups and five captains of evil spirits, that the groups totaled five hundred in number, and could be easily expelled, but the five captains were harder to get rid of. He began to exorcise them, and Masvidal started screaming and acting like someone possessed. The little ones, as he called them, were dealt with first, then he focused on the captains. That first night, after dinner, around nine o’clock, he began making the sign of the cross and speaking in a language no one understood. Then he let out two loud screams, so terrifying that they scared everyone; Axis claimed they were heard in the farthest reaches of the air by the other spirits. On this occasion, the two brothers-in-law mentioned earlier were present.

Axis declared that the spirits were not despatched, and he exacted a promise from them by the mouth of the patient, that they would depart at nine o’clock the next morning; but continuing to remain at that time, they promised anew in the same manner, to depart at nine that night. The patient sent for Juan Munseis, Juan Baxo, and Antonio Torras, all inhabitants of the place. At nine o’clock, the performances before described, were repeated, the patient suffering greatly, crying out and talking, as people do when bewitched. This was repeated morning and night, for five or six days.

Axis stated that the spirits hadn’t left, and he got a promise from them through the patient that they would leave at nine o’clock the next morning. However, when that time came and they were still there, they promised again in the same way to leave at nine that night. The patient called for Juan Munseis, Juan Baxo, and Antonio Torras, all locals. At nine o’clock, the previously described performances, were repeated, with the patient in great distress, crying out and speaking as people do when they’re possessed. This continued morning and night for five or six days.

All this producing no effect, they advised him to confess the whole to the abovementioned Reverend Father, F. Juan Mesados Servita. This was agreed to, and Axis, the patient, Munseis, Torras, and Baxo, went to his cell. The Reverend Father repeated some exorcisms, and Axis repeated his crossings and supplications. He afterwards declared he had seen the spirits, and described their shapes.

All of this having no impact, they suggested he confess everything to the aforementioned Reverend Father, F. Juan Mesados Servita. This was agreed upon, and Axis, the patient, along with Munseis, Torras, and Baxo, went to his cell. The Reverend Father recited some exorcisms, and Axis performed his crossings and prayers. He later stated that he had seen the spirits and described their appearances.

My informant also stated that Axis possessed the power to restrain the tempests, for as they were returning in company from St Cypria, a storm overtook them, and he was in great terror. Axis told him that a shower of stones was falling at San Cucufase del Valles, but that he need not fear, as he would shelter them from it, by means of a prayer that he knew. And so it happened, for the shower fell as they learned afterwards, but did not touch them, although they were forced to travel quite to the seashore. Furthermore, Axis declared to him that he had been in hell, and described to him the condition of the damned. One night some evil spirits appeared to him, and offered him money if he would give himself up to them, but he would not consent.

My informant also mentioned that Axis had the ability to calm storms. While they were returning together from St. Cypria, a storm hit them, and he was very scared. Axis told him that a rain of stones was falling at San Cucufase del Valles, but that he didn’t need to worry because he would protect them from it with a prayer he knew. And it turned out to be true, as they found out later that the stones fell, but didn’t affect them, even though they had to travel all the way to the seashore. Additionally, Axis told him that he had been to hell and described what it was like for the damned. One night, some evil spirits appeared to him and offered him money if he would submit to them, but he refused.

I likewise summoned to appear before me, Isidro Lepu of this place, and obliged him to swear to declare the whole truth, and preserve secrecy. I demanded whether he knew Antonio Axis, and his wife, Josefa Axis. He answered that he did, inasmuch as they lived in the same house with him, although in a different part. I asked him if he knew whether the said Axis performed cures. He replied that he knew of his performing some, and that Axis asked him to go in company with him one night, adding that they would hear a loud noise, but he must not be frightened being in his company, as they would be out of danger; that they must go at midnight, and without any clothes. This proposal was rejected. Axis replied to him, that he had no way to get a living, but my informant persisted in his refusal.

I also called Isidro Lepu from this place to come before me and made him swear to tell the whole truth and keep it a secret. I asked if he knew Antonio Axis and his wife, Josefa Axis. He said he did since they lived in the same house, just in a different section. I inquired if he knew whether Axis did any healing. He replied that he was aware of some healing practices, and that Axis had invited him to go out one night, mentioning they would hear a loud noise, but he shouldn’t be scared because they would be safe together. He said they needed to go at midnight and without any clothes. This suggestion was turned down. Axis told him that he had no way to make a living, but my informant kept refusing.

The above are the literal declarations which I have taken under oath from the person named. I have, moreover, strong suspicions that Axis and his wife neglect mass on many occasions. Axis himself during his residence this year in my parish, has not confessed, nor taken the Pascal communion, although this has been done in the house where he lives, and I have entreated him and his wife to comply with the observance. Besides what is related above, he has attempted many other superstitious cures upon people belonging to Barcelona and strangers; all which I certify to be the exact truth.

The above are the literal statements that I have sworn to from the person mentioned. Additionally, I have good reason to believe that Axis and his wife frequently skip mass. This year, during his time in my parish, Axis has neither confessed nor participated in the Easter communion, even though it has taken place in the house where he lives. I have urged him and his wife to follow these practices. Besides what I've mentioned, he has also tried various other superstitious remedies on people from Barcelona and visitors; I confirm that all of this is true.

Dr Francisco Guiu, Parochial Curate.
St Martin de Provensals, October second, 1803.

Dr. Francisco Guiu, Parochial Curate.
St. Martin de Provensals, October 2, 1803.

*  *  *

*  *  *

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SEÑORES,

Most esteemed gentlemen,

The supernumerary Inquisitor Fiscal declares that a commission should be granted for the purpose of examining this letter, and also to examine and ratify the depositions of the delator and the witnesses, which is submitted to the opinion of your Excellencies.

The extra Inquisitor Fiscal states that a commission should be set up to look into this letter, as well as to examine and confirm the statements of the informer and the witnesses, which is presented for your Excellencies' consideration.

The Licentiate, Basarrate.

The Licentiate, Basarrate.

Secret Chamber, October tenth, 1803.

Secret Chamber, October 10, 1803.


MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

Dear Esteemed Sir,

In obedience to the dictates of my conscience and the counsel of my confessor, Padre Gervasio Minguella, Carmelite Calzado, I inform your Excellency of the following act which I have committed. Upon three several times, at the solicitation of one of my companions, I went to visit a woman for the purpose of learning, by a divination with cards, whether a certain young man, to whom I am betrothed, would return hither from Olot, where he now is. The above woman, having consulted the cards, answered that he would return; but that it would be sometime first. Other things she also informed me by divination. The woman’s true name I do not know, but she is called Pepa dels Gossos, and lives in the Calle dels Tallers. I entreat that your Excellency will pardon this weakness of mine, for I was not aware that I was committing an offence. My confessor informs me of the fact that I have been guilty, and that I must, within six days, give notice of the same to your Excellency.

In line with my conscience and the advice of my confessor, Padre Gervasio Minguella, Carmelite Calzado, I am writing to inform your Excellency about an act I have committed. Three times, at the request of one of my friends, I visited a woman to see, through card divination, if a certain young man, to whom I am engaged, would return here from Olot, where he currently is. The woman, after consulting the cards, said he would return, but it would take some time. She also shared other information through divination. I do not know her real name, but she is known as Pepa dels Gossos, and she lives on Calle dels Tallers. I ask for your Excellency's forgiveness for this weakness of mine, as I didn’t realize I was doing something wrong. My confessor has informed me of my wrongdoing, and that I must notify your Excellency of it within six days.

God preserve your Excellency many years.

God keep your Excellency for many years to come.

I kiss the hands of your Excellency.

I kiss your Excellency's hands.

Your servant, Antonia Puxant,
daughter of Jaime Puxant, Calle del Hom.
Barcelona, February third, 1805.

Your servant, Antonia Puxant,
daughter of Jaime Puxant, Calle del Hom.
Barcelona, February 3, 1805.

TO PADRE GERVASIO MINGUELLA, CARMELITE CALZADO.

TO PADRE GERVASIO MINGUELLA, CARMELITE CALZADO.

We herewith transmit you orders to proceed in company with another person of sacerdotal character to officiate as Notary, having first sworn fidelity and secrecy, and summon before you, Antonia Puxant, daughter of Jaime Puxant, living in the Calle del Hom. You will ascertain from her, upon oath, whether the subjoined letter be hers, whether she affirms the contents to be true, and whether there be any part of the same to alter, or any addition to make. Within four days of this, you will ratify the above depositions before the Notary, and other trustworthy persons, and if any testimony which may corroborate the same should offer, you will receive it, and ratify the said testimony at the end of four days in like manner. Information respecting the character and credit of the witnesses, you will transmit, written in the margin of the depositions. Also in a separate paper you will forward an account of the character and christian conduct of the person denounced. This order is to be returned to our hands with all the other papers. Our Lord preserve you many years.

We are sending you orders to go along with another priest to serve as Notary, after first taking an oath of loyalty and confidentiality, and to summon Antonia Puxant, daughter of Jaime Puxant, who lives on Calle del Hom. You will find out from her, under oath, if the attached letter is hers, if she confirms its contents as true, and if there’s anything she wants to change or add. Within four days of this, you will confirm the above statements before the Notary and other reliable individuals, and if any evidence that supports this comes forward, you will accept it and confirm that testimony in the same way within four days. You will provide written information about the character and credibility of the witnesses in the margin of the statements. Also, in a separate document, you will send a report on the character and Christian conduct of the accused person. This order should be returned to us along with all the other papers. May our Lord preserve you for many years.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, February thirteenth, 1805.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, February 13, 1805.

Dr Don Joseph de Llozer.
Licentiate, Don Manuel de Merra y Paniagua.
Dr Don Juan de Rodas.
D. D. Juaquin Moner, Secretary.

Dr. Don Joseph de Llozer.
Licentiate, Don Manuel de Merra y Paniagua.
Dr. Don Juan de Rodas.
D. D. Joaquin Moner, Secretary.

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SEÑORES,

Most Esteemed Gentlemen,

I return your Excellencies the order of the date of February thirteenth, of the present year, along with the deposition of Antonia Puxant, native of Ripoll, in the bishopric of Vique, daughter of Jaime Puxant, resident in the Calle del Hom, of this city. With this you will also receive the depositions of six other witnesses to the same facts, which I have taken by the information of the abovementioned Antonia. The tardiness with which this business has been accomplished, will be overlooked by your Excellencies, on reflecting upon the extent of my occupations, and on the fact that the people from whom the depositions were taken, are of the laboring class, seldom at their houses, and of consequence difficult to find. The last named among them was not met with till the twentyseventh of March.

I am returning your Excellencies the order dated February 13th of this year, along with the statement from Antonia Puxant, who comes from Ripoll in the Vique bishopric, and is the daughter of Jaime Puxant, a resident of Calle del Hom in this city. Along with this, you will also receive the statements of six other witnesses regarding the same events, which I gathered based on the information provided by Antonia. I hope you will overlook the delay in this matter, considering how busy I have been and the fact that the people who provided the statements are from the working class, often not at home and therefore hard to locate. The last of them wasn’t found until March 27th.

With regard to the declarations of Antonia Puxant, I have to state that both in her deposition, and in the ratification, she appears to have disclosed the truth with perfect ingenuousness, as far as her knowledge extended and the interrogatives went, although a mistake was made in the name of the street, in which Pepa de los Gosos performed her divinations, which she affirmed was the Calle de Nazaret; but on being reminded of the error, she informed me, after the ratification, that it was the Calle de Farlandina which is situated at the head of the street leading from the convent of Nuestra Señora de los Angeles, to the Casa de Charidad of this city.

Regarding Antonia Puxant's statements, I must say that both in her deposition and in the ratification, she seems to have shared the truth with complete honesty, as far as her knowledge and the questions allowed, although she did make a mistake about the name of the street where Pepa de los Gosos did her divinations, claiming it was Calle de Nazaret; however, after being reminded of the error, she told me after the ratification that it was actually Calle de Farlandina, located at the end of the street leading from the convent of Nuestra Señora de los Angeles to the Casa de Charidad in this city.

Respecting the persons denounced by the said Antonia Puxant, both in the deposition and ratification, I have summoned only those who, as I understood from her, were present when the aforementioned Pepa de los Gosos performed her divinations before the said Antonia. As to the other persons and matters, referred to by her, I have instituted no proceedings respecting them, deeming an additional order from your Excellencies necessary to this step.

Respecting the individuals named by Antonia Puxant in both her statement and confirmation, I have only called those whom I understood from her were present when Pepa de los Gosos conducted her divinations in front of Antonia. Regarding the other individuals and issues she mentioned, I have not taken any action, as I believe that another order from your Excellencies is needed for this step.

I have also to inform your Excellencies that the said Antonia Puxant is very anxious that her father, Jaime Puxant, may know nothing of her declarations, and in particular, that in the ratification, respecting Margarida Puxant, inasmuch as this woman is married to the brother of the above Jaime Puxant. She states further, that she heard sometime since that the above Margarida, her aunt, had been summoned before our Holy Tribunal for witchcraft and superstition; whether at the instance of her father or relations, or other persons, does not appear, and for this reason or some other, a discord had arisen between them.

I also need to inform your Excellencies that Antonia Puxant is very worried that her father, Jaime Puxant, may find out about her statements, especially regarding the ratification concerning Margarida Puxant, since this woman is married to Jaime Puxant's brother. She also mentions that she heard some time ago that her aunt Margarida had been called before our Holy Tribunal for witchcraft and superstition; it's unclear whether this was at the request of her father or other relatives or someone else, and for this reason or another, a conflict has arisen between them.

With respect to the character and occupation of the denounced Pepa de los Gosos and the fact whether she observes the precepts of the church, I cannot transmit you any information, as I do not know the person, and have not yet been able to find her; but according to all that can be learned from the witnesses, she is undoubtedly guilty. They inform me she is very cautious in concealing herself.

With regard to the character and occupation of the accused Pepa de los Gosos and whether she follows the church's teachings, I can’t provide you with any information since I don’t know her and haven’t been able to find her yet. However, from what I’ve gathered from the witnesses, she is definitely guilty. They tell me she is very careful about hiding.

In relation to the other witnesses, I have to remark the following. As to Gertrudis Poc y Marti, mentioned in the deposition of Antonia Puxant, it appears to me that he has concealed the truth in his declaration, from fear or some other motive; which opinion is confirmed by his having delayed the ratification beyond the specified time, so that it was found necessary to summon him anew. He appears, however, after he had been charged to declare the truth on the eighth of March, when the ratification took place, to have made a full and ingenuous declaration, which corresponds with the statements of the above Antonia Puxant.

In regard to the other witnesses, I have to point out the following. Regarding Gertrudis Poc y Marti, who is mentioned in Antonia Puxant's deposition, it seems to me that he has hidden the truth in his statement, whether out of fear or another reason; this view is supported by the fact that he delayed the ratification beyond the given time, making it necessary to call him back again. However, after being instructed to tell the truth on March 8, when the ratification occurred, he seems to have provided a full and honest account, which aligns with what Antonia Puxant stated.

As to the deposition of Rosa Llobet, it appears to be true, although nothing to the purpose. This person was summoned as she was supposed to be the lady of the house where the divinations were performed, from the description of Antonia; but I found, upon examining her, that she was not. Still some information was obtained by her means, she having informed me that a house near the one abovementioned, on the left hand, is a great resort for young females for some unknown purpose. In consequence, I have summoned the occupant, Francisca Jacoba, whom I shall hereafter refer to.

Regarding the statement of Rosa Llobet, it seems to be accurate, but not really relevant. She was called in because she was thought to be the lady of the house where the divinations took place, based on Antonia's description; however, when I examined her, I realized she wasn't. Still, I did gather some useful information from her, as she told me that a house nearby, on the left, is a popular spot for young women for some unknown reason. As a result, I've summoned the occupant, Francisca Jacoba, whom I will refer to later.

Respecting Madalena Masllorens, I believe that she has declared sincerely the whole truth. It is to be observed that this person is not the proprietor of the house in the Calle de Farlandina in which Pepa de los Gosos practised her arts, as was thought by Antonia Puxant.

Respecting Madalena Masllorens, I believe she has honestly stated the whole truth. It's important to note that this person is not the owner of the house on Calle de Farlandina where Pepa de los Gosos practiced her arts, as Antonia Puxant believed.

With relation to Francisca Jacoba, who occupies the first floor of the first house in la Riera Alta, on the left hand as you go from the Convent of the Capuchins, she confesses that the said Pepa de los Gosos has visited her house upon business, as many other persons have done, but affirms that she never practised there, any performance or divination with cards; yet from her manner of answering the interrogatories, and her warmth in defending the said Pepa, talking at great length in her favor, and declaring she had been accused falsely, I have no doubt she is a friend of hers, and, therefore, that her testimony is very suspicious. In this, however, I may be mistaken.

Regarding Francisca Jacoba, who lives on the first floor of the first house on La Riera Alta, on the left as you head from the Convent of the Capuchins, she admits that Pepa de los Gosos has come to her house for business, just like many others have, but insists that she never engaged in any performances or divination with cards there. However, based on how she responded to the questions and her strong defense of Pepa—speaking at length in her favor and claiming that she was falsely accused—I have no doubt that she is a friend of hers and, therefore, her testimony is quite questionable. I might be wrong about this, though.

With respect to Maria Tintorer, who is the proprietor of a house in the Calle de Farlandina where the divinations above referred to were performed, I think she has spoken the truth, and that her whole testimony may be credited. As to the Gipsey of the Calle de St Pablo, Señor Augustus Fuster, and the other females, I have not summoned them, waiting for an order from your Excellencies to this effect.

With regard to Maria Tintorer, who owns a house on Calle de Farlandina where the mentioned divinations took place, I believe she is telling the truth, and her entire testimony should be trusted. As for the Gypsy on Calle de St. Pablo, Señor Augustus Fuster, and the other women, I haven't called them yet, as I'm waiting for your Excellencies' order to do so.

With regard to Antonia Ragas, I think her testimony may be admitted, as it corroborates that of Antonia Puxant in some points. Respecting the other witness, mentioned by Antonia, named Margarida, I have not been able to take her deposition, as she has been long confined by sickness, in the hospital in this city.

Regarding Antonia Ragas, I believe her testimony should be accepted, as it supports some points made by Antonia Puxant. As for the other witness mentioned by Antonia, named Margarida, I haven't been able to take her statement since she has been seriously ill and in the hospital in this city for a long time.

The above, Most Illustrious Señores, are the depositions which I have taken, and the judgments I have formed respecting them. I trust you will pardon the faults which I have committed therein, and rectify my errors.

The above, Most Illustrious Señores, are the statements I have gathered and the conclusions I have drawn regarding them. I hope you will forgive any mistakes I've made and correct my errors.

I remain your Excellencies’ most humble servant, and kiss the hands of your Excellencies.

I am still your Excellencies' most humble servant and I kiss your Excellencies' hands.

Fr. Gervasio Minguella, Carmelite Calzado.

Fr. Gervasio Minguella, Carmelite Calzado.


In the city of Barcelona, on the twentieth day of February, one thousand eight hundred and five, before the Reverend Father Fr. Gervasio Minguella, Carmelite Calzado, Presbyter and Commissary appointed for this investigation, and me, Fr. Joseph Abella, Presbyter Carmelite Calzado, Notary, having sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Antonia Puxant, a native of Ripoll, in the bishopric of Vique, daughter of Jaime Puxant, of this city, aged seventeen years.

In the city of Barcelona, on February 20, 1805, before the Reverend Father Fr. Gervasio Minguella, Carmelite Calzado, Presbyter and Commissioner assigned for this investigation, and me, Fr. Joseph Abella, Presbyter Carmelite Calzado, Notary, having sworn to keep matters confidential and carry out our duties faithfully, appeared, as summoned, and took an oath to tell the truth and maintain confidentiality, Antonia Puxant, a native of Ripoll, in the diocese of Vique, daughter of Jaime Puxant, of this city, aged seventeen.

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

Questioned if she knew or guessed why she was called to appear.

Answered, that she supposed it to be on account of a letter which she had caused to be written in her name, to the Holy Tribunal, on the third day of the present month.

Answered that she thought it was because of a letter she had made to be written in her name to the Holy Tribunal on the third day of this month.

Questioned, at what time and place, and in the presence of what persons were the operations with the cards performed; also, with what words and gestures, and whether the performer received any rebukes for her actions, or appeared to be of sound mind.

Questioned, at what time and place, and in the presence of what people were the card operations carried out; also, with what words and gestures, and whether the performer received any criticism for her actions, or seemed to be of sound mind.

Answered, that about six months ago, at the request of the deponent, she performed the operation three several times in the space of three or four weeks at different places; that is to say, the first time in the Calle de la Riera Alta, at the other times in the Calle de Nazaret. The houses she did not know. In the Calle de Nazaret the entrance was by a small door in the lower story near a garden. The places she could recognise on seeing. The person who performed the operation was always unwilling to do it at her own house. Those present on the first occasion were four in number; the deponent, the operator, one of her friends called Gertrudis, and sometimes Jesus, because she lives in the Calle de Jesus. She was a married woman. The fourth was, as the deponent imagined, the lady of the house. On the second occasion there were present the two first persons before mentioned, a young woman named Antonia Ragosa, living in the Calle del Conde del Asalto, a native of Ripoll, and the lady of the house called Helena or Magdalena. On the third occasion there were present the two first persons, and another called Puntina, the widow of a weaver. The operations were performed with singular actions and unintelligible language. All that the deponent could understand was the word ‘Barrabast.’ Nobody rebuked the performer, and she practised the whole seriously, and in her right mind.

Answered that about six months ago, at the request of the person giving the statement, she performed the procedure three times over the course of three or four weeks at different locations. The first time was on Calle de la Riera Alta, and the others were on Calle de Nazaret. She did not know the houses. On Calle de Nazaret, the entrance was through a small door on the ground floor near a garden. She could recognize the places upon seeing them. The person who performed the procedure always preferred not to do it at her own home. The people present during the first occasion were four in total: the person giving the statement, the operator, a friend named Gertrudis, and sometimes Jesus, as she lived on Calle de Jesus. She was married. The fourth person was, as the person giving the statement believed, the lady of the house. During the second occasion, the two previously mentioned were present along with a young woman named Antonia Ragosa, who lived on Calle del Conde del Asalto and was from Ripoll, and the lady of the house named Helena or Magdalena. In the third occasion, the first two people were there again, along with another named Puntina, the widow of a weaver. The procedures were carried out with unusual rituals and unintelligible language. The only word the person giving the statement could understand was ‘Barrabast.’ No one scolded the performer, and she carried out everything seriously and with a clear mind.

Questioned, what things she divined.

Questioned, what she discovered.

Answered, that she told her what money she had in her pocket; what she was thinking about; that her father wanted her to marry a young man whom she disliked, and that on this account her father was displeased with her. Sometimes she made wrong statements, but this the deponent thinks was done designedly, and in order that she might not be discovered. She also told the deponent that the young man of Olot, to whom she was betrothed, and whose name was Caspar Giralt, would write to her within three weeks, and that he would visit this city, adding other information. The operator always chose Friday for her performances, and the deponent paid her two reals vellon.

Answered that she told her how much money she had in her pocket and what she was thinking. She mentioned that her father wanted her to marry a young man she didn't like, which made her father unhappy with her. Sometimes she said things that weren't true, but the deponent believes this was intentional, so she wouldn't get caught. She also informed the deponent that the young man from Olot, to whom she was engaged and whose name was Caspar Giralt, would write to her within three weeks and that he would visit the city, along with other details. The operator always chose Friday for her activities, and the deponent paid her two reals vellon.

Questioned, if she knew that any other persons had said or done anything which came under the cognisance of the Holy Office.

Questioned if she knew whether anyone else had said or done anything that fell under the authority of the Holy Office.

Answered, that she had heard of four other persons who performed divinations. One was named Fargas, and lived in a lane near St Paul’s Church. Another was named Teresica, and appeared to be a married woman. She lived in the same street. Another was called Garvi. Her residence unknown. The last was called Teresa, and sometimes Ballarenga, a married woman, and formerly living in the Calle de la Parra. The deponent was told by a young woman named Felipe, that on the second of this month she passed the night with the said Ballarenga, where they burnt a rosary and a two real piece along with some holy water. On the following morning the said Felipe showed the deponent some black powder which she stated to be the ashes of the rosary and money, and said it was a potent love powder. The deponent was also informed by a young woman named Ursula, who lives in la Riera Alta, that a person living in Barceloneta carried on the same practices.

Answered that she had heard of four other people who did divinations. One was named Fargas, who lived on a lane near St. Paul's Church. Another was named Teresica, who seemed to be a married woman. She lived on the same street. Another was called Garvi, but her residence was unknown. The last was named Teresa, also known as Ballarenga, a married woman who used to live on Calle de la Parra. The deponent was told by a young woman named Felipe that on the second of this month, she spent the night with Ballarenga, where they burned a rosary and a two real coin along with some holy water. The next morning, Felipe showed the deponent some black powder, which she claimed was the ashes of the rosary and money, saying it was a powerful love powder. The deponent was also informed by a young woman named Ursula, who lives on La Riera Alta, that a person living in Barceloneta was practicing the same things.

Questioned, if she knew anything more.

Questioned if she knew anything else.

Answered, that a young woman named Teresa, living in the Calle del Conde del Asalto, told her that a certain man declared to her mother, that he knew a woman who would carry her to Olot in an hour’s time, upon the condition that she should not invoke any Saint.

Answered, that a young woman named Teresa, living on Calle del Conde del Asalto, told her that a man told her mother he knew a woman who could take her to Olot in an hour, as long as she didn’t call on any Saint.

Questioned, what was the age and personal appearance of the abovementioned Pepa de los Gosos.

Questioned, what was the age and personal appearance of the above-mentioned Pepa de los Gosos?

Answered, that she was a little old woman with sunken eyes and a wrinkled face.

Answered that she was a little old woman with hollow eyes and a wrinkled face.

Questioned, if she knew anything more.

Questioned if she knew anything else.

Answered, that a woman named Serafina Xuera, wife of Señor Miguel in the Calle de St Olegario, had told her there was a woman in her house who performed divinations.

Answered that a woman named Serafina Xuera, wife of Señor Miguel on Calle de St Olegario, had told her there was a woman in her house who did fortune-telling.

Questioned, if she knew anything more.

Questioned if she knew anything else.

Answered, No.

No.

The above having been read to the deponent, is declared by her to be correctly recorded. She further states that she has not made these declarations out of malice, but solely in obedience to her conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon her, which she promised, and not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name.

The above has been read to the witness, and she confirms that it has been accurately recorded. She adds that she is not making these statements out of spite, but purely in accordance with her conscience. She was instructed to keep this confidential, which she agreed to, and since she is unable to write, I, the undersigned Commissary, am signing on her behalf.

Fr. Gervasio Minguella,
Carmelite Commissary.
Antonio Puixant.

Fr. Gervasio Minguella,
Carmelite Commissary.
Antonio Puixant.

Before me—

In front of me—

Fr. Joseph Abella, Carmelite Calzado, Notary.

Fr. Joseph Abella, Carmelite Calzado, Notary.

*  *  *  *

*  *  *  *


In the suburb of Barceloneta, on the thirtieth day of October, one thousand eight hundred and six, before the Rev. Juan Pedrals, Presbyter and Commissary, and me Ignacio Ribes, Presbyter Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy, and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Manuel Baxo, a native of the town of Blancas, in the bishopric of Gerona, aged sixtyfour years, and dwelling in Barceloneta, in the Calle del Sementerio.

In the suburb of Barceloneta, on October 30, 1806, before Rev. Juan Pedrals, a priest and commissioner, and me, Ignacio Ribes, a notary priest sworn to keep secrets and do our jobs faithfully, appeared, as summoned, and took an oath to tell the truth and maintain confidentiality, Manuel Baxo, a sixty-four-year-old from the town of Blancas, in the diocese of Gerona, currently living in Barceloneta on Calle del Sementerio.

Questioned, why he had demanded audience.

Questioned why he had requested a meeting.

Answered, to give the following information to the Holy Office. Within about three years he had observed that his wife, named Cecilia Pruna, and vulgarly la Cileta, had, on many occasions, in his house, performed such practices as these. About ten or twelve o’clock at night, she took a sheep’s liver and put it in an earthen pot with a small quantity of water. This she boiled over the fire and kept piercing it with a nail set in the end of a stick, which he observing, she hid the stick and made use of a knife for this purpose. She practised divinations with cards to ascertain whether any person would be rich or poor, married or single, or whether any one arriving from America brought money or not. There was a ship which ran out to sea in the night, with the Collector of the Customs and some of his officers on board, and while the whole city was in suspense as to their fate, not knowing whither the ship had gone, she informed the second officer of the marine that he might be under no apprehensions, for they had arrived at Naples, without any injury, which in fact turned out to be the case. Furthermore, she used to gather dead men’s bones out of the graveyard, and burn them to powder, but what she did with this powder he did not know. She also made use of certain grains which she obtained at the Convent of Jesus, and observed that in order to be efficacious they should be gathered at the time when our Lord was in his tomb, and not suffered to touch the ground. These practices his wife had learned from a sailor of St Felio Guixots, named Pedro Torrent, according to what she had stated to a woman residing in the house. The deponent had made many exertions to persuade his wife to comply with the precept of the church, and attend mass, but she refused.

Answered, to provide the following information to the Holy Office. Over about three years, he noticed that his wife, named Cecilia Pruna, commonly known as la Cileta, had often carried out practices like these in their home. Around ten or twelve o’clock at night, she would take a sheep’s liver and put it in a clay pot with a bit of water. She boiled it over the fire while repeatedly poking it with a nail on a stick; when he noticed, she hid the stick and used a knife instead. She practiced card divination to find out if someone would be rich or poor, married or single, or if anyone coming from America would bring money. One night, a ship went out to sea with the Customs Collector and some of his officers onboard, and while the entire city was anxious about their fate, not knowing where the ship had gone, she told the second officer that he shouldn't worry because they had safely arrived in Naples, which indeed turned out to be true. Additionally, she used to gather bones from the graveyard and ground them to powder, but he didn’t know what she did with that powder. She also used specific grains that she got from the Convent of Jesus, and noted that to be effective, they had to be collected when our Lord was in his tomb and not let touch the ground. She had learned these practices from a sailor from St Felio Guixots named Pedro Torrent, according to what she told a woman living in their house. He had made many efforts to convince his wife to follow the church’s teachings and attend mass, but she refused.

Questioned, what persons were present when these superstitious and necromantic deeds were done, what persons took part in them, what instruments were used, what words spoken, what ceremonies performed, and whether the whole was done seriously or in a jesting manner; whether she was rebuked by any one, and by whom; whether, after being rebuked, she continued the practices, and whether she was in her right mind.

Questioned about who was there when these superstitious and necromantic acts took place, who participated in them, what tools were used, what words were spoken, what ceremonies were carried out, and whether everything was done seriously or jokingly; whether she was scolded by anyone, and who that was; whether, after being scolded, she continued the practices, and whether she was in her right mind.

Answered, that various persons were present on the above occasion, but their names and residences were unknown to him. Many persons likewise unknown had participated in the operations. As to the instruments used, they had been already described, as well as the manner and ceremonies; that it was not done in jest, and she was in her right mind; and finally, that he had often reproved her without effect.

Answered, that various people were there on that occasion, but he didn’t know their names or where they lived. Many other unknown individuals also took part in the activities. Regarding the tools used, they had already been described, along with the methods and rituals; that it wasn’t done for fun, and she was in her right mind; and finally, that he had often called her out on it with no success.

Questioned, what was the age, personal appearance, and residence of the person in question.

Questioned, what was the age, appearance, and residence of the person in question.

Answered, that she was about sixty years of age, tall, of a swarthy complexion, and lived in his house.

Answered that she was about sixty years old, tall, with a dark complexion, and lived in his house.

Questioned, if he knew that any other person had said or done aught contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith, or against the proceedings of the Holy Office.

Questioned if he knew that anyone else had said or done anything against our Holy Catholic Faith or against the actions of the Holy Office.

Answered, No.

No.

The above being read to the deponent, he declared it to be correctly recorded, and that he had nothing to add or alter in relation to it; that it was the truth, and not uttered by him out of malice or ill will against his wife, but solely in obedience to his conscience. Secrecy was enjoined, which he promised, and added his signature.

The above was read to the person giving the testimony, and he stated that it was recorded accurately, with nothing to add or change about it; that it was the truth, and not said out of malice or bad feelings towards his wife, but solely in accordance with his conscience. He was instructed to keep it confidential, which he agreed to, and then he signed his name.

Manuel Baxo.
Juan Pedrols, Commissary.

Manuel Baxo.
Juan Pedrols, Commissioner.

Before me—

In front of me—

Ignacio Ribes, Notary.

Ignacio Ribes, Notary.

*  *  *  *

*  *  *  *

To the reverend Vicar of Santa Maria de los Reyes to whom is intrusted the district of the Calle del Santo Hospital, Barcelona.

To the esteemed Vicar of Santa Maria de los Reyes, who is in charge of the area around Calle del Santo Hospital, Barcelona.

It is desired in this Tribunal of the Holy Office, to learn the conduct in a religious, moral, and political relation, of Dr Don Josef Baldrich, advocate of the Royal Audience, and a resident in the Calle de Jerusalem, at the corner opposite the church of St Augustin, in this city. To know whether he observes the regulations of our Holy Mother Church, and his general character in religion and politics. For this purpose the Tribunal have directed that instructions be sent you to make all possible exertions to this end, both in the discharge of your ordinary functions, and by cautious and secret inquiries from persons of good credit, not omitting anything in these researches which may discover his most secret thoughts upon the matters above specified.

It is the wish of this Tribunal of the Holy Office to investigate the behavior of Dr. Don Josef Baldrich, advocate of the Royal Audience, who lives on Calle de Jerusalem, at the corner across from St. Augustin's church in this city, in terms of his religious, moral, and political conduct. They want to determine whether he follows the rules of our Holy Mother Church and to evaluate his overall character in these areas. For this reason, the Tribunal has instructed that you be sent guidelines to make every effort toward this goal, both through your usual duties and by discreet and confidential inquiries with trustworthy individuals, leaving no stone unturned in these investigations that might reveal his innermost thoughts on the subjects mentioned above.

The above instructions I communicate to you by order of the Tribunal. God preserve you many years.

The instructions above are communicated to you by order of the Tribunal. Wishing you many more years ahead.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, October thirtieth, 1818.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, October 30, 1818.

Don Jose Aymar y Soler, Sec’y.

Don Jose Aymar y Soler, Secretary

ANSWER TO THE ABOVE.

ANSWER TO THE ABOVE.

To Don Josef Aymar y Soler, Sec’y.
Sir,

To Don Josef Aymar y Soler, Secretary.
Sir,

Dr Don Josef Baldrich conforms punctually to the precepts of the church, and regularly presents me his certificate to this effect. I have also ascertained by inquiries, that his character is good in a political view, and that he is a well informed and industrious person. I can furthermore state that I have never had any complaint against him, all which intelligence I transmit in discharge of the duty imposed on me. God preserve you many years.

Dr. Don Josef Baldrich follows the church's principles on time and regularly gives me his certificate to prove it. I've also checked and found that his character is solid from a political standpoint, and he is knowledgeable and hardworking. Additionally, I can say that I've never received any complaints about him, and I'm sharing this information as part of my responsibilities. Wishing you many more years to come.

Barcelona, November seventh, 1818.

Barcelona, November 7, 1818.

Cloy Tuberi, Presbyter and Vicar del Pino.

Cloy Tuberi, Priest and Vicar of del Pino.

*  *  * 

*  *  *

To the Reverend Cura Parroco of Canellas.

To the Reverend Parish Priest of Canellas.

This Tribunal of the Holy Office, desire to know the religious, moral, and political behaviour of the Baron de Canellas; whether he follows the precepts respecting Easter, and the other regulations of our Holy Mother Church; and, having learnt that he has taken up his residence in your town, the Tribunal have ordered that you receive instruction to make all possible researches for this purpose, both in the performance of your ordinary duties and by making inquiries through the instrumentality of trustworthy persons, with all proper caution and secrecy; the satisfactory performance of which, the Tribunal expect from your prudence and zeal.

This Tribunal of the Holy Office wants to know the religious, moral, and political behavior of Baron de Canellas; whether he follows the guidelines about Easter and the other rules of our Holy Mother Church; and, having learned that he has moved to your town, the Tribunal has instructed you to gather as much information as possible for this purpose, both in your regular duties and by asking trustworthy people, with all necessary caution and confidentiality. They expect you to carry this out with your prudence and enthusiasm.

These instructions I transmit by order of the Tribunal. God preserve you many years.

These instructions are sent on behalf of the Tribunal. May you be blessed with many more years.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, November fourth, 1819.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, November 4, 1819.

Don Jose Aymar y Soler, Sec’y.

Don Jose Aymar y Soler, Secretary


ANSWER.

Understood. Please provide the text you would like me to modernize.

To Don Josef Aymar y Soler, Secretary of the Holy Office of Barcelona.

To Don Josef Aymar y Soler, Secretary of the Holy Office of Barcelona.

In compliance with the order of the Tribunal of the Holy Office, I am enabled to state that the Baron de Canellas has resided in this place ever since the beginning of 1815, except being occasionally absent on account of the season or his health, as at the present time; he is now at Manlleu where he has resided since the first of August of the present year, with the intention of passing the hot months there. It has not been ascertained when he means to return, but I believe he has determined to do this next January.

In accordance with the directive from the Tribunal of the Holy Office, I can confirm that Baron de Canellas has been living here since the start of 1815, except for occasional absences due to the season or his health, like right now; he is currently in Manlleu, where he has been since August 1 of this year, intending to spend the summer months there. It hasn't been confirmed when he plans to return, but I believe he intends to do so next January.

As to his moral and religious conduct, he commonly hears mass once or twice a day, says his prayers very devoutly, and enjoins the same upon all his family; but when his mental irregularities occur, which have happened three or four times within six years, he is highly phrenetical, and will utter blasphemies like a heretic, as I have been informed, although such a thing has never happened in my presence or that of my vicar. Even in these fits of delirium, however, he manifests towards us some respect and fear. His last attack, according to what I have been able to learn, endured from January till the end of April of the present year, during which he conducted in a most inexplicable manner, behaving at times very regularly, and at others like a madman. During all this period I believe he never failed to attend mass at the stated time, although he declared that he was no better than a dog, that he possessed neither faith, hope, nor charity, that everything was a dream to him, and that he had no belief in the divine mysteries.

As for his moral and religious behavior, he usually goes to mass once or twice a day, prays very sincerely, and encourages the same from his family. However, when his mental irregularities occur, which have happened three or four times in the last six years, he becomes extremely agitated and will say blasphemous things like a heretic, as I’ve been told, although I’ve never witnessed it myself nor has my vicar. Even during these episodes of delirium, he still shows us some respect and fear. His last episode, from what I’ve been able to gather, lasted from January to the end of April of this year, during which he acted in a very strange way, sometimes behaving normally and at other times like a madman. Throughout this period, I believe he never missed mass at the scheduled time, even though he claimed he was no better than a dog, that he had no faith, hope, or charity, that everything felt like a dream to him, and that he didn’t believe in divine mysteries.

Sometimes he would fall to raving, and declare that he had all hell within him, on which occasions he would utter the most horrid blasphemies. Finally at the end of the period abovementioned he grew tranquil, and I directed him to observe the ordinances relating to Easter, threatening him, in case of refusal, with a denunciation to my prelate. All the threats and exhortations I could use were fruitless for some time. At length, learning that the Missionary Fathers from Villanueva were to take this parish in their way in the course of their labors, he sent me a message, desiring me to grant him a forbearance for a few days, as he was in readiness to perform his duties to the mission. Notwithstanding, however, the assurances I had received from the Missionary Fathers, they did not visit us, and the Baron remained without confession, in which state he left this place for that in which he now resides.

Sometimes he would go off on wild rants, claiming that he had all of hell inside him during those moments, and he would spew the most terrible blasphemies. Eventually, by the end of the mentioned period, he became calm, and I told him to follow the rules for Easter, warning him that if he refused, I would report him to my superior. All the threats and pleas I made were useless for a while. Finally, after hearing that the Missionary Fathers from Villanueva were going to come through this parish during their work, he sent me a message asking for a few days of grace, saying he was ready to fulfill his commitments to the mission. However, despite the assurances I got from the Missionary Fathers, they did not come to see us, and the Baron left without making his confession, in which state he departed for the place where he now lives.

In the year one thousand eight hundred and eighteen he also omitted the above duty in this place, and passed the Lent at the college, in the capital, where he confessed, and took the sacrament, as appears from a regular certificate which he showed me. When in good humor, which happens the greater part of the time, he exhibits outwardly, great piety and zeal, taking much care that his religious worship is accompanied with every mark of respect, and paying the regular sums for the support of my church. He is also very charitable, in which point, indeed, I can bear witness that he follows his natural inclination.

In 1818, he also skipped the duty here and spent Lent at the college in the capital, where he confessed and took communion, as shown by a certificate he shared with me. When he's in a good mood, which is most of the time, he outwardly shows great piety and enthusiasm, making sure that his religious practices are conducted with all due respect and regularly contributing to the support of my church. He is also very charitable, and I can attest that this aligns with his natural inclination.

Father N. de Barbara, lecturer in philosophy, of the Franciscan Convent, at Villafranca, preached in this place during the last Lent, and had many disputes with the Baron while he was in the height of his extravagances. In the course of these the Baron uttered some assertions which, had they proceeded from a person of sound mind, would have been reported to the Holy Tribunal, but in his condition it was judged best to consider him as a madman.

Father N. de Barbara, a philosophy lecturer at the Franciscan Convent in Villafranca, preached here during the last Lent and had several arguments with the Baron while he was at the peak of his eccentric behavior. During these exchanges, the Baron made some claims that, if they had come from someone in their right mind, would have been reported to the Holy Tribunal, but given his condition, it was deemed more appropriate to regard him as a madman.

In fact, I am convinced that with occasional seasons of intermission, he is not to be looked upon as a sane person; and finally with all his singular piety and devotedness to the cause of the church, charity to the poor, and apostolic zeal in speaking against the vices of these miserable days, I perceive in him a great fund of excessive vanity and pride.

In fact, I'm convinced that with some breaks, he shouldn't be seen as a sane person. And despite his unusual piety and dedication to the church, his charity towards the poor, and his passionate speeches against the vices of these unfortunate times, I see in him a significant amount of excessive vanity and pride.

The above information I lay before the Tribunal of the Holy Office, to be applied to the requisite purposes. God preserve you many years.

The information above is submitted to the Tribunal of the Holy Office for the necessary purposes. May God grant you many more years.

Francisco Marcer, Cura Parroco.
Canellas, November 18th, 1819.

Francisco Marcer, Parish Priest.
Canellas, November 18th, 1819.

The Inquisitor Fiscal declares it as his opinion that the investigation of the above matter should be suspended and recorded for want of proof.

The Inquisitor Fiscal states that he believes the investigation into the matter mentioned above should be halted and noted due to lack of evidence.

D. Castillon.
Secret Chamber, November 23d, 1819.

D. Castillon.
Secret Chamber, November 23, 1819.

 

The said Inquisitor having examined the above proceedings, in his morning audience, on the day before stated, ordered that the investigation be suspended for want of proof, and that it be recorded in the registers under the name of the person referred to.

The Inquisitor reviewed the above proceedings during his morning session the day before and ordered that the investigation be put on hold due to lack of evidence, and that it be documented in the records under the name of the individual mentioned.

Attest. Dr Don Cyro Valls y Geli, Sec’y.

Attest. Dr. Don Cyro Valls y Geli, Secretary.

*  *  *  *

Below is a short piece of text (5 words or fewer). Modernize it into contemporary English if there's enough context, but do not add or omit any information. If context is insufficient, return it unchanged. Do not add commentary, and do not modify any placeholders. If you see placeholders of the form __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_x__, you must keep them exactly as-is so they can be replaced with links. * * * *

INFORMATION has been received and sworn to in this Holy Office, that a certain person has, in the presence of others, among whom was Juan Bonafos, surgeon, living in the house of Don Antonio Canals, uttered the following assertions.

INFORMATION has been received and sworn to in this Holy Office, that a certain person has, in the presence of others, including Juan Bonafos, a surgeon living in the house of Don Antonio Canals, made the following statements.

1st. That the priests in the holy sacrifice of Mass, have no power to bring Christ down from heaven, which is proved by the example of the English, who, although so learned a people, yet do not believe this, which they would if it were true, from their great sagacity.

1st. That the priests in the holy sacrifice of Mass have no power to bring Christ down from heaven, which is shown by the example of the English, who, even though they are such a learned people, do not believe this, which they would if it were true, due to their great wisdom.

2d. That the French have done right in breaking up so many ecclesiastical and lay communities, which were the cause of such a multitude of dissensions and altercations, destructive to the crown and to the Apostolic Roman Catholic Church.

2d. That the French made the right choice in dissolving so many religious and secular communities, which caused so many conflicts and disputes, harmful to the crown and to the Apostolic Roman Catholic Church.

3d. That the chaplains dress in black to cover their ignorance, inasmuch as they know nothing.

3d. That the chaplains wear black to hide their lack of knowledge, since they know nothing.

4th. That there is no hell nor purgatory.

4th. That there is no hell or purgatory.

5th. That the highest disgrace which could befall him in this world, would be to have one of his relations a monk, or the Beneficiado of a parish.

5th. That the greatest shame that could happen to him in this world would be to have one of his relatives as a monk or the Beneficiado of a parish.

6th. That if the Tribunal were to order him to be arrested, he had arms in his house and would resist till he had killed four or five.

6th. That if the Tribunal ordered him to be arrested, he had weapons in his house and would fight back until he killed four or five.

In consequence of this, we hereby grant a commission to our Commissary Dr Antonio Amill, for the examination before Dr Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta, Presbyter, as Notary, of the said Juan Bonafos, according to the formula herewith subjoined. The name and residence of the speaker and those who were present, are to be recorded, as also all the circumstances of time, place, &c., as prescribed in the above direction; the whole to be forwarded to us with this commission. God preserve you.

In light of this, we are giving a commission to our Commissary Dr. Antonio Amill to examine Juan Bonafos in front of Dr. Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta, who will act as the Notary, following the attached guidelines. The names and addresses of the speaker and everyone present should be recorded, along with all relevant details such as time and place, as specified in the aforementioned instructions; the entire report should be sent back to us with this commission. May God keep you safe.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, June eleventh, 1791.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, June 11, 1791.

The Licentiate,

The Licentiate,

Don Manuel de Merra y Paniygua.
Dr Don Pedro Diaz de Valdes.
Juan Antonio Almonacid, Sec’y.

Don Manuel de Merra y Paniygua.
Dr. Don Pedro Diaz de Valdes.
Juan Antonio Almonacid, Secretary.


In the city of Barcelona, on the eleventh day of July, one thousand seven hundred and ninetyone, before Dr Antonio Amill, Presbyter and Commissary of the Holy Office, by virtue of a commission of the Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition of Catalonia, and me, Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta, Presbyter and Notary, having sworn to preserve secrecy, and perform faithfully our duties, appeared and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Juan Bonafos, surgeon, a native of the village of San Lorenzo de la Muga, in the bishopric of Gerona, of age, as he stated, twentyone years.

In the city of Barcelona, on July 11, 1791, before Dr. Antonio Amill, Presbyter and Commissioner of the Holy Office, by virtue of a commission from the Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition of Catalonia, and I, Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta, Presbyter and Notary, having sworn to keep confidentiality and perform our duties faithfully, appeared and took an oath to tell the truth and maintain secrecy. Juan Bonafos, a surgeon from the village of San Lorenzo de la Muga in the diocese of Gerona, declared that he was twenty-one years old.

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

Questioned whether he knew or guessed why he had been called to appear.

Answered, that he did not know.

Said he didn't know.

Questioned, if he knew that any person had said or done aught which was, or appeared to be, contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Doctrine.

Questioned if he knew whether anyone had said or done anything that was, or seemed to be, against our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Doctrine.

Answered, Yes, inasmuch as about six months before, he had heard Joseph Coch, a surgeon, native of Sellern, and at present residing in Barcelona, make the following assertions.

Answered, Yes, because about six months earlier, he had heard Joseph Coch, a surgeon from Sellern, who is now living in Barcelona, make the following statements.

1st. That the priests &c. [The six assertions specified above.]

1st. That the priests, etc. [The six assertions specified above.]

On another occasion, the deponent having stated to him that he had been in the Carthusian Convent, where he read an edict of the Holy Tribunal, prohibiting several books, and among them, one called Avisos de Moises, the above person replied, that as Christ had abolished the law of Moses, he hoped that another Christ would come and abolish the laws of the first. He moreover told him that he had prohibited books in his possession, which in fact he showed to the deponent. Their titles the deponent does not know.

On another occasion, the witness told him that he had been at the Carthusian Convent, where he read a decree from the Holy Tribunal banning several books, including one called Avisos de Moises. The person he was speaking to replied that since Christ had abolished the law of Moses, he hoped that another Christ would come to cancel the first set of laws. He also mentioned that he had banned books in his possession, which he actually showed to the witness. The witness does not know their titles.

Questioned, in what place the abovementioned Josef Coch made these assertions, and what persons were present at the time.

Questioned about where the mentioned Josef Coch made these claims and who was there at the time.

Answered, that it was at the house of the surgeon Baramon, in the Calle de los Flasades; and that the person present was Antonio Trabe, surgeon, who lives with Dr Torner, Beneficiado of San Justo.

Answered, that it was at the house of the surgeon Baramon, on Calle de los Flasades; and that the person present was Antonio Trabe, a surgeon, who lives with Dr. Torner, Beneficiado of San Justo.

Questioned, what was the age and personal appearance of the said Joseph Coch.

Questioned, what was the age and appearance of the said Joseph Coch?

Answered, that he should suppose him to be about thirtythree years old; that he was of a middling height, with a thin, pock marked face, and black hair.

Answered, that he should assume he was about thirty-three years old; that he was of average height, with a thin, blemished face, and black hair.

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the deponent, who states that he has not made this declaration out of malice, but solely from conscientious motives. Having been read to him, he declares it to be correctly recorded. I add his signature.

The above is the truth, according to the oath of the person giving the testimony, who states that he did not make this declaration out of spite, but solely from a sense of duty. After it was read to him, he confirms that it is recorded accurately. I include his signature.

Juan Bonafos.
Dr Antonio Amill, Presbyter Commissary.

Juan Bonafos.
Dr. Antonio Amill, Presbyter Commissary.

Before me—Juan Bonafos.

In front of me—Juan Bonafos.

Dr Antonio Amill, Presbyter Commissary.

Dr. Antonio Amill, Presbyter Commissary.

Before me—

In front of me—

Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta,
Presbyter Commissary, Notary.

Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta,
Commissioner Priest, Notary.

*  *  *  *

Below is a short piece of text (5 words or fewer). Modernize it into contemporary English if there's enough context, but do not add or omit any information. If context is insufficient, return it unchanged. Do not add commentary, and do not modify any placeholders. If you see placeholders of the form __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_x__, you must keep them exactly as-is so they can be replaced with links.

IN the city of Barcelona, on the twentysecond day of March, one thousand eight hundred and ninetytwo, before Dr Andres Fernandes de la Cuesta, Presbyter and Commissary of the Holy Office, by virtue of a commission from the Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition of Catalonia, and me, Francisco Junca, Presbyter Notary, appointed for this investigation, sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully the duty,—appeared according to summons, and made oath formally to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Francisco Beau, clerk, a native and inhabitant of Barcelona, and residing in the Calle dels Tallers, in the house of the Earthen Ware Company, on the second floor, of age, as he stated, thirtyeight years.

IN the city of Barcelona, on the twenty-second day of March, eighteen ninety-two, before Dr. Andres Fernandes de la Cuesta, Presbyter and Commissary of the Holy Office, by authority of a commission from the Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition of Catalonia, and me, Francisco Junca, Presbyter Notary, appointed for this investigation, sworn to keep confidentiality and faithfully fulfill my duty,—appeared as summoned and formally swore to tell the truth and maintain secrecy, Francisco Beau, a clerk, a native and resident of Barcelona, living on the second floor at the Earthen Ware Company, stating he was thirty-eight years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or suspected why he was being summoned to appear.

Answered, that he supposed it might be for the purpose of inquiring about the following matter. Being one day at dinner, in the tavern of Domingo ——, in the Calle de la Paja, he heard a certain Estruch, and another person who was a fifer in the Walloon Guards, talking about the French affairs. The said fifer spoke against the christian religion and Spain, and Estruch opposed him. Among other things in the conversation, this fifer observed that he believed only three things; but what these were, the deponent could not recollect—it was so long ago—only one of them, as it appears to him, related to giving charity. He declared that he possessed many books, and was not afraid of the Inquisition, for he had already been engaged in some disputes relative to a woman, which had come under the cognisance of the Holy Tribunal, or some of the officers. More of the conversation than this, he does not remember.

Answered that he thought it might be to ask about the following matter. One day while having dinner at Domingo’s tavern on Calle de la Paja, he heard a man named Estruch and a fifer from the Walloon Guards discussing French affairs. The fifer criticized the Christian religion and Spain, while Estruch argued against him. During their conversation, the fifer mentioned that he believed in only three things, but he couldn’t remember what they were—it was so long ago—only that one of them seemed to involve giving to charity. He claimed to own many books and wasn't afraid of the Inquisition, as he had already participated in some disputes regarding a woman that had been considered by the Holy Tribunal or some of its officers. He doesn’t recall more of their conversation than this.

The deponent was then told that information had been received and sworn to, that a certain person had uttered, in his presence, and in that of others, the following assertions; that fornication was no sin, and as to the rest, the whole was made good by giving charity to the poor. Other persons having mentioned the commandments, he replied, that they were all fulfilled by giving alms. Speaking disrespectfully of the church, he asserted, that the friars and chaplains did nothing but eat and stuff their paunches; that the church sought nothing but her own interest, collecting tithes from one year’s end to another; that the Pope had no more power than any other man; that he did not believe in the decalogue, nor the obligation to hear mass and confess, but only that there was a God, and that men were bound to give to the poor, and not steal. The conversation turning upon the miracles performed by the intercession of the Saints, he asserted that he believed none of them, because he had not witnessed them. Those of Christ being mentioned, he made this remark;—‘What a length of time from that period to 1791! and yet you believe them!’ thereby giving it to be understood that he did not believe them.

The witness was then informed that information had been received and sworn to, stating that a certain person had claimed, in his presence and that of others, the following: that fornication was not a sin, and that everything else could be made right by giving to the poor. When others brought up the commandments, he replied that all of them were fulfilled through giving alms. Speaking disrespectfully about the church, he said, that the friars and chaplains did nothing but eat and stuff their bellies; that the church cared only about its own interests, collecting tithes year after year; that the Pope had no more power than any other person; that he didn’t believe in the Ten Commandments, nor in the obligation to attend mass and confess, but only that there is a God, and that people should give to the poor and not steal. When the conversation turned to the miracles performed by the Saints' intercession, he claimed that he believed none of them, because he had not seen them. When the miracles of Christ were mentioned, he remarked, ‘What a long time from then to 1791! And yet you still believe them!’ implying that he did not believe them.

The deponent was therefore admonished in the name of God our Lord, and his Glorious and Blessed Mother, Our Lady, the Virgin Mary, to bethink himself and declare the whole truth.

The person giving the testimony was therefore reminded in the name of God our Lord, and His Glorious and Blessed Mother, Our Lady, the Virgin Mary, to consider carefully and state the entire truth.

Answered, that he heard the whole of these assertions except the first and last, relating to the miracles.

Answered that he heard all of these claims except for the first and last ones, which were about the miracles.

Questioned, why he had not given information of what he had heard to the Holy Office, inasmuch as it was so directly contrary to Our Holy Religion and Evangelical Law.

Questioned about why he hadn't reported what he heard to the Holy Office, since it was so directly against Our Holy Religion and Evangelical Law.

Answered, that he was so occupied with his dinner, and the debates going on, that he never thought of the obligation.

Answered that he was so busy with his dinner and the discussions happening that he never considered the obligation.

Questioned, from what cause and motive, and to what end the said fifer uttered these scandalous expressions; how many times, and what persons were present. Also, whether he was mad or drunk at the time, and whether he had been rebuked; how many times this was done, and if he abstained.

Questioned about the reasons and motivations behind the fifer's scandalous comments; how many times this happened, and who was present. Also, whether he was crazy or drunk at the time, and if he had been reprimanded; how many times that occurred, and if he stopped.

Answered, that he knew nothing of the cause, motive, or end of these words being spoken; that they were uttered only once at the noon above specified, in the sight and hearing of the deponent. That the persons present were the abovementioned Domingo, and a certain Juan, who, he believed, resided in the Calle Condal, next the house of Dr Juncia, on the second or third floor; also another person whom he did not remember; that he judged him to have been in his right mind, having asked the said Domingo in the presence of Estruch whether this man had not drunk too much, to which he replied that it could not be the effect of the wine, as he had, on other occasions, drunk more. That he did not recollect whether he was rebuked, but only that they kept disputing.

He answered that he knew nothing about the reason, motive, or purpose of these words being spoken; that they were said only once at the noon mentioned earlier, in the sight and hearing of the person giving the testimony. The individuals present were the previously mentioned Domingo, and a guy named Juan, who he believed lived on the Calle Condal, next to Dr. Juncia's house, on the second or third floor; there was also another person he couldn't remember. He thought that the guy was in his right mind because he asked Domingo in front of Estruch whether this man had drunk too much, to which Domingo replied that it couldn't be the wine's effect, as he had drunk more on other occasions. He didn't remember if he was scolded but only that they kept arguing.

Questioned, what was the personal appearance and age of the said fifer.

Questioned, what was the personal appearance and age of the mentioned fifer?

Answered, that he was of a middling size, about forty years old, and had been the gardener of the citadel; that he belonged to the grenadier company of Brias, according to his own statement.

Answered that he was of average height, about forty years old, and had been the gardener of the citadel; he claimed to belong to the grenadier company of Brias.

The whole of the above is the truth according to the oath sworn by the deponent, who also declared that the declarations were not made by him out of malice or ill will, but solely to discharge his conscience. The whole being read in his hearing, was declared by him to be correctly recorded, and he added his signature.

The entire statement above is true according to the oath taken by the witness, who also stated that his declarations were not made out of malice or bad intent, but solely to clear his conscience. After it was read aloud to him, he confirmed that it was accurately recorded and he added his signature.

Francisco Beau.
Dr Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta,
Presbyter and Commissary.

Francisco Beau.
Dr. Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta,
Priest and Official Representative.

Before me—

In front of me—

Francisco Juncia, Presbyter Notary
for this Investigation
.

Francisco Juncia, Presbyter Notary
for this Investigation
.

*  *  *  *

*  *  *  *

IN the city of Barcelona, on the fourteenth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and two, before the Reverend Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter and Commissary appointed for this investigation, and me, the Reverend Juan Palol, Presbyter Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, voluntarily, and made oath in the name of God our Lord to declare the truth and preserve secrecy in everything upon which she might be questioned, a woman, calling herself Maria Anna Sauri, a native of the town of Trem, in the bishopric of Urgel, of age, as she stated, forty years, a resident in Barcelona for twentysix years, and at present residing in the Calle de Basea, in the fourth story of a house opposite a carpenter’s, next the stairs called den Casador. She was the widow of Juan Martines, merchant, a native of the town of Figueras in the bishopric of Gerona.

IN the city of Barcelona, on June 14, 1802, before Reverend Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter and Commissary appointed for this investigation, and me, Reverend Juan Palol, Presbyter Notary, sworn to keep confidentiality and perform our duties faithfully, appeared voluntarily and took an oath in the name of God to tell the truth and maintain secrecy regarding everything she might be asked about. A woman who identified herself as Maria Anna Sauri, originally from the town of Trem in the bishopric of Urgel, claimed to be forty years old, had lived in Barcelona for twenty-six years, and was currently residing on the fourth floor of a building on Calle de Basea, opposite a carpenter’s shop, next to the stairs known as den Casador. She was the widow of Juan Martines, a merchant from the town of Figueras in the bishopric of Gerona.

Questioned, why she had demanded an audience of the Holy Office.

Questioned about why she had asked for a meeting with the Holy Office.

Answered, for the purpose of denouncing certain matters to the Holy Tribunal.

Answered, with the intention of reporting specific issues to the Holy Tribunal.

Questioned, what matters.

Questioned, what’s important.

Answered, that about six months ago she dwelt in the Calle de San Raymundo, near the Calle del Asalto, in a house between a tavern on one side, and a tailor’s shop on the other. In this neighbourhood resided a female named, formerly, Teresa Sola, and after her second marriage, Salanova, a native of Barcelona, aged from forty to fortyseven years. Her husband was named Francisco Salanova, and was by trade a weaver, and a native of San Felix de Llobregat. The deponent witnessed several transactions between the said Teresa Sola, now Salanova, and a Swiss soldier of the regiment called Bretxa. This soldier was called Joseph; his other name unknown, as well as the place of his birth. Information respecting him could be obtained of a certain captain, called Don Felice Cristi.

Answered that about six months ago she lived on Calle de San Raymundo, near Calle del Asalto, in a house located between a tavern on one side and a tailor’s shop on the other. In this neighborhood lived a woman named, formerly, Teresa Sola, and after her second marriage, Salanova, originally from Barcelona, aged between forty and forty-seven years. Her husband was named Francisco Salanova, who worked as a weaver and was from San Felix de Llobregat. The witness saw several interactions between the aforementioned Teresa Sola, now Salanova, and a Swiss soldier from the regiment called Bretxa. This soldier was named Joseph; his last name is unknown, as is the place of his birth. Information about him could be obtained from a certain captain named Don Felice Cristi.

The deponent saw these two persons take certain live frogs, stick needles into their eyes, breasts, and backs, and put them into a new pot over a great fire. This was done, as they informed her, for the purpose of compelling a certain man to marriage. She also saw them take three or four wax candles and light them. These they burnt bottom upwards, burning, at the same time, rosemary, and repeating unintelligible language, and making divers motions with the feet and hands.

The witness saw these two people catch some live frogs, poke needles into their eyes, chests, and backs, and put them into a new pot over a big fire. They told her this was done to force a certain man into marriage. She also saw them take three or four wax candles and light them. They burned them upside down while also burning rosemary, speaking in a strange language, and making various movements with their feet and hands.

The deponent also saw them practise operations with cards for the purpose of divining whatever things they chose. She requested them to perform one for her, and ascertain whether a person named Vicente, whom she supposed to be sick, would return soon from Valencia. ‘The said Teresa shuffled the cards, and then answered me that he was not sick, and would return soon, which in fact took place, and the abovementioned Vicente shortly appeared. She told me, at the same time, that I was in much distress, and if I would give her and the abovementioned soldier half a dollar, they would enable me to attain all my wishes. I gave them the money, and saw that they immediately took the figure of a dragon tied by the neck, and placed it in the sun. This occasioned me so much terror that I begged them to desist. Upon this they gave me back the half dollar, uttering maledictions, and the said Teresa declared that I was about to fall into an irretrievable misfortune, and that I should be obliged to sell every rag from my back, which in truth is my condition at present; and although I only laughed at the prediction then, they both told me that I might proclaim to the whole world that they had said it.’

The witness also saw them use cards to figure out various things they wanted. She asked them to do a reading for her to find out if a person named Vicente, whom she thought was sick, would return soon from Valencia. ‘Teresa shuffled the cards and told me that he wasn't sick and would be back soon, which indeed happened, as Vicente showed up shortly after. At the same time, she told me I was in a lot of distress, and if I gave her and the mentioned soldier half a dollar, they would help me get all my wishes. I gave them the money and saw them immediately take a figure of a dragon tied by the neck and place it in the sun. This scared me so much that I asked them to stop. They then returned the half dollar, cursing, and Teresa said that I was about to fall into an irreversible misfortune and that I would have to sell every rag from my back, which is exactly my situation now; even though I just laughed at the prediction back then, they both insisted that I could tell everyone that they had said it.’

The deponent further stated that the said Teresa had a companion named Maria Anna Gitar, a native of Barcelona and a resident in the Calle de San Raymundo. The deponent has never seen this person perform any superstitious acts, but has heard that on occasion of a quarrel between them, some witchcraft was practised; also that the said Maria Anna Gitar had a sister named Magdalena, (the name of her husband unknown) and the deponent heard the abovementioned Teresa Sola, now Salanova, declare that her sister Magdalena had not been at confession for the space of eight years. At other times, when these two were quarrelling, the deponent has heard the said Magdalena exclaim, ‘I am not like you, who lay heaps of rosemary in the balcony at night to burn the next morning.’

The witness also mentioned that Teresa had a friend named Maria Anna Gitar,, who was from Barcelona and lived on Calle de San Raymundo. The witness has never seen her do anything superstitious but heard that during one of their fights, some witchcraft was performed. The witness also learned that Maria Anna Gitar had a sister named Magdalena, (her husband's name is unknown), and the witness heard the aforementioned Teresa Sola, now Salanova, say that her sister Magdalena hadn't been to confession in eight years. At other times, when these two were arguing, the witness heard Magdalena yell, ‘I’m not like you, who puts piles of rosemary on the balcony at night to burn the next morning.’

Furthermore, the deponent has seen the said Teresa Sola, now Salanova, burn alum for some superstitious purpose, to her unknown. On this occasion there were two other persons present, namely, a girl called Antonia, about twentythree years of age, a native of Barcelona, and living with the abovementioned Teresa, and Raymundo Campeñs, widow of Esteva Campeñs, tailor, dwelling in the Calle de San Raymundo, aged, apparently, about fortyfive years.

Furthermore, the person giving this statement has seen Teresa Sola, now Salanova, burn alum for some unknown superstitious reason. On this occasion, there were two other people present: a girl named Antonia, about twenty-three years old, originally from Barcelona, living with the aforementioned Teresa, and Raymundo Campeñs, widow of Esteva Campeñs, a tailor, living on Calle de San Raymundo, who appears to be about forty-five years old.

Furthermore, the deponent remembers that she saw the said Teresa and the abovementioned soldier called Joseph, burn alum for the purpose of causing a reconciliation between a young man and a female named Magdalena, which persons had fallen into a quarrel. The said Teresa also practised operations with cards, and burnt rosemary, in order to effect this object. On the first occasion were present the abovementioned Antonia and Raymunda Campeñs, and on the second, Josefa Bardaguer, a girl of about twenty years of age, living in the Plazuela del Pino in the second story of a house which makes a corner of the Plazuela, and other persons whom she does not remember, as she had witnessed these performances between the said Teresa and the soldier so many times.

Furthermore, the witness recalls seeing Teresa and the mentioned soldier named Joseph burning alum to reconcile a young man and a woman named Magdalena, who had been in a fight. Teresa also performed card tricks and burned rosemary, to achieve this goal. On the first occasion, the aforementioned Antonia and Raymunda Campeñs were present, and on the second, Josefa Bardaguer, a girl around twenty years old, living in the Plazuela del Pino on the second floor of a building that corners the Plazuela, along with other people she can't remember, since she had seen these activities between Teresa and the soldier so many times.

The said Teresa also informed her that she possessed a St Antonio upon paper, which sweated whenever any ill was about to happen, and that when a pack of cards was shuffled and the ace of spades and five of diamonds drawn, it signified death or apprehension by the Holy Office. The deponent further stated that the said Teresa, was accustomed to burn rosemary, and sprinkle holy water all over her house, walking backwards to the door; and that she possessed an herb which foretold everything, good or bad, about to happen. Upon the stalk of this herb she placed a piece of gold or silver money, or a ring; and the deponent on one of these occasions saw a tile fall from the balcony into the street. In this tile was a piece of a silver key, a gold ring, and seven reals vellon.

The mentioned Teresa also told her that she had a St. Antonio on paper, which would sweat whenever something bad was about to happen. She said that if a pack of cards was shuffled and the ace of spades and five of diamonds were drawn, it meant death or fear from the Holy Office. The witness also mentioned that Teresa would burn rosemary and sprinkle holy water all over her house while walking backward to the door. She had an herb that predicted everything, good or bad, that was about to happen. She would place a piece of gold or silver coin, or a ring, on the stalk of this herb; and on one of those occasions, the witness saw a tile fall from the balcony into the street. Inside that tile was a piece of a silver key, a gold ring, and seven reals vellon.

Furthermore, the deponent has heard that when the said Teresa lived in the Calle de Arolas, there ran out of her house, one day, a dog, with an ox’s heart, stuck full of needles, and that the Alcalde, whose name is unknown to the deponent, with the men and boys of the neighbourhood, caught the dog and burnt him in the middle of the street.

Furthermore, the person giving the statement has heard that when Teresa lived on Calle de Arolas, one day a dog ran out of her house carrying an ox’s heart, poked full of needles. The Mayor, whose name the person doesn't know, along with the local men and boys, caught the dog and set it on fire in the middle of the street.

The deponent has also seen the said Teresa burn nine plates and three strings of cotton, which she informed her was done to break the heart of a certain person. She also told the deponent that on the night of St John’s day, she went to collect the leaves of certain herbs in a place called Trinidad, where criminals who have been hanged are buried. There accompanied her three or four women and a man who was a lamplighter. The names of none of them were known to the deponent. Three or four men came out and threw stones at then without hitting any one. She also informed the deponent that she had in her possession medals and a crucifix of the Holy Office.

The witness has also seen Teresa burn nine plates and three strings of cotton, which she said was to break someone’s heart. She also told the witness that on St. John’s Day, she went to gather leaves from certain herbs in a place called Trinidad, where they bury criminals who have been hanged. Three or four women and a man who was a lamplighter went with her. The witness didn’t know any of their names. Three or four men came out and threw stones at them but didn’t hit anyone. She also told the witness that she had medals and a crucifix from the Holy Office in her possession.

Furthermore, the deponent stated that she requested her to ascertain whether a person of her acquaintance in Valencia would return soon to Barcelona; and the said Teresa Sola, now Salanova, bade her go and purchase a pack of French cards at the shop of Revella, in the Plaza del Angel. This the deponent did, and paid two reals plate for them. The cards being produced, an operation was performed, and she pronounced that he would return ere long, and that he had met with a misfortune; for, on a journey to visit his sister, he had fallen from his horse and broken his leg. She then further declared that at half past six o’clock the next morning he would be in Barcelona; the whole of which proved true, for at half past six he knocked at the door and said he had been on a visit to his sister, who was a nun, and had fallen from his horse and broken his leg.

Furthermore, the witness said that she asked her to find out if someone she knew in Valencia would be returning to Barcelona soon; and Teresa Sola, now Salanova, told her to go and buy a deck of French playing cards at Revella's shop in Plaza del Angel. The witness did this and paid two reals for them. After the cards were dealt, she declared that he would return soon and that he had experienced a misfortune; during a trip to visit his sister, he had fallen off his horse and broken his leg. She then added that at half past six the next morning, he would be in Barcelona; all of which turned out to be true, as at half past six he knocked at the door and said he had been visiting his sister, who was a nun, and had fallen off his horse and broken his leg.

Furthermore, the deponent stated that she had seen divinations with cards performed by the surgeon of the Swiss soldiers in the regiment called the regiment of Bretxa, now in Madrid. This surgeon was called Don Felipe. His other name is unknown to the deponent. She has also seen in his possession a book filled with figures of tombs, evil spirits, and skeletons; and the surgeon told her that it contained matter which was denounceable. There was present on this occasion the wife of the colonel of the Swiss regiment, called Dona Maria. Her other name and birthplace the deponent did not know; but only that when the regiment was in Barcelona, the said Don Maria dwelt in the Calle Nueva del Asalto.

Furthermore, the person giving testimony stated that she had seen card readings done by the surgeon of the Swiss soldiers in the regiment known as the regiment of Bretxa, currently in Madrid. This surgeon was named Don Felipe. His other name is unknown to the witness. She has also seen in his possession a book filled with images of tombs, evil spirits, and skeletons; and the surgeon told her that it contained information that could be reported. Present at this occasion was the wife of the colonel of the Swiss regiment, named Dona Maria. The witness did not know her other name or where she was from; she only knew that when the regiment was in Barcelona, Dona Maria lived on Calle Nueva del Asalto.

Questioned, what else she knew or had to relate.

Questioned, what else did she know or have to share?

Answered, that she had seen the above practices performed so often that she had forgotten a great many instances.

Answered that she had seen those practices done so many times that she had forgotten a lot of examples.

Questioned, what persons were present on any of the above occasions.

Questioned, who was present on any of the above occasions?

Answered, that she had already named them.

Answered that she had already named them.

Questioned, if she had seen or heard that any other person had said or done anything against Our Holy Catholic Faith, or against the proceedings of this Holy Office.

Questioned if she had seen or heard that anyone else said or did anything against Our Holy Catholic Faith or against the proceedings of this Holy Office.

Answered, that she knew nothing further, and had she known anything, should have divulged it before.

Answered that she didn’t know anything more, and if she had known anything, she would have revealed it earlier.

Questioned, why she suffered so much time to elapse without giving information.

Questioned why she let so much time pass without providing information.

Answered, that she was ignorant of her obligation to do this, till on relating these things to her spiritual father, he ordered her to make a deposition of the whole before the Holy Tribunal.

Answered that she didn’t know she was supposed to do this until she talked about it with her spiritual father, who told her to present everything before the Holy Tribunal.

Questioned, what was the personal appearance of the above mentioned Teresa Sola, now Salanova; of the soldier; of Maria Anna Gitar, and her sister.

Questioned, what was the personal appearance of the aforementioned Teresa Sola, now Salanova; of the soldier; of Maria Anna Gitar, and her sister.

Answered, that Teresa Sola, now Salanova, was a well shaped person, somewhat fleshy, with a dusky complexion, reddish eyes, chestnut hair, and small hands, having no scar to distinguish her. That Maria Anna Gitar was a tall person, with an ugly pock marked face, the color of her eyes, hair, &c. not remembered. That her sister Magdalena was a small person, with a face likewise ugly and pock marked; other characteristics forgotten. That the soldier called Joseph was a well shaped person, with a long, palish face, and chestnut hair; the other marks not remembered.

Answered that Teresa Sola, now Salanova, was well-shaped, a bit plump, with a dark complexion, reddish eyes, chestnut hair, and small hands, without any scars to set her apart. Maria Anna Gitar was tall, with an unattractive face marked by pockmarks; her eye color, hair, etc., are not recalled. Her sister Magdalena was short, with an equally unattractive and pockmarked face; other details are forgotten. The soldier named Joseph was well-built, with a long, pale face, and chestnut hair; other distinguishing features are not remembered.

The above, being read to the deponent, was pronounced to be her own declaration, and faithfully recorded. She declared that she had nothing to correct of its contents, except that the abovementioned Magdalena was not the sister of the said Teresa, but of Maria Anna Gitar. She affirmed that she did not make the declaration out of malice or ill will against the abovementioned Teresa Sola, now Salanova, the soldier Joseph, Maria Anna Gitar, and her sister Magdalena; but solely to discharge her conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon her which she promised, and not being able to write, I, the present Commissary, sign in her name.

The above, read to the witness, was confirmed to be her own statement and recorded accurately. She stated that she had nothing to correct in its contents, except that the mentioned Magdalena was not the sister of Teresa, but of Maria Anna Gitar. She insisted that she did not make the statement out of malice or ill will against Teresa Sola, now Salanova, the soldier Joseph, Maria Anna Gitar, and her sister Magdalena; but solely to relieve her conscience. She was instructed to keep this confidential, which she agreed to, and since she could not write, I, the present Commissary, will sign for her.

Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter and Commissary.

Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter and Commissary.

Before me—

In front of me—

Joan Palol, Presbyter, Commissary, and Notary.

Joan Palol, Priest, Representative, and Notary.


In the city of Barcelona, on the eighteenth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and two, before me, Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter and Commissary, appointed for this investigation, and me, the Reverend Juan Palol, Presbyter Notary, both sworn to preserve secrecy, appeared and made oath in the name of God our Lord, to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Maria Anna Sauri, widow, being also present, in the quality of honest and religious persons, the Presbyters whose names are signed below.

In the city of Barcelona, on June 18th, 1802, before me, Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter and Commissioner appointed for this investigation, and me, the Reverend Juan Palol, Presbyter Notary, both sworn to maintain confidentiality, appeared and swore in the name of God our Lord, to declare the truth and keep secrets, Maria Anna Sauri, a widow, also present, along with the honest and faithful Presbyters whose names are signed below.

Questioned, if she remembered having made a declaration before the ministers of the Holy Office against any persons for crimes within her knowledge.

Questioned if she remembered making a statement before the ministers of the Holy Office about anyone for crimes she knew about.

Answered, and related substantially the whole of the preceding declaration. She requested that it might be produced and read.

Answered and recounted most of the earlier statement. She asked for it to be shown and read.

The deponent was then informed that the Promotor Fiscal of the Holy Office presented her as a witness ad perpetuam rei memoriam, in a cause under his direction against the said Teresa Sola, now Salanova, against the Swiss soldier named Joseph, against Maria Anna Gitar, and against her sister Magdalena, whose husband’s name is unknown. The deponent was directed to give attention while her declaration was read, and if she found anything to add or alter of its contents, to perform it in such a manner as to declare the truth, as her assertions might prejudice the said persons. The above deposition was then read de verbo ad verbum, the deponent hearing and understanding the same.

The witness was then informed that the Promotor Fiscal of the Holy Office presented her as a witness for the record, in a case under his direction against Teresa Sola, now Salanova, against the Swiss soldier named Joseph, against Maria Anna Gitar, and against her sister Magdalena, whose husband’s name is unknown. The witness was instructed to pay attention while her statement was read, and if she found anything to add or change in its contents, to do so in a way that expressed the truth, as her statements could affect the individuals mentioned. The aforementioned deposition was then read word for word, with the witness hearing and understanding it.

The deponent declared that it was her identical deposition, as it had been read and recorded; that she had nothing to add or alter respecting it, for the whole was the truth which she attested and ratified; and that if necessary, she was ready to repeat the whole against the said Teresa, Maria Anna, Magdalena, and the soldier, and against the surgeon Don Felipe, not from malice or ill will, but solely to discharge her conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon her anew, which she promised to observe, and the deponent not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name along with the honest persons.

The witness stated that this was her exact testimony, as it had been read and recorded; that she had nothing to add or change about it, as everything was the truth that she confirmed and approved; and that if needed, she was willing to repeat everything against Teresa, Maria Anna, Magdalena, the soldier, and the surgeon Don Felipe, not out of spite or bad intent, but solely to clear her conscience. She was reminded again to keep everything confidential, which she promised to do, and since she could not write, I, the undersigned Commissary, sign on her behalf along with the trustworthy individuals.

Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter and Commissary.
Francisco Palmarola, Presbyter.
Antonio Huguet, Presbyter.

Cayetano Tuco, Priest and Officer.
Francisco Palmarola, Priest.
Antonio Huguet, Priest.

Before me—

In front of me—

Juan Palol, Presbyter, Commissary, and Notary.

Juan Palol, Priest, Officer, and Notary.


TO CAYETANO TUCO, PRESBYTER COMMISSARY.

To Cayetano Tuco, Presbytery Commissioner.

In consequence of the deficiency of the information relating to the deposition of Mariana Sauri, widow, native of Tremp, and residing in Barcelona, in the Calle de Basea, in the upper story of a house opposite a carpenter’s, the Tribunal has ordered that you be instructed to make inquiries with all possible expedition respecting the character and responsibility of the abovementioned person, and of the credit due to her testimony; also respecting the character and conduct of Teresa Salanova, wife of Francisco Salanova, weaver, living, as it appears, in the Calle de San Raymon, between a tavern and a tailor’s shop. You will likewise make the same inquiries respecting the life and character of Joseph ——, a soldier in the Swiss regiment of Vetchar, and whether these persons conform to the precepts of the Church in the annual confession and Paschal communion. These orders I transmit for your execution. Our Lord preserve you.

Due to the lack of information about the testimony of Mariana Sauri, a widow from Tremp who lives in Barcelona at on Calle de Basea, in the upper floor of a house across from a carpenter, the Tribunal has instructed you to quickly investigate the character and reliability of this person and the credibility of her testimony. Additionally, look into the character and behavior of Teresa Salanova, wife of Francisco Salanova, a weaver who seems to live on Calle de San Raymon, between a tavern and a tailor’s shop. You should also conduct the same inquiries regarding the life and character of Joseph ——, a soldier in the Swiss regiment of Vetchar, and whether these individuals follow the Church’s practices concerning annual confession and Easter communion. I am sending you these orders for your action. May our Lord keep you safe.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, June 28th, 1802.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, June 28, 1802.

Dr Don Ciro Valls y Geli, Sec’y.

Dr. Don Ciro Valls y Geli, Secretary.


TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS INQUISITOR.

To the Most Illustrious Inquisitor.

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

DEAR SIR,

I have made inquiries of the Vicar of the district of the Calle Nueva de Asalto and other streets, for the purpose of learning the character and conduct of Teresa Sola, now Salanova, and of the girl Antonia, who lives with her, and whose name has hitherto been unknown, but is now ascertained to be Antonia Costa. These two persons live in the third story of a house which makes the corner of the Calle de la Guardia. It has been ascertained from the cartepacio of the communions, that neither the said Teresa Salanova, nor Antonia Costa, have, within the present year, presented their certificates of the Paschal communion.

I’ve asked the Vicar of the Calle Nueva de Asalto area and other nearby streets to find out about Teresa Sola, now Salanova, and the girl Antonia who lives with her. Until now, her name was unknown, but it’s been confirmed to be Antonia Costa. These two live on the third floor of a building at the corner of Calle de la Guardia. It has been confirmed__ from the cartepacio of the communions that neither Teresa Salanova nor Antonia Costa have submitted their certificates of Paschal communion this year.

Respecting the soldier named Joseph, of the Swiss regiment of Vetchar, I have not been able to learn anything, except that the regiment is now in Madrid.

Respecting the soldier named Joseph from the Swiss regiment of Vetchar, I haven't been able to find out much, except that the regiment is currently in Madrid.

The above is the substance of what I have succeeded in learning, and I communicate the same that your Excellency may apply it to the proper purposes. God preserve the life of your Excellency many years.

The above is what I've managed to learn, and I'm sharing it so that you can use it for the right purposes. May God grant you many more years of life, Your Excellency.

Barcelona, July 2d, 1802.

Barcelona, July 2, 1802.

Your most humble chaplain who kisses the hands of your Excellency,

Your most humble chaplain who kisses your Excellency's hands,

Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter Commissary.

Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter Commissary.


TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS INQUISITOR.

TO THE MOST HONORABLE INQUISITOR.

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

Most Honorable Sir,

I have made the most industrious search for information respecting the character and life of Maria Anna Sauri, widow, but cannot ascertain what degree of credit ought to be attached to her testimony. I am informed by the Reverend Antonio Huguet, Presbyter, that he has some knowledge of her, as all these persons belong to the town of Tremp. He cannot tell, however, what life she leads, and only knows that she has been in the Galera. I made inquiries of the Pacionero del Pino, and he stated to me that he had seen her in the Galera, where she was then in custody for smuggling. Nothing more respecting her was known.

I have done a thorough search for information about the character and life of Maria Anna Sauri, a widow, but I can't determine how credible her testimony is. The Reverend Antonio Huguet, a Presbyter, has some knowledge of her, since they are all from the town of Tremp. However, he doesn’t know what kind of life she leads and only knows that she has been in the Galera. I asked the Pacionero del Pino, and he told me that he had seen her in the Galera, where she was being held for smuggling. No further details about her were known.

I have, with the assistance of the Vicar del Pino, examined the cartepacio of communions of the whole district of the Calle de Asalto, Calle de Lancastre, Calle den Guardia, Calle del Olmo, Calle de San Olaguer, which, as supposed by her in her deposition, must be the second Calle de San Ramon, the whole Calle de San Ramon, and all the lanes. No part of the cartepacio exhibits the name of Marianna Sauri. I then proceeded to Santa Maria del Mar, as the Calle de Basea, where she resides, is situated in that parish, and here in the cartepacio of the communions it was found, but nothing further to direct me. She has left Barcelona, whether for Tremp or Figueras, I cannot positively determine.

I have, with the help of the Vicar del Pino, checked the cartepacio of communions for the entire area of Calle de Asalto, Calle de Lancastre, Calle den Guardia, Calle del Olmo, and Calle de San Olaguer, which, as she suggested in her statement, must be the second Calle de San Ramon, the entire Calle de San Ramon, and all the alleys. None of the cartepacio lists the name Marianna Sauri. I then went to Santa Maria del Mar, since Calle de Basea, where she lives, is in that parish, and here in the cartepacio of communions it was found, but nothing else to lead me further. She has left Barcelona, but I cannot say for sure whether she went to Tremp or Figueras.

The above information I communicate to your Excellency to be applied to the proper purposes.

The information above is shared with your Excellency for appropriate use.

Barcelona, July 2d, 1802.

Barcelona, July 2, 1802.

Your most humble chaplain who kisses the hands of your Excellency.

Your most humble chaplain who kisses your Excellency's hands.

Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter and Commissary.

Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter and Commissary.

*  *  *

*  *  *

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

Honorable Sir,

Father Fr. Vicente Xaus, Franciscan, residing in the Franciscan Convent of Gerona, by an extra sacramental commission from Eulalia Forcat, dwelling in the Hospicio of that city, with the intention to assume the scapulary of a sister, gives information to the Holy Tribunal, that Joseph Jalbert, merchant, a resident, as well as the other persons referred to, in this city of Barcelona, and now residing in the Callejuela de San Antonio, in a house where a herbseller keeps, uttered about two years ago, certain insulting language about Ecclesiastics, both secular and regular, saying they were a set of vagabonds, and that he would not give them money, with many other things which she has forgotten. These words were said at the house and in the presence of Señor Francisco Galup, merchant, living in the Calle de la Merced, and who can give further information of the facts. At another time, and in the presence of the abovementioned Eulalia Forcat and Augustina Buxeras, a resident in the Calle de Basea, besides his accustomed speeches above described, he took a paper on which was the figure of a Saint, and rubbed it over his posteriors outside of his clothes. The said Eulalia also saw him open a book containing many indecent figures.

Father Fr. Vicente Xaus, a Franciscan staying in the Franciscan Convent of Gerona, through an additional sacramental commission from Eulalia Forcat, who lives in the Hospicio of that city, intends to take on the scapular of a sister. He informs the Holy Tribunal that Joseph Jalbert, a merchant residing in Barcelona, along with other individuals mentioned, currently living on Callejuela de San Antonio in a house with a herbseller, made some offensive remarks about ecclesiastics, both secular and regular, around two years ago. He claimed they were a bunch of vagabonds and said he wouldn’t give them money, along with many other things he has since forgotten. These comments were made at the house in front of Señor Francisco Galup, a merchant living on Calle de la Merced, who can provide further details. On another occasion, in front of Eulalia Forcat and Augustina Buxeras, who lives on Calle de Basea, in addition to his usual offensive remarks, he took a paper with an image of a saint and rubbed it against his backside over his clothing. Eulalia also saw him open a book that had many indecent images.

Furthermore, in the name of the same person, he denounces to the Holy Tribunal the following matter. Father Fr. Antonio Puig, of Barcelona, a monk of my seraphic order, and residing in the Grand Convent of Barcelona, a thing which grieves me exceedingly, hearing the confession of this person, in which she informed him that she was mortifying herself with the exercise of the penal discipline, he visited her one day when she was confined to her bed by indisposition, and speaking of her penance, she discovered to him a portion of her body where she had applied it, when the abovementioned Father examined it, and felt it with his hand, asking her if it pained her where he touched. This business, God be thanked, proceeded no further.

Furthermore, in the name of the same person, he reports to the Holy Tribunal the following matter. Father Fr. Antonio Puig, from Barcelona, a monk of my seraphic order and residing in the Grand Convent of Barcelona, which deeply troubles me, heard this person's confession. During the confession, she told him that she was punishing herself with acts of self-discipline. One day, when she was bedridden due to illness, he visited her, and while discussing her penance, she showed him part of her body where she had applied it. The aforementioned Father examined it and felt it with his hand, asking her if it hurt where he touched. Fortunately, this matter did not go any further.

He furthermore states that the said Father did even worse than this to the abovementioned Augustina, as he had learned from her own mouth. He had ascertained from her confession, that she also was practising the penal exercise, and went to her house one day, where he disciplined her so violently that she was unable to sit down. She sent for the abovementioned Eulalia to examine her, fearing that she had received some wound. The said Eulalia does not recollect that she stated he had disciplined her twice before, but remembers that she asserted she had seen a part of the good Father’s body uncovered.

He also says that the Father did even worse things to the previously mentioned Augustina, as he learned directly from her. He found out from her confession that she was also practicing the penal exercise and went to her house one day, where he punished her so harshly that she couldn’t sit down. She called for Eulalia to examine her, worried that she might have been injured. Eulalia doesn’t remember being told that he had punished her twice before but does recall Augustina saying that she had seen part of the Father’s body uncovered.

Upon these matters the Holy Tribunal will institute the necessary proceedings.

On these matters, the Holy Tribunal will initiate the necessary proceedings.

P. Vicente Xaus, Franciscan.

P. Vicente Xaus, Franciscan.

Gerona, June 2d, 1807.

Gerona, June 2, 1807.

P. S. Both the above occurrences happened about two years ago. Nevertheless a few days after the confession, I remember that the said Eulalia told me they continued to confess to the same Father.

P. S. Both of the events mentioned above happened about two years ago. However, a few days after the confession, I remember that Eulalia said they kept confessing to the same Father.


In the city of Gerona, on the twentieth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and seven, before Dr Narciso Coll, Presbyter, Inquisitor Honorary, and Commissary, appointed for this investigation, and me Joseph Gasull, Presbyter Notary, both sworn to preserve secrecy, and perform faithfully our duties, appeared voluntarily, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy in everything which she knew, and about which she might be interrogated, a person calling herself Eulalia Forcat, of the city of Barcelona, aged about thirty years, a nun and attendant upon the foundlings in the Royal Hospicio of this city.

In the city of Gerona, on June 20, 1807, before Dr. Narciso Coll, Presbyter, Honorary Inquisitor, and Commissary assigned for this investigation, and me, Joseph Gasull, Presbyter Notary, both of us sworn to keep things confidential and to perform our duties faithfully, the person who called herself Eulalia Forcat, from the city of Barcelona, about thirty years old, a nun and caretaker of the foundlings in the Royal Hospicio of this city, appeared voluntarily and took an oath to tell the truth and keep confidential everything she knew and anything she might be asked about.

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

Questioned if she knew or guessed why she was being called to appear before the Holy Office.

Answered, that she did not know.

Answered, she said she didn't know.

Questioned, if she knew or had heard that any person had said or done anything which was, or appeared to be, contrary to Our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law, or against the just proceedings of the Holy Office.

Questioned whether she knew or had heard that anyone said or did anything that was, or seemed to be, against Our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law, or against the rightful actions of the Holy Office.

Answered, that about two years since, being in this city, and serving as a domestic in the house of Señor Francisco Galup, merchant, in the Calle de la Merced, she heard on many occasions, Joseph Jalbert, merchant, a young man, a native of Puigcerda, and who transacted business in this house for a year, and then removed with his parents to the Calle de San Antonio, utter various insulting and abusive words against the Priests, both secular and regular, disputing often at table with the said Señor Francisco Galup, respecting matters of religion, declaring that the Priests were a parcel of useless vagabonds, and that they ought to be set to work, with other assertions of the same kind, which were uttered repeatedly in the presence of the deponent and Augustina Buxeras, both domestics in the house, Señora Maria Galup, Cayetano Galup, and Señor Francisco Galup. He persisted in this language, notwithstanding they all checked and rebuked him, in particular the abovementioned Señor Francisco Galup.

Answered that about two years ago, while in this city and working as a domestic in Señor Francisco Galup's house, a merchant on Calle de la Merced, she heard Joseph Jalbert, a young merchant from Puigcerda who had been doing business there for a year before moving with his parents to Calle de San Antonio, make various insulting and abusive comments about the Priests, both secular and regular. He often argued with Señor Francisco Galup at the table about religious issues, claiming that the Priests were a bunch of worthless vagabonds who should be put to work, along with other similar statements that he repeatedly made in front of the deponent, Augustina Buxeras (both domestic workers in the house), Señora Maria Galup, Cayetano Galup, and Señor Francisco Galup. He continued this language despite everyone trying to stop and reprimand him, particularly Señor Francisco Galup.

On another occasion the deponent being in company with the aforesaid Augustina Buxeras, in the kitchen of the house, the abovementioned Joseph Jalbert took a paper, on which was the figure of a Saint, and with approbrium to religion passed it behind him over his clothes. And when they rebuked him in a christian manner, he laughed and left them. At the same time she saw in the room in which he dwelt, three books, bound in the French manner, of a small size, and containing very indecent pictures of men and women. Neither the author of the books nor the subject were known to her, as they were in French. He kept them in his possession while he remained in the house, and on his departure took them with him.

On another occasion, the person giving this statement was with Augustina Buxeras in the kitchen of the house when Joseph Jalbert took a piece of paper with an image of a saint on it and contemptuously passed it behind him over his clothes. When they scolded him in a respectful manner, he laughed and left them. At the same time, she noticed three small books, bound in the French style, in the room where he stayed, which contained very inappropriate pictures of men and women. She didn’t recognize the author or the content since they were in French. He kept these books while he was in the house and took them with him when he left.

Questioned, what was the age, personal appearance, residence, &c. of the abovementioned person.

Questioned about the age, appearance, residence, etc., of the person mentioned above.

Answered, that he was then about twentyone or twentytwo years old, of a moderate stature, fleshy, with a face somewhat long, and flaxen hair. He was unmarried, and engaged in mercantile trade. She believed that he lived at present in Barcelona.

Answered that he was around twenty-one or twenty-two years old, of average height, plump, with a somewhat long face and blonde hair. He was single and worked in the trading business. She thought he currently lived in Barcelona.

Questioned, if she knew that any other person had said or done anything which was or appeared to be contrary to our Holy Faith or against the just proceedings of the Holy Office.

Questioned if she was aware of anyone else saying or doing anything that was or seemed to go against our Holy Faith or the fair processes of the Holy Office.

Answered, No.

No, I didn't.

The above being read to her she declared that it was faithfully recorded conformably to her own declaration, and that she had nothing to add or alter respecting it, as it was the truth. She further stated that she had not done it out of malice, or ill will against the said Joseph Jalbert, but solely to discharge her conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon her, which she promised; and the deponent, not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name.

The above being read to her, she stated that it was accurately recorded according to her own statement, and that she had nothing to add or change about it, as it was the truth. She also mentioned that she did not do it out of malice or bad feelings towards Joseph Jalbert, but only to clear her conscience. She was instructed to keep it confidential, which she agreed to; and since the deponent could not write, I, the said Commissary, sign on her behalf.

Narciso Coll, Presbyter, and for
the said Deponent
.

Narciso Coll, Priest, and for
the said Deponent
.

Before me—

Before me—

Joseph Gasull, Presbyter Notary.

Joseph Gasull, Notary Priest.


In the city of Gerona, on the twentyfifth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and seven, before Dr Narciso Coll, Presbyter, Commissary commissioned for this investigation, and me, Joseph Gasull, Presbyter Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy, and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Eulalia Forcat, and being present in the quality of honest and religious persons, the Rev. Gines Torrent and the Rev. Thomas Parella, both Presbyter Beneficadores of the Holy Church, sworn to preserve secrecy. She was

In the city of Gerona, on June 25, 1807, before Dr. Narciso Coll, Presbyter, and the Commissary appointed for this investigation, and me, Joseph Gasull, Presbyter and Notary, sworn to uphold confidentiality and carry out our duties faithfully, appeared and took an oath to tell the truth and maintain confidentiality, Eulalia Forcat, with the Rev. Gines Torrent and the Rev. Thomas Parella, both Presbyter Beneficadores of the Holy Church, present as honest and religious individuals, sworn to uphold confidentiality. She was

Questioned, if she remembered having made a declaration before the Ministers of the Holy Office against any person for crimes within her knowledge.

Questioned if she recalled making a statement before the Ministers of the Holy Office against anyone for crimes she was aware of.

Answered, by repeating, substantially, the foregoing declaration of the twentieth of June current, made before the Commissary and Notary whose names are signed below. She requested that it might be produced and read.

Answered by reiterating, basically, the previous statement from June 20 of this year, made in front of the Commissioner and Notary whose names are signed below. She asked for it to be brought out and read.

The deponent was then informed that the Promotor Fiscal of the Holy Office presented her as a witness ad perpetuam rei memoriam in a cause under his direction against the persons referred to in the said declaration. She was directed to give attention while it was read, and if she found anything to add or alter respecting the contents of it, to do it in such a manner as to declare the truth, as what she now uttered might operate to the prejudice of the aforesaid persons. The declaration made before the abovementioned Commissary and Notary, on the twentieth of June current was then read de verbo ad verbum, the deponent hearing and understanding the same.

The witness was then told that the Promotor Fiscal of the Holy Office had called on her to testify as a witness for the record in a case he was handling against the individuals mentioned in the declaration. She was instructed to pay attention while it was read, and if she noticed anything to add or change about its contents, to do it in a way that would declare the truth, as what she said might negatively impact the mentioned individuals. The declaration made before the previously mentioned Commissary and Notary on the twentieth of June was then read word for word, with the witness listening and understanding it.

She declared it was her declaration, and correctly recorded; that she had nothing to add or alter respecting it, as it was the truth, and she attested it for the same, and if necessary was ready to repeat the whole anew against the said Joseph Jalbert, not out of malice or ill will, but solely to discharge her conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon her which she promised to observe, and the deponent not being able to write, I, the said Commissary, sign in her name, along with the honest persons.

She stated it was her statement, and it was accurately recorded; that she had nothing to add or change about it, as it was the truth, and she confirmed it for that reason, and if necessary, she was ready to repeat the whole thing again against the said Joseph Jalbert, not out of malice or ill will, but solely to clear her conscience. She was instructed to keep it confidential and she promised to do so, and since the deponent couldn't write, I, the said Commissary, signed in her name, along with the trustworthy individuals.

Narciso Coll, Commissary,
and for the said Witness
.
Gines Torrent, Presbyter,
in the same name
.
Thomas Parella, Presbyter.

Narciso Cole, Commissary,
and on behalf of the Witness
.
Gines Torrent, Priest,
in the same capacity
.
Thomas Parella, Priest.

Before me—

In front of me—

Joseph Gasull, Presbyter Notary.

Joseph Gasull, Notary Priest.


In the city of Gerona, on the twentysecond day of June, one thousand eight hundred and seven, before Dr Narciso Coll, Presbyter, Inquisitor Honorary, and Commissary appointed for this investigation, and me, Joseph Gasull, Presbyter Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, voluntarily, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy in everything which she knew, and about which she might be interrogated, a person calling herself Eulalia Forcat, of the city of Barcelona, aged about thirty years, a nun, and attendant upon the foundlings in the Royal Hospicio of this city.

In the city of Gerona, on June 22, 1807, before Dr. Narciso Coll, a priest, honorary inquisitor, and commissioner appointed for this investigation, and me, Joseph Gasull, a priest and notary sworn to keep secrets and perform our duties faithfully, appeared, voluntarily, and swore to tell the truth and keep confidential everything she knew and about which she might be questioned, a person named Eulalia Forcat, from the city of Barcelona, around thirty years old, a nun, and caregiver to the foundlings at the Royal Hospicio of this city.

Questioned, if she knew or suspected the cause of her being summoned to appear by the Holy Office.

Questioned whether she knew or suspected why she was called to appear before the Holy Office.

Answered, that she did not know.

Said she didn’t know.

Questioned, if she knew or had heard that any person had said or done anything which was or appeared to be contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law, or against the just proceedings of the Holy Office. Answered, that at present she could remember nothing.

Questioned if she knew or had heard of anyone saying or doing anything that was or seemed to go against our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law, or against the proper actions of the Holy Office. She replied that at the moment she could not remember anything.

Questioned, if she knew or had heard that any Ecclesiastic had practised irregularities towards any person of the other sex in hearing them often at confession.

Questioned whether she knew or had heard that any clergy member had acted inappropriately towards anyone of the opposite sex by frequently hearing their confessions.

Answered, that all she knew was this; about two years ago she served as a domestic in this city, along with Agustina Buxeras, who afterwards lived in the family of Puigcech, a button maker, in the Plazuela de Basea in Barcelona, and being at that time in the house of Señores Francisco Galup and Cayetano, merchants, in the Calle de la Merced in Barcelona, she heard, on several occasions, the said Agustina declare that on confessing herself to the Reverend Father Fr. Antonio Puig, of Barcelona, of the order of San Francisco de Asis, he had ordered her many times at evening to go into a room at the entrance of the church of the Convent of San Francisco, on the right hand, where he disciplined her and caused her to do the same to herself, and that, he had done this also at the house of the abovementioned Señores Galup. This the deponent learned from the mouth of the said Agustina, and furthermore by examining her person on the second occasion, when she found her posteriors were black and blue, and that she had evidently been severely handled.

Answered that all she knew was this: about two years ago, she worked as a domestic in this city, along with Agustina Buxeras, who later lived with the family of Puigcech, a button maker, in the Plazuela de Basea in Barcelona. At that time, while she was in the home of Señores Francisco Galup and Cayetano, merchants on Calle de la Merced in Barcelona, she heard Agustina mention several times that when she confessed to the Reverend Father Fr. Antonio Puig of Barcelona, from the order of San Francisco de Asis, he instructed her on multiple occasions to go into a room near the entrance of the church of the Convent of San Francisco, to the right, where he disciplined her and made her do the same to herself. He also did this at the home of the aforementioned Señores Galup. This information was relayed to the deponent by Agustina, and additionally, when she examined Agustina's body on a second occasion, she noticed that her behind was black and blue, indicating she had clearly been mistreated.

The said Augustina also informed her that in one or more of these instances while she was in the room with the abovementioned Confessor, at the entrance of the Convent, he had taken off her petticoat and stays to give her the discipline; at the same time he uncovered his back, which she supposed was done for the purpose of exhibiting the effect of his flagellation. These confessions and disciplines continued, as the deponent learned, for some time, when finding that he did nothing to effect her admission as a nun into some Convent, of which she was desirous, she left him and sought another Confessor. What other things were done was not known.

The mentioned Augustina also told her that in one or more of these instances while she was in the room with the aforementioned Confessor at the entrance of the Convent, he had removed her petticoat and stays to give her the discipline; at the same time, he showed his back, which she thought was for the purpose of displaying the result of his flagellation. These confessions and disciplines continued, as the witness learned, for some time, and when she saw that he wasn't doing anything to help her join a Convent, which she wanted, she left him and looked for another Confessor. What else happened was unknown.

The deponent was then informed that information had been received in this Holy Office that on the time above specified, while she was confined to her bed by some indisposition, her Confessor had paid her a visit, and in conversation upon penal mortifications he had uncovered a part of her body, examined it, and touched with his hands the places where she exercised her discipline, demanding if she felt any pain while he was touching them. Therefore, by virtue of the oath she had sworn, she was exhorted to bethink herself, reflect attentively upon the matter, and declare the truth.

The witness was then informed that this Holy Office had received information that at the specified time, while she was confined to her bed due to illness, her Confessor had visited her. During their conversation about penal practices, he had uncovered part of her body, examined it, and touched the areas where she practiced her discipline, asking if she felt any pain while he was doing so. Therefore, in accordance with the oath she had taken, she was urged to reconsider, think carefully about the situation, and tell the truth.

Answered, that this was all true; that it occurred in the abovementioned house of the Señores Galup, with the aforesaid Father Fr. Antonio Puig, her Confessor, and that on this occasion she did not confess herself to him. She did not remember how long she had then gone without confessing, nor how long she deferred afterwards confessing to the same person. She however continued in company with him but without ever speaking of the matter. She knew not whether the abovementioned Father had ever solicited any person during confession or at any other time, nor had ever heard that any person has declared that there was no obligation to denounce such things to the Holy Office, but has heard the contrary from her present Confessor, Father Fr. Vicente Xaus, a monk of the same order, and now a conventual in this city of Gerona.

Answered that this was all true; that it took place in the aforementioned house of the Señores Galup, with the previously mentioned Father Fr. Antonio Puig, her Confessor, and that she did not confess to him on this occasion. She didn’t remember how long it had been since her last confession, nor how long she postponed confessing to the same person afterward. However, she continued to be with him without ever discussing the matter. She didn’t know whether the aforementioned Father had ever tempted anyone during confession or at any other time, nor had she ever heard that anyone declared there was no obligation to report such things to the Holy Office, but she had heard the opposite from her current Confessor, Father Fr. Vicente Xaus, a monk of the same order, and now a conventual in this city of Gerona.

Questioned, what was the age and personal appearance of the said Father Fr. Antonio Puig, also his condition, residence, &c.

Questioned, what was the age and appearance of Father Fr. Antonio Puig, as well as his status, residence, etc.

Answered, that she believed him to be under forty years of age, that he was of a middling height, rather thin, with a handsome face, large black eyes and eyebrows, hair and beard a little whitened, and that she believes he resides in Barcelona as one of the four ordinary Confessors of the aforesaid Convent.

Answered, that she thought he was under forty years old, about average height, a bit thin, with a good-looking face, big black eyes and eyebrows, and his hair and beard slightly graying, and that she believes he lives in Barcelona as one of the four regular Confessors of the mentioned Convent.

The above having been read in her presence, she affirmed that it was correctly recorded conformably to her declaration; that she had nothing to add or alter respecting it, as it was the truth; and that it was not uttered by her out of malice or ill will against the abovementioned ecclesiastic, but solely to discharge her conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon her, which she promised, and being unable to write, I, the said commissary sign in her name.

The above was read in her presence, and she confirmed that it was accurately recorded according to her statement; that she had nothing to add or change about it, as it was the truth; and that she didn't say it out of malice or ill will towards the mentioned ecclesiastic, but only to clear her conscience. She was told to keep it confidential, which she agreed to, and since she couldn't write, I, the said commissary, signed on her behalf.

Narciso Coll, Commissary,
and Presbyter for the Deponent
.

Narciso Call, Commissary,
and Presbyter for the Deponent
.

Before me—

In front of me—

Joseph Gasull, Presbyter Notary.

Joseph Gasull, Notary Priest.

*  *  *  *

Sure! Please provide the text you'd like me to modernize.

IN the Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, on the twentyninth day of August, one thousand seven hundred and eightyone, the Inquisitor Licentiate, Dr Manuel de Merra y Paniagua, ordered to appear before him according to summons, a foreigner, established in this city, who, being present, was formally sworn to declare the truth and preserve secrecy with respect to everything which he knew, and concerning which he might be interrogated, and in relation to everything which he might see or understand, and everything which might befall him.

IN the Royal Palace of the Inquisition in Barcelona, on the twenty-ninth day of August, 1781, the Inquisitor Licentiate, Dr. Manuel de Merra y Paniagua, summoned a foreign resident of this city to appear before him. The individual, upon arrival, was officially sworn to tell the truth and keep confidential everything he knew, what he might be asked about, and anything he might see or comprehend, along with all that might happen to him.

Questioned, his name, birthplace, residence, condition, age, and occupation.

Questioned about his name, where he was born, where he lives, his status, age, and job.

Answered, that his name was Pedro Remson; that he was born in the town of St Jean in the district of Laval, in France; that he had resided in this city four years, doing business as a linen draper; that he had no wife, and was about thirtyfive years of age.

Answered, that his name was Pedro Remson; that he was born in the town of St Jean in the district of Laval, in France; that he had lived in this city for four years, working as a linen merchant; that he had no wife and was about thirty-five years old.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was summoned to appear before this Tribunal.

Answered, that he neither knew nor conjectured.

Answered that he neither knew nor guessed.

Questioned, if he had said or done anything which was or appeared to be a matter within the cognizance of the Holy Office, or against our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law.

Questioned if he had said or done anything that was, or seemed to be, a matter within the authority of the Holy Office or against our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law.

Answered, that he had never said or done anything contrary to the Catholic Faith, nor anything pertaining to the cognizance of the Holy Office.

Answered that he had never said or done anything against the Catholic Faith, nor anything regarding the jurisdiction of the Holy Office.

He was then told that information had been received and sworn to in this Holy Office, that he, the deponent, had uttered certain speeches containing matter which came under the jurisdiction of the Holy Office; that he was summoned to be examined respecting it, and that he would do well to confess the whole before he was compelled to it.

He was then informed that information had been received and sworn to in this Holy Office, stating that he, the witness, had made certain remarks that fell under the authority of the Holy Office; that he was called to be questioned about it, and that it would be in his best interest to confess everything before he was forced to do so.

Answered, that he was confident he had never said or done anything of the kind unless the following could be denominated such. About a year since, conversing with Carlos Coquet with whom he resided in this city, speaking of our Lady, of Mary and her image, the deponent affirmed that the Holy Virgin Mother of God was the only one, and that there was no difference between the image of Our Lady, of Mary, and any other. On another occasion, about the same time, he told the abovementioned Coquet that in France they were not obliged to present certificates of compliance with the annual precepts of sacramental confession and communion; that he considered it a burdensome practice and exposed to great abuses, and that he had understood these certificates were often sold about to persons who did not choose to comply with the precept, which thing he had heard publicly declared in coffee houses and clubrooms, but did not recollect by what persons.

Answered that he was sure he had never said or done anything like that unless the following could be considered as such. About a year ago, while talking with Carlos Coquet, who lived with him in this city, they discussed Our Lady, Mary, and her image. The deponent stated that the Holy Virgin Mother of God was the only one, and that there was no difference between the image of Our Lady, Mary, and any other. On another occasion, around the same time, he told Coquet that in France, they weren’t required to present certificates of compliance with the annual requirements for sacramental confession and communion; he thought it was a burdensome practice that could lead to significant abuses. He mentioned that he had heard these certificates were often sold to people who didn’t want to meet the requirements, which he had heard publicly talked about in coffee houses and clubrooms, but he couldn’t remember who exactly said it.

At another time, finding that at his meal the oil did not suit his taste nor agree with him, he observed to the said Coquet that he thought he should not offend by eating the fat of beef on fast days, in place of oil.

At one point, noticing that the oil didn't taste good or sit well with him during his meal, he told Coquet that he thought he wouldn't be offending anyone by eating beef fat on fast days instead of oil.

On another occasion, about the same time, being out of the city, Josefa Coquet, wife of the abovementioned Carlos Coquet, was looking over his books, among which she found one entitled La Henriade, by Mons. Voltaire, which book belonged to Bernardo Carles, a Frenchman, who passed through this city for Andalusia, and gave the book in keeping to the deponent. He received it knowing that it was a prohibited book. When the deponent returned to the city, the said Josefa Coquet told him, with a mysterious look, that she had seen this book, and that her Confessor had ordered her to give information of it to the Holy Office. He replied that she had done wrong, and should have given up the book on mentioning it. He offered her the key of his writing desk that she might see whether he had any other bad or prohibited book.

On another occasion, around the same time, while out of the city, Josefa Coquet, the wife of Carlos Coquet, was going through his books. Among them, she found one called La Henriade, by Mons. Voltaire. This book belonged to Bernardo Carles, a Frenchman who had passed through this city on his way to Andalusia and had given the book to the deponent to keep. He accepted it knowing it was a prohibited book. When the deponent returned to the city, Josefa Coquet told him with a mysterious look that she had seen this book and that her confessor had instructed her to report it to the Holy Office. He replied that she had made a mistake and that she should have surrendered the book as soon as she mentioned it. He offered her the key to his writing desk so she could check if he had any other forbidden or prohibited books.

Another day, talking with the aforesaid Coquet about the infallibility of the Pope, the deponent declared that inasmuch as he had never read in any book that the Pope was infallible, although he believed and held him to be the head of the church, yet he was persuaded that God alone was infallible; that the catechism which was taught him in France did not declare that the Pope was infallible, and therefore he did not believe it; but if his confessor or any other learned person were to say that he was, he should believe it; upon which Coquet was offended and went off to his own apartment. Further than this he did not remember to have said or done anything relating to matters of religion, and if he were apprised of anything, which had been denounced to the Holy Office, he would disclose all he knew with the same sincerity.

Another day, while talking with Coquet about whether the Pope was infallible, the person stated that since he had never read anywhere that the Pope was infallible, even though he believed and considered him the head of the church, he was convinced that only God was infallible. He mentioned that the catechism he learned in France did not assert that the Pope was infallible, so he did not believe it. However, if his confessor or any knowledgeable person claimed that the Pope was infallible, he would accept it. At that point, Coquet became upset and left for his room. Beyond that, he didn’t recall saying or doing anything related to religious matters, and if he were informed of anything that had been reported to the Holy Office, he would share everything he knew with total honesty.

He was then told that information had been received and sworn to in this Holy Office, that he, the deponent, had said he was a freemason, and had a book containing the constitutions of that society, that he produced the book, read a portion of it, and declared that there was nothing in it contrary to the Catholic Religion; furthermore, that the person to whom he made these assertions and read the book, making some objections, and telling him to conceal the book and take care that it came not to the knowledge of the Inquisition, for they would punish him, he laughed at him.

He was then informed that information had been received and sworn in this Holy Office, stating that he, the witness, claimed he was a freemason and had a book containing the rules of that society. He showed the book, read a part of it, and asserted that there was nothing in it against the Catholic Religion. Additionally, the person to whom he made these claims and read the book raised some objections and advised him to hide the book and ensure it didn’t come to the attention of the Inquisition, as they would punish him; he just laughed at him.

Answered, that it was false that he had ever told any one that he was a freemason, as he was not, nor ever had been one of that order, although he had held communication with some of them in France, had dined with them, and seen them converse together by signs; also, that he never possessed, nor said that he possessed a book containing their constitutions, and although he once had a book which spake in praise of freemasons, and commended their charities and other good works, yet it was false that he ever read any part of the same to any person; that he burnt this book with some other papers in presence of the abovementioned Josefa Coquet, and that he did not remember to have made the assertions imputed to him.

Answered that it was untrue that he ever claimed to be a freemason, as he was not and had never been part of that group, although he had interacted with some of them in France, shared meals with them, and had seen them communicating with signs; he also stated that he never owned, nor claimed to own, a book containing their rules, and although he once had a book that praised freemasons and highlighted their charitable work and other positive efforts, it was false that he ever read any part of it to anyone; he had burned this book along with some other papers in front of the aforementioned Josefa Coquet, and he did not recall making the statements attributed to him.

He was then told that information had been also received and sworn to, that he, the deponent, on a certain occasion, gave to another person a book whose author was Mons. Voltaire, informing him that he had possessed it for fifteen years; and that a certain ecclesiastic reprehending him for it, he replied that the book was not his, and that on the same day, in presence of the person aforesaid, he burnt some papers, saying, that he did it for fear of the Inquisition.

He was then informed that they had also received and sworn to information that he, the witness, on a certain occasion, gave another person a book written by Mons. Voltaire, telling him that he had owned it for fifteen years. When a certain cleric criticized him for it, he replied that the book wasn’t his, and later that day, in front of the aforementioned person, he burned some papers, saying that he did it out of fear of the Inquisition.

Answered, that the first part of this assertion was false; namely, that relating to the work of Mons. Voltaire, and that no part of it was true, except what he had already related as having passed between him and Josefa Coquet; that it was true he had burnt, in her presence, the book in praise of the freemasons, the history of the Incas of Peru, and some papers relating to the entertainments given to the Prince of Chartres, who was considered as the head of the freemasons, and also that he declared he had done the same for fear of the Inquisition.

Answered that the first part of this claim was false; specifically, the part regarding the work of Mons. Voltaire, and that none of it was true, except for what he had already mentioned about his interactions with Josefa Coquet; it was true that he had burned, in her presence, the book praising the freemasons, the history of the Incas of Peru, and some documents related to the events held for the Prince of Chartres, who was seen as the leader of the freemasons, and also that he stated he had done this out of fear of the Inquisition.

It being late, the audience closed, and the deponent was ordered to appear again the next morning. The whole was read to him and he declared it to be true, which I certify.

It was late, the audience was dismissed, and the witness was ordered to come back the next morning. Everything was read to him and he confirmed that it was true, which I certify.

Pedro Remusson.
Juan Antonio Almonacid, Sec’y.

Pedro Remusson.
Juan Antonio Almonacid, Sec’y.

*  *  *  *

*  *  *  *

To the Members of the Tribunal of the Inquisition of Catalonia, at their Royal Palace, Barcelona.

To the Members of the Inquisition Tribunal of Catalonia, at their Royal Palace, Barcelona.

Barcelona, March 20th, 1802.

Barcelona, March 20, 1802.

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

DEAR SIR,

I have some information to give your Excellency respecting a certain person who has uttered in my presence some words which it appears to me come within the cognizance of your Excellency. Various causes have hindered me from appearing before the respectable tribunal of your Excellency and denouncing the whole matter. I trust your Excellency will favor me so far as to take my deposition at the hands of some clerical person. I live in the Calle Ancha, in the second room of a house which forms the corner of the Callejon de la Plata, No. 1, and for more particular direction, my house is so near that of Señor Don Juan Larra, that nothing separates them but the abovementioned Callejon.

I have some information to share with you regarding a certain person who has spoken in my presence in a way that I believe falls under your jurisdiction. Various reasons have prevented me from appearing before your esteemed court to report the entire matter. I hope you can arrange for someone to take my statement. I live on Calle Ancha, in the second room of a house at the corner of Callejon de la Plata, No. 1. For more precise directions, my house is so close to Señor Don Juan Larra's that the only thing separating them is the mentioned Callejon.

Your Excellency’s most humble servant,
Maria Bernarda Hallegg, wife of
Don Pedro Hallegg, Captain in the
Regiment of Rutiman
.

Your Excellency’s most humble servant,
Maria Bernarda Hallegg, wife of
Don Pedro Hallegg, Captain in the
Regiment of Rutiman
.


In the city of Barcelona, on the third day of June, one thousand eight hundred and two, before Dr Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta, Presbyter and Commissary appointed for this investigation, and me, the Reverend Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter, Commissary, and Notary on this occasion, sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, voluntarily, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy with respect to everything which she knew and about which she might be interrogated, a person calling herself Dona Maria Bernardo Halegg, wife of Don Pedro Hallegg, Captain in the Regiment of Rutiman, a native of the town of Estipona, in the province of Andalusia, of age, as she stated, twentyfour years, and residing in the Calle de la Plata.

In the city of Barcelona, on June 3, 1802, before Dr. Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta, Presbyter and Commissioner appointed for this investigation, and me, the Reverend Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter, Commissioner, and Notary for this occasion, sworn to keep confidentiality and carry out our duties faithfully appeared voluntarily and took an oath to tell the truth and maintain secrecy regarding everything she knew and anything she might be questioned about. This person called herself Dona Maria Bernardo Halegg, wife of Don Pedro Hallegg, Captain in the Rutiman Regiment, originally from the town of Estipona, in the province of Andalusia, claiming to be twenty-four years old and residing on Calle de la Plata.

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

Questioned whether she knew or guessed the reason she was summoned to appear before the Tribunal of the Holy Office.

Answered, that she supposed it to be on account of a letter which her Confessor had written in her name to the Holy Office, in which letter she had declared that she had some information to communicate. The matter in question was as follows. About six months ago, Juan Picar, a native of Lyons, in France, who visited at her house, uttered the following heretical speeches; namely, that he did not believe in the purity of the Most Holy Mary; that he did not believe Jesus Christ descended to the Host after the words of consecration were uttered by the Priest; that he did not believe in the Pope, inasmuch as he was a man like ourselves; that those who died did not go to Hell, but to Paradise; that he said ‘Holy Mary’ instead of ‘Most Holy Mary;’ that he spoke ill of the Priests, declaring that he could not endure the sight of them, and that they had ruined Spain; that the French had done well in driving them all out of their country. The deponent stated further, that she believed he did not attend mass on the days appointed, although he professed to be a Christian.

Answered that she thought it was because of a letter her Confessor had written in her name to the Holy Office, in which she stated that she had some information to share. The matter at hand was as follows. About six months ago, Juan Picar, a native of Lyons, France, who visited her house, made the following heretical remarks: namely, that he did not believe in the purity of the Most Holy Mary; that he did not believe Jesus Christ descended to the Host after the Priest had spoken the words of consecration; that he did not believe in the Pope since he was just a man like the rest of us; that those who died did not go to Hell but to Paradise; that he referred to ‘Holy Mary’ instead of ‘Most Holy Mary’; that he spoke negatively about the Priests, claiming he could not stand to look at them and that they had ruined Spain; and that the French had done well to drive them all out of their country. The deponent further stated that she believed he did not attend mass on the appointed days, even though he professed to be a Christian.

She was then shown a letter beginning with ‘Barcelona, March 20th, 1802,’ and ending with ‘Don Pedro Halegg, Captain in the Regiment of Rutiman,’ that she might examine and identify it, and declare it to have been written by her, or by her direction in her name, and containing the truth.

She was then shown a letter that started with ‘Barcelona, March 20th, 1802,’ and ended with ‘Don Pedro Halegg, Captain in the Regiment of Rutiman,’ so she could examine and identify it, confirm that it was written by her or on her behalf, and state that it contained the truth.

Answered, that it was the identical one which she had caused to be written by her Father Confessor, and that she attested it for the truth; that she had nothing to add or alter in relation to it, and that she had not made her declarations out of malice or enmity against the abovementioned person, nor from any counsel or instigation on the part of any other person.

Answered that it was the exact one her Father Confessor had written, and she verified it as true; that she had nothing to add or change regarding it, and that her statements were not made out of malice or hostility towards the person mentioned, nor from any advice or encouragement from anyone else.

Questioned, why she had delayed to denounce these offences to the Holy Office, thereby failing in her obligation to give notice of all such matters immediately upon having knowledge of the same.

Questioned about why she had waited to report these offenses to the Holy Office, thus failing in her duty to notify them of such matters as soon as she became aware.

Answered, that she wished previously to consult her Father Confessor, and that she obeyed upon receiving his orders.

Answered that she wanted to talk to her Father Confessor first, and that she followed his instructions when she got them.

Questioned, at what time and in what place he made the abovementioned assertions; what persons were present; if he said them more than once, and how many times; whether he spoke in his own language, or quoted others who made the assertions referred to; whether he spoke in jest, in dispute, or in a passion; whether he was accustomed to utter such words; whether he was rebuked by any persons present, and by whom; whether, after being rebuked, he persisted in his assertions, and whether at the time of speaking he was in his right mind, or was insane or drunk.

Questioned about when and where he made the claims mentioned above; who was there; if he said them more than once, and how many times; whether he spoke in his own words or quoted others; whether he was joking, arguing, or passionate; whether he usually said such things; if anyone present reprimanded him, and by whom; whether, after being reprimanded, he stuck to his claims; and whether he was sober and sane when he spoke.

Answered, that she had already specified the time, and that it happened at her house; that there were present occasionally her husband abovementioned; her brother-in-law, Don Martin Halegg, who resided there, a servant named Francisca Garriga, living in the Callejon de Santa Anna, and who went to be married at Tarragona, but her present place of residence the deponent does not know, and another servant named Antonia, who lives in a lane near La Trinidad Calzada, and is the daughter of a schoolmaster in that lane; that he repeated the above assertions many times, so often that she could not recollect the number; that he spoke affirmatively, and seriously; that she did not think he was accustomed to such talk, as he had not repeated it for more than two months; that he was rebuked several times by the abovementioned persons and the deponent, but took no heed; and that on most of these occasions he was in his right mind, although a few times he was intoxicated.

She answered that she had already mentioned the time, and that it took place at her house; that sometimes her husband was present; her brother-in-law, Don Martin Halegg, who lived there, a servant named Francisca Garriga, who lived on Callejon de Santa Anna and was going to get married in Tarragona, but she didn’t know where she was living now, and another servant named Antonia, who lives on a lane near La Trinidad Calzada and is the daughter of a schoolmaster in that lane; that he repeated the above statements many times, so often that she couldn’t remember how many; that he spoke confidently and seriously; that she didn’t think he was used to such talk, as he hadn’t said it for more than two months; that he was scolded several times by the aforementioned people and the respondent, but he ignored it; and that on most of these occasions he was sober, although there were a few times he was drunk.

Questioned, if she knew that any other person had said or done anything which came within the cognizance of the Holy Office.

Questioned if she was aware of any other person saying or doing anything that fell under the attention of the Holy Office.

Answered, No.

No.

Questioned, what was or appeared to be the age of the abovementioned Juan Picar, also his personal appearance and condition.

Questioned about the age of the previously mentioned Juan Picar, as well as his appearance and condition.

Answered, that he was about fortyfour years of age, tall, thin, with a light complexion, blue eyes, and red hair; and that he was a soldier in the aforesaid regiment.

Answered that he was about forty-four years old, tall, thin, with a light complexion, blue eyes, and red hair; and that he was a soldier in the mentioned regiment.

The above being read to her, she affirmed it to be recorded conformably to her declaration; that she had nothing to add or alter respecting it, as it was the truth; and that she did not utter it out of malice or ill will against the said Juan Picar, but solely to discharge her conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon her, which she promised to observe, and added her signature, which I certify.

The above being read to her, she confirmed that it was recorded according to her statement; that she had nothing to add or change about it, as it was the truth; and that she was not saying it out of malice or ill will against Juan Picar, but only to clear her conscience. She was asked to keep it confidential, which she agreed to, and she added her signature, which I certify.

After the declaration had been read, and before it was signed, the deponent recollected that the abovementioned Juan Picar observed to her husband, that a person, on dying, passed to the other world without suffering any punishment. Also she had been informed by her sister-in-law, Dona Rafaela Reymer, wife of a captain out of service, named Don Joseph Reymer, who lives in the Calle de San Pablo, No. 14, third story, that two officers of the said regiment, the one named Martin Estinause, and the other unknown, uttered blasphemies respecting a figure of Christ.

After the declaration was read and before it was signed, the witness remembered that the aforementioned Juan Picar told her husband that when someone dies, they go to the other world without facing any punishment. She was also informed by her sister-in-law, Dona Rafaela Reymer, who is married to a retired captain named Don Joseph Reymer, living at Calle de San Pablo, No. 14, on the third floor, that two officers from that regiment, one named Martin Estinause and the other unknown, made blasphemous remarks about a figure of Christ.

All which she denounces to the Holy Office in discharge of her conscience, and under the oath of secrecy sworn by her. She added her signature, which I certify.

All of which she reports to the Holy Office to relieve her conscience, and under the oath of confidentiality she has taken. She added her signature, which I confirm.

Maria Bernarda Hallegg.
Dr Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta,
Presbyter and Commissary,
Cayetano Tuco, Presbyter, Commissary,
and Notary
.

Maria Bernarda Hallegg.
Dr. Andres Fernandez de la Cuesta,
Priest and Commissary,
Cayetano Tuco, Priest, Commissary,
and Notary
.

*  *  *  *

*  *  *  *

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

DEAR SIR,

Francisco Prat, Subdeacon, native of Esponella, and a resident in the Seminario del Señor, in the bishopric of Gerona, by counsel and order of the Reverend Juan Salgueda his Confessor, gives information with due respect to your Excellency, of the following matter.

Francisco Prat, Subdeacon, originally from Esponella, and currently living in the Seminario del Señor in the Diocese of Gerona, respectfully informs Your Excellency about the following matter, under the guidance and instruction of his confessor, the Reverend Juan Salgueda.

About six months since, in this city, he heard Narcisa Catala y Pinsach, the wife of a Frenchman, and reputed a woman of truth, and a native of Gerona, dwelling in the Mercadal Parish of that city—declare that a Frenchman who was a stocking weaver in the Hospicio of the same city, whose name was Blaqueire, and whose age was about thirty years, had been baptized since he was in Spain, but had prevaricated and embraced some heresy.

About six months ago, in this city, he heard Narcisa Catala y Pinsach, the wife of a Frenchman and known to be a truthful woman, originally from Gerona, living in the Mercadal Parish of that city—declare that a Frenchman named Blaqueire, who was a stocking weaver in the Hospicio of the same city and around thirty years old, had been baptized since arriving in Spain but had gone astray and embraced some heresy.

Also that a certain Frenchman, named Avi Brich, aged about sixty years, residing in the said city of Gerona, and likewise a stocking weaver in the Hospicio, was a Jew, and the writer of this letter observing that they ought to commune annually, otherwise they would be severely punished, she replied that in order to deceive the spies, he took the sacrament not merely once, but two or three times every year.

Also, there was a Frenchman named Avi Brich, about sixty years old, living in the city of Gerona, who worked as a stocking weaver in the Hospicio. He was Jewish, and the writer of this letter noticed that they were supposed to communicate annually, or else they would face serious consequences. She replied that to outsmart the spies, he took the sacrament not just once, but two or three times a year.

Which information I transmit to your Excellency for the necessary end.

I am sending this information to you, Your Excellency, for the required purpose.

Gerona, April 28th, 1791.

Gerona, April 28, 1791.

Francisco Prat, Subdeacon.

Francisco Prat, Subdeacon.

We herewith transmit to the Reverend Juan Salgueda, Presbyter Vicar of the church of the Mercadal of Gerona, the extrajudicial denunciation of Francisco Prat, Subdeacon, a resident in the Episcopal Seminario of that city, and we grant a commission for examining him before another Ecclesiastic as Notary, according to the formula adjoined, No. 1, in order that the denunciation may be attested, and he may affirm, under oath, that it is his, written and signed by him, and its contents true, as also whether he has anything to add or alter respecting it, and from what motive the said Narcisa Catala y Pinsach made the charges in question against the two Frenchmen.

We are sending the Reverend Juan Salgueda, Presbyter Vicar of the church of the Mercadal in Gerona, the out-of-court complaint from Francisco Prat, Subdeacon, who lives in the Episcopal Seminary in that city. We authorize a commission to examine him before another ecclesiastical official as Notary, following the attached formula, No. 1. This is so the complaint can be officially recorded, and he can confirm, under oath, that it’s his, written and signed by him, and that its contents are true. He should also state if he has anything to add or change about it, and explain the reason why Narcisa Catala y Pinsach made the allegations against the two Frenchmen.

Having taken the deposition of Francisco Prat, you will take the occasion and methods the most cautious and opportune to examine before the same Notary, and according to the formula No. 2, the said Narcisa Catala y Pinsach, respecting the matters referred to by Francisco Prat, taking care not to mention to her the name of this person, nor the names of the Frenchmen accused, inasmuch as she will state them herself should her testimony corroborate the charge, in which case she will specify the name, occupation, country, residence, age, and personal appearance of each individual. Also if she knows whether one of them has been baptized in Spain, when, in what Parish, and what heresy he embraced afterwards. Also what reason she has for saying that one of them is a Jew, and in order to deceive the spies, takes the communion not merely once, but two or three times a year. You will also question her whether she has heard or understood anything from these two Frenchmen or others, which is, or appears to be, contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith, or within the cognisance of the Holy Office, in which case she must declare whatever she knows, with the utmost clearness and perspicuity.

Having taken the deposition of Francisco Prat, you will carefully and appropriately examine Narcisa Catala y Pinsach before the same Notary, following the format No. 2, regarding the matters mentioned by Francisco Prat. Be sure not to mention the name of this person or the names of the accused Frenchmen, as she will provide them herself if her testimony supports the charges. In that case, she will detail the name, occupation, country, residence, age, and appearance of each individual. Additionally, ask if she knows whether any of them have been baptized in Spain, when it happened, in which parish, and what heresy they later adopted. Also inquire about her basis for claiming that one of them is Jewish and that to mislead the spies, he takes communion not just once, but two or three times a year. You should also ask her if she has heard or understood anything from these two Frenchmen or others that contradicts our Holy Catholic Faith or falls under the jurisdiction of the Holy Office. In that situation, she must declare everything she knows clearly and thoroughly.

These investigations being completed, you will forward the proceedings to us, returning also all the papers. Our Lord preserve you.

These investigations completed, please send us the proceedings and return all the documents as well. May our Lord protect you.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, June 11th, 1791.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, June 11, 1791.

The Licentiate,
Don Manuel de Merra y Paniagua.
Dr Don Pedro Diaz de Valdes.
Juan Antonio Almonacid, Secretary.

The Licentiate,
Don Manuel de Merra y Paniagua.
Dr. Don Pedro Diaz de Valdes.
Juan Antonio Almonacid, Secretary.


In the city of Gerona, Principality of Catalonia on the thirtieth day of June, one thousand seven hundred and ninetyone, before us, Juan Salgueda, Presbyter Vicar of the Mercadal and Commissary of the Holy Office for this investigation, and Dr Marcial Llistorella, Presbyter Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy, and perform faithfully our duties, appeared according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, a person calling himself Francisco Prat, Subdeacon of the village of Esponella in the bishopric of Gerona, aged twentyeight years.

In the city of Gerona, Principality of Catalonia, on June 30, 1791, before us, Juan Salgueda, Vicar Presbyter of the Mercadal and Commissioner of the Holy Office for this investigation, and Dr. Marcial Llistorella, Notary Presbyter, sworn to keep confidentiality and carry out our duties honestly, appeared as summoned and took an oath to tell the truth and maintain secrecy, a person identifying himself as Francisco Prat, Subdeacon of the village of Esponella in the diocese of Gerona, aged twenty-eight years.

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

Questioned whether he knew or guessed why he was called to appear.

Answered, that he supposed it to be on account of a denunciation he had made, respecting something he had heard from Narcisa Catala y Pinsach.

Answered, he thought it was because of a report he had made about something he heard from Narcisa Catala y Pinsach.

He was then informed that a letter had been received in this Holy Office, which appeared to be from him, which letter began with ‘Francisco Prat, Subdeacon,’ and ended with ‘for the necessary ends.’ This letter was then produced, when he recognised it, and declared it to be the one which he wrote to the Tribunal, and that its contents were true.

He was then told that a letter had been received in this Holy Office, which seemed to be from him. The letter started with 'Francisco Prat, Subdeacon,' and ended with 'for the necessary ends.' When the letter was presented, he recognized it and confirmed that it was the one he wrote to the Tribunal, and that its contents were accurate.

Questioned, if he had anything to add thereto.

Questioned if he had anything to add to that.

Answered, that in the conversation referred to, the abovementioned Narcisa Catala y Pinsach stated that some other Frenchmen abused the said Francisco Blaqueire on account of his prevarication respecting our religion, and that this happened in her house. Also, (but of this he is not certain) he believed she declared that the father and brother of the said Blaqueire who reside in Montagut or Tortella, in the bishopric of Gerona, refused to live with him by reason of his baptism, and that they had not been baptized; at any rate she said something respecting this.

Answered that in the mentioned conversation, the aforementioned Narcisa Catala y Pinsach said that some other Frenchmen mistreated the said Francisco Blaqueire because of his wrongdoing regarding our religion, and this occurred in her home. Also, (though he is not sure about this) he thought she mentioned that the father and brother of the said Blaqueire, who live in Montagut or Tortella in the bishopric of Gerona, refused to live with him because of his baptism, and that they had not been baptized; at any rate, she said something about this.

Furthermore he had been told by Maria, the sister of the aforesaid Narcisa Pinsach, that Francisco Brich was a Jew. This she told the deponent in his own house; the like assertion he had heard from some of the common people, but did not recollect whom.

Furthermore, he had been told by Maria, the sister of the aforementioned Narcisa Pinsach, that Francisco Brich was Jewish. She shared this information with the deponent in his own home; he had heard similar claims from some locals, but he couldn’t recall who.

Questioned, what gave rise to the aforesaid conversation; why the charges were made; and seeing that it was his duty to oppose and denounce such matters, why he waited six months before he gave information.

Questioned about what led to that conversation, why the charges were made, and considering it was his responsibility to oppose and condemn such issues, why he waited six months before reporting it.

Answered, that he chanced to remark, while waiting for the husband of the said Narcisa Pinsach, that the abovenamed Brich appeared to be an honest man, to which she replied that he was not, when the rest of the assertions followed; that the charges were made in compliance with the dictates of his conscience; and that he had spoken of the matter before, but had been told that it was women’s tattle.

Answered that he happened to notice, while waiting for Narcisa Pinsach's husband, that the aforementioned Brich seemed to be a decent guy, to which she responded that he wasn't, leading to all the other claims that followed; that the accusations were made according to his conscience; and that he had discussed the issue before, but had been dismissed as it was seen as just women's gossip.

Questioned, what was the appearance of the persons in question.

Questioned about what the people looked like.

Answered, that he had no knowledge of Francisco Blaqueire; and that the said Brich is a man of middling stature, corpulent, somewhat florid, and of a pacific temper; and that he knew nothing of his birthplace, except that he was a Frenchman.

Answered that he didn't know Francisco Blaqueire; and that Brich is an average-sized man, overweight, somewhat red-faced, and has a peaceful nature; and that he knew nothing about his birthplace, except that he was French.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent, who has not made this declaration out of malice or ill will, but solely in discharge of his conscience; he declared that it was correctly recorded, and signed it in the city of Gerona, on the first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and ninetyone.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the person giving the statement, who has not made this declaration out of spite or bad intentions, but only to fulfill their conscience; they stated that it was accurately recorded and signed it in the city of Gerona, on July 1, 1791.

Francisco Prat, Subdeacon.

Francisco Prat, Subdeacon.

Before me—

In front of me—

Dr Marcial Llistorella, Presbyter Notary.

Dr. Marcial Llistorella, Notary Public.

In the city of Gerona, on the second day of July, one thousand seven hundred and ninetyone, before us, Juan Salgueda, Presbyter, Vicar of the Mercadal of Gerona, and Commissary of the Holy Office, and Dr Marcial Llistorella, Presbyter Notary, sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully our duties, appeared, according to summons, and made oath to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, Narcisa Catala y Pinsach, wife of Joseph Fabrega, commonly called Catala, stocking weaver, a native and inhabitant of Gerona, of age, as she stated, twentyeight years.

In the city of Gerona, on July 2, 1791, before us, Juan Salgueda, Presbyter, Vicar of the Mercadal of Gerona, and Commissary of the Holy Office, and Dr. Marcial Llistorella, Presbyter Notary, sworn to keep confidentiality and carry out our duties faithfully, appeared, as summoned, and swore to tell the truth and maintain secrecy, Narcisa Catala y Pinsach, wife of Joseph Fabrega, commonly known as Catala, a stocking weaver, a native and resident of Gerona, who stated she was twenty-eight years old.

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

Questioned if she knew why she had been summoned to appear.

Answered, No.

No.

Questioned, if she knew that any person had said or done anything which was, or appeared to be contrary to our Holy Catholic Faith, and Evangelical Law.

Questioned if she knew of anyone who had said or done anything that was, or seemed to be, against our Holy Catholic Faith and Evangelical Law.

Answered, that she had been told that Francisco Brich, alias Lo Avi Brich, and Francisco Blaqueire, stocking weavers, in the Hospicio of this city, were Protestants; and that the said Blaqueire had been baptized since his residence in Spain, but she knew not in what Parish. Also, that he could not live with his parents because they were Protestants. His parents live in France.

Answered that she had heard that Francisco Brich, also known as Lo Avi Brich, and Francisco Blaqueire, stocking weavers at the Hospicio in this city, were Protestants; and that Blaqueire had been baptized after moving to Spain, but she didn't know which parish. Also, he couldn't live with his parents because they were Protestants. His parents live in France.

Questioned, if she knew whether the said Blaqueire had embraced any heresy.

Questioned if she knew whether the mentioned Blaqueire had accepted any heresy.

Answered, that she only knew he was a Protestant, according as she was informed by her mother, now dead, who asserted that she was unwilling to let her other daughter marry the said Blaqueire because he was a Protestant. The same assertion she has heard from many other persons; she could not remember whom, but believed they were people of the vulgar sort.

Answered that she only knew he was a Protestant, based on what her late mother had told her. Her mother claimed that she was unwilling to let her other daughter marry Blaqueire because he was a Protestant. She had heard the same claim from many other people too; she couldn’t recall exactly who, but she thought they were regular folks.

Questioned, if she had told this to any other person.

Questioned if she had shared this with anyone else.

Answered, that what had been told her, she had told to others, but to whom she could not say.

Answered, she said that what she had been told, she had shared with others, but she couldn't say who those others were.

Here closed the deposition of the second of July, and on the fourth of the same month, the said Narcisa Fabra Catala y Pinsach appeared again.

Here ended the deposition on the second of July, and on the fourth of the same month, Narcisa Fabra Catala y Pinsach appeared again.

Questioned, if she had anything to add to the declaration which she had made against Francisco Blaqueire.

Questioned if she had anything to add to the statement she had made against Francisco Blaqueire.

Answered, No.

No, I didn’t.

Questioned, what was the personal appearance of this man.

Questioned about it, what did this man look like?

Answered, that he was about thirty years of age, of a moderate stature, and corpulent; that she did not know his birthplace, only that he was a Frenchman; that he was desirous of marrying, and that he was a stocking weaver, but in what factory he worked she did not know.

Answered that he was about thirty years old, of average height, and overweight; that she didn't know where he was from, only that he was French; that he wanted to get married, and that he was a stocking weaver, but she didn’t know which factory he worked in.

Questioned, why she supposed the abovenamed Brich to be a Protestant.

Questioned why she thought the aforementioned Brich was a Protestant.

Answered, that she did not know it for certain, but had heard of it in the same manner in which she learned the history of Francisco Blaqueire, and that perhaps she had told it to others.

Answered that she wasn't completely sure, but had heard about it in the same way she learned the story of Francisco Blaqueire, and that she might have shared it with others.

She was then informed that information had been received and sworn to in the Holy Office, that in a certain conversation a certain person observed that Avi Brich appeared to be an honest man, to which she replied, ‘He is not an honest man, but a Jew.’ And it being remarked that in Spain they must confess and partake of the communion once in each year, she replied, that in order to deceive the spies, they did this not merely once, but two or three times a year.

She was then told that information had been received and sworn in the Holy Office, that during a certain conversation, a certain person noted that Avi Brich seemed to be an honest man, to which she responded, ‘He’s not an honest man; he’s a Jew.’ And when it was mentioned that in Spain they must confess and take communion once a year, she replied that to fool the spies, they didn’t do this just once, but two or three times a year.

Therefore, in the name of God Our Lord and his Glorious and Blessed Mother Our Lady the Virgin, she was exhorted to bethink herself and declare the whole truth.

Therefore, in the name of God Our Lord and his Glorious and Blessed Mother Our Lady the Virgin, she was urged to reflect and tell the whole truth.

Answered, that she did not remember to have said so, but had heard say that if he had died in the Hospital, where he lay very sick about two years, he would not have been buried in consecrated grounds. At present she could not recollect who made this assertion, but she believed they were Frenchmen.

Answered that she didn't remember saying that but had heard that if he had died in the hospital, where he was very sick for about two years, he wouldn't have been buried in consecrated ground. Right now, she couldn't recall who made this claim, but she thought they were French.

Questioned, what was his age and personal appearance.

Questioned about his age and how he looked.

Answered, she had known him about six years; that he was of a middling stature, corpulent, of a pacific temper, and above fifty years old; that she knew not his birthplace, but only that he was a Frenchman, and resided in the parish of the Mercadal of Gerona.

Answered, she had known him for about six years; that he was of average height, overweight, had a calm demeanor, and was over fifty years old; that she didn’t know where he was born, only that he was French and lived in the Mercadal parish of Gerona.

Questioned, if she knew anything of any other person which was contrary to our Faith.

Questioned if she knew anything about any other person that contradicted our Faith.

Answered, that she had been told by Dona Manuela de Rodil, that Monsieur Daniel, a Frenchman, living in the parish of the Mercadal, possessed a mirror, which, on looking into it, exhibited the figures of devils. Also, she had heard, from the vulgar, that he and his wife were not Christians. Furthermore, she had been told by a certain Mallensa, a French woman, that a certain Luis in her house was a Protestant, but she believed this was said from hatred, and in order to get him out of the house. Finally, she remembered to have heard that one of the sons, Francisco Brich, now in France, was a Protestant. Who made this assertion she could not tell.

She said that Dona Manuela de Rodil had told her that Monsieur Daniel, a Frenchman living in the parish of Mercadal, had a mirror that showed the images of devils when you looked into it. She also heard from the locals that he and his wife were not Christians. Additionally, a French woman named Mallensa told her that a certain Luis in her house was a Protestant, but she thought this was said out of spite to get him out of the house. Finally, she remembered hearing that one of the sons, Francisco Brich, who is now in France, was a Protestant. She couldn't say who made that claim.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the deponent, who has not uttered it out of malice or ill will, but solely to discharge her conscience; and having been read, she declared that it was correctly recorded.

The above is the truth according to the oath of the person giving testimony, who did not say it out of malice or bad intention, but only to clear her conscience; and after it was read, she stated that it was recorded accurately.

Done at Gerona on the fourth day of July, one thousand seven hundred and ninetytwo.

Done at Gerona on the 4th day of July, 1792.

The said Narcisa Catala Fabre y Pinsach not being able to write, I sign the above.

The mentioned Narcisa Catala Fabre y Pinsach is unable to write, so I sign above.

Juan Salgueda, Presbyter, &c.

Juan Salgueda, Pastor, etc.

Before me—

In front of me—

Dr Marcial Llistorella, Presbyter,
Notary in this Investigation
.

Dr. Marcial Llistorella, Presbyter,
Notary for this Investigation
.

*  *  *  *

*  *  *  *

MOST ILLUSTRIOUS SIR,

DEAR SIR,

Being in company with Juan Bautista Viada, mason, on the twelfth day of the present month, and discoursing of sermons upon the state of the soul, I am very confident that he made this remark; that he had heard sundry persons declare they believed nothing about hell or purgatory, but as for himself, he believed. Which information I give your Excellency in obedience to the dictates of my conscience.

Being with Juan Bautista Viada, a mason, on the twelfth day of this month, and talking about sermons regarding the state of the soul, I am quite sure he said this: that he had heard several people claim they believed nothing about hell or purgatory, but as for him, he believed. I’m sharing this with you, your Excellency, because I feel it's the right thing to do.

Mataro, November 17th, 1819.

Mataro, November 17, 1819.

Your most humble servant,
Franch. Plana, Carpenter.

Your most humble servant,
Franchise Plan, Carpenter.

On the road beyond the gate of Batlleix.[21]

On the road beyond the gate of Batlleix.[21]


Let a commission be expedited for the examination of the above letter.

Let a commission be set up to review the above letter.


To the Reverend Father Pedro Martir de S. Vicente, Capuchin and Ex Lecturer of his order.

To Reverend Father Pedro Martir de S. Vicente, Capuchin and former Lecturer of his order.

We hereby grant you a commission to summon before you, and another ecclesiastic to act as Notary, first swearing secrecy, Francisco de Asis Plana, carpenter, residing opposite the gate of Batlleix of this city. You will subject him to a regular examination respecting a letter of his which is herewith enclosed, and exact an oath from him that the letter is his, written by himself and its contents true. You will ascertain whether he has anything to add or alter respecting it, and after four days you will ratify the same ad perpetuam, in the presence of two other ecclesiastics sworn to secrecy. In the same manner you will proceed to take separately the depositions of Juan Bautista Viada, mason, and of the other persons whom he states were present when the speeches in question were uttered; these depositions to be also ratified. You will not omit to question him who these persons were, according to the regular form. You will note in the margin of the paper which shall contain the depositions, the degree of credit which they deserve; and you will also transmit, separately, an account of the lives, character, and behaviour of the persons denounced. With these you will return this commission and the other papers. God preserve you many years.

We hereby give you permission to summon Francisco de Asis Plana, a carpenter living across from the gate of Batlleix in this city, along with another cleric to serve as Notary, who must first take an oath of secrecy. You will conduct a formal examination regarding a letter of his that is enclosed here, and require him to swear that the letter is his own, written by him, and that its contents are true. You will find out if he has anything to add or change about it, and after four days you will confirm it ad perpetuam, in the presence of two other clerics who also take an oath of secrecy. You will then take separate statements from Juan Bautista Viada, a mason, and the other individuals he claims were present when the remarks in question were made; these statements also need to be confirmed. Be sure to ask him who these people were, following the usual procedure. In the margin of the document containing the statements, you will note the level of credibility they deserve; you will also send in a separate account of the lives, character, and behavior of the individuals being reported. With these documents, you will return this commission and the other papers. May God keep you well for many years.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, December 18th, 1819.

Royal Palace of the Inquisition of Barcelona, December 18, 1819.

Dr Don Jose Llozer.

Dr. Don Jose Llozer.

The Licentiate,

The Licentiate,

Don Santo de Basarrate.
D. D. Juan de Calva y Marti, Sec’y.

Don Santo de Basarrate.
D. D. Juan de Calva y Marti, Secretary.


In the city of Mataro, bishopric of Barcelona, on the twentyeighth day of December, one thousand eight hundred and nineteen, before Father Pedro Martir de San Vicente, Presbyter and Commissary, specially appointed in virtue of a commission to this effect, and before me, P. Bernardino de Barcelona, Presbyter Notary, having sworn to preserve secrecy and perform faithfully our duties, appeared voluntarily and made oath in the name of God our Lord, with the sign of the cross, to declare the truth and preserve secrecy, with respect to everything demanded of him which he knew, a person calling himself Francisco de Asis Plana, carpenter, aged fiftyseven years.

In the city of Mataro, part of the Barcelona bishopric, on December 28, 1819, before Father Pedro Martir de San Vicente, Presbyter and Commissary, who was specifically assigned for this purpose, and before me, P. Bernardino de Barcelona, Presbyter Notary, having sworn to keep confidentiality and carry out our duties honestly, a person named Francisco de Asis Plana, a carpenter, 57 years old, appeared voluntarily and took an oath in the name of God our Lord, with the sign of the cross, to tell the truth and keep confidentiality regarding everything he was asked that he knew.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was called to appear before the Holy Office.

Answered, Yes.

Said, Yes.

Questioned, if he had written, or caused to be written at any time, a letter to the Tribunal of the Inquisition, giving an account of some crime within his knowledge, and who was the person to whom he referred.

Questioned whether he had written, or had someone else write at any time, a letter to the Inquisition Tribunal, detailing a crime he was aware of, and who he was referring to.

Answered, that he had written a letter against Juan Bautista Viada, mason. The letter was then exhibited and the first clause of it read, when the deponent declared it to be his, and that its contents were true.

Answered that he had written a letter against Juan Bautista Viada, mason. The letter was then shown, and the first clause of it was read, at which point the witness confirmed it was his and that the contents were true.

Questioned, if he had anything to add or alter in the said letter.

Questioned if he had anything to add or change in the letter mentioned.

Answered, that if it were not for the apprehension of falling into an error, he should alter, ‘I am confident,’ to ‘I am certain.’

Answered, that if it weren't for the fear of making a mistake, he would change, 'I am confident,' to 'I am certain.'

Questioned, if there were other persons present when Juan Bautista Viada made the assertions in question.

Questioned whether there were other people present when Juan Bautista Viada made the statements in question.

Answered, No.

No.

Questioned, if he knew that any other person had said or done anything which came under the cognizance of the Holy Office.

Questioned if he knew that anyone else had said or done anything that was under the jurisdiction of the Holy Office.

Answered, No.

No.

Questioned, what was the age, appearance, and habitation of the person denounced.

Questioned about the age, appearance, and living situation of the person who was reported.

Answered, that he was about fiftysix years old, and lived in the Calle de Argentona, in Mataro.

Answered that he was about fifty-six years old and lived on Calle de Argentona in Mataró.

The above having been read to the deponent was declared by him to be correctly recorded. He stated further that he had nothing to add or alter respecting it; and that he did not make the declarations therein contained, out of malice, but solely from conscientious motives. Secrecy was enjoined upon him, which he promised, and added his signature.

The above was read to the witness, who confirmed that it was recorded accurately. He also stated that he had nothing to add or change about it, and that he didn't make the statements it contained out of spite, but only from a sense of duty. He was instructed to keep it confidential, which he agreed to, and then he signed it.

Francisco de Asis Plana.

Fr. Pedro Martir de San Vicente,
Presbyter Capuchin.

Francisco de Asis Plana.

Fr. Pedro Martir de San Vicente,
Capuchin Priest.

Before me—

In front of me—

P. Bernardino de Barcelona, Presbyter,
Notary, and Commissary, appointed for
this Purpose
.

P. Bernardino of Barcelona, Priest,
Notary, and Commissioner, assigned for
this Purpose
.


In the city of Mataro, bishopric of Barcelona, on the sixteenth day of January, one thousand eight hundred and twenty, before Father Pedro Martir de San Vicente, Presbyter Capuchin, and Commissary, by a special commission for this purpose, and me, Father Bernardino de Barcelona, Notary, having sworn to preserve secrecy, and perform faithfully our offices, appeared and made oath in the name of God our Lord, with the sign of the cross, to declare the truth, and observe secrecy, a person calling himself Juan Bautista Viada, a native of Mataro, in the bishopric of Barcelona, by occupation a mason, aged fiftyfour years.

In the city of Mataro, part of the bishopric of Barcelona, on January 16, 1820, before Father Pedro Martir de San Vicente, a Capuchin priest and special commissioner for this purpose, and myself, Father Bernardino de Barcelona, Notary, having sworn to keep confidentiality and fulfill our duties faithfully, appeared and took an oath in the name of God, making the sign of the cross, to tell the truth and keep secrets, a person identifying himself as Juan Bautista Viada, a native of Mataro in the bishopric of Barcelona, who is a mason, aged fifty-four.

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

Questioned if he knew or guessed why he was called to appear.

Answered, No.

No, I didn't.

Questioned, if he knew that any person or persons had said there was no Hell nor Purgatory, or made any other assertion which came under the cognisance of the Holy Office.

Questioned if he knew whether any person or people had claimed there was no Hell or Purgatory, or made any other statement that fell under the authority of the Holy Office.

Answered, that he had heard the above assertion uttered by Magin Casanovas, or Barcelo, a person who died two years since.

Answered that he had heard the above statement made by Magin Casanovas, or Barcelo, a person who passed away two years ago.

Questioned, what persons were present when these words were spoken; and if the said Magin Casanovas was in his right mind; also, whether the assertion was made in a positive manner, or by referring to some other person, and whether it was made in jest, or dispute, or passion.

Questioned about who was present when these words were said; whether Magin Casanovas was of sound mind; also, if the statement was made assertively or by pointing to someone else, and whether it was said in jest, during an argument, or out of anger.

Answered, that he did not recollect whether it was said in the presence of others or not, but that it appeared to be said in a positive manner, and not in the heat of passion; that the abovementioned Magin Casanovas was a Marine Alguacil of this city, of which he was also a native, and that his age was about seventy years.

Answered that he didn't remember whether it was said in front of others or not, but it seemed to be stated confidently and not in the heat of the moment; that the aforementioned Magin Casanovas was a Marine Alguacil of this city, where he was also born, and that he was around seventy years old.

Questioned, if he remembered how many times the assertion had been made, and if he received any rebuke for it.

Questioned whether he remembered how many times the claim had been made, and if he had received any backlash for it.

Answered, that he did not remember.

Said he didn't remember.

Questioned, why he had not denounced the speaker to the Holy Tribunal.

Questioned why he hadn't reported the speaker to the Holy Tribunal.

Answered, that the thought of this never occurred to him.

Answered, that he never thought of this.

Questioned, if he knew that any other person had said or done anything which belonged to the cognizance of the Holy Tribunal.

Questioned if he knew that anyone else had said or done anything that fell under the jurisdiction of the Holy Tribunal.

Answered, No.

No.

The above having been read to the deponent, was declared by him to be correctly recorded; and he further stated that he had nothing to add or alter respecting it, and that he did not make the declaration through malice, but solely in obedience to his conscience. Secrecy was enjoined upon him, which he promised, and added his signature.

The above was read to the person giving the statement, who confirmed that it was recorded correctly. He also said he had nothing to add or change about it and that he wasn't making the statement out of malice, but purely out of a sense of duty. He was instructed to keep it confidential, which he agreed to, and he added his signature.

Juan Bautista Viada.
Fray Pedro Martir de San Vicente,
Presbyter Capuchin Commissary.

Juan Bautista Viada.
Brother Pedro Martir de San Vicente,
Capuchin Priest Commissary.

Before me—

Before me—

F. Bernardo de Barcelona, Notary.

F. Bernardo de Barcelona, Notary.


[The following is written in the margin of the above deposition.]

[The following is written in the margin of the above deposition.]

I know the deponent Juan Bautista Viada to be a person worthy of credit. He supports his family by his labor; follows the precepts of the church, confesses, and partakes of the sacrament; nor have I ever heard of anything which can impeach his testimony. This is my opinion, salvo meliori.

I know that Juan Bautista Viada is a trustworthy person. He provides for his family through his work, follows the teachings of the church, confesses, and takes part in the sacrament; and I have never heard anything that could discredit his testimony. This is my opinion, subject to better judgment.

Mataro, January 28th, 1820.

Mataro, January 28, 1820.

Fr. Pedro Martir de San Vicente,
Presbyter Capuchin Commissary.

Fr. Pedro Martir de San Vicente,
Capuchin Priest and Commissary.


THE END.

THE END.

FOOTNOTES:

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Fleury, Hist. Ecclesiast.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Fleury, Church History.

[2] Sismondi, Litterature du Midi de l’Europe.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Sismondi, Southern European Literature.

[3] Sismondi, Hist. des Français.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Sismondi, History of the French.

[4] Fleury, Hist. Ecclesiast.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Fleury, Church History.

[5] Daru, Hist. de Venise.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Daru, History of Venice.

[6] Giannone, Storia di Napoli.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Giannone, History of Naples.

[7] Llorente, Hist. de la Inquisicion de Espana.

[7] Llorente, History of the Inquisition in Spain.

[8] Mariana, Hist. de Espana. Llorente.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Mariana, History of Spain. Llorente.

[9] Schiller, Abfall der Niederlande.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Schiller, The Revolt of the Netherlands.

[10] Llorente.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Llorente.

[11] Lafitau, Conquestes des Portugais.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Lafitau, Conquests of the Portuguese.

[12] As soon as the crime of suspicion of heresy was established in the preliminary accusation, the Inquisitors ordered the arrest of the delinquent. From that moment there were neither privileges nor shelter for him. Whatever might be his rank, he was seized in the midst of his family and friends, and no one dared to offer the least resistance. From the instant he was in the hands of the Inquisition not an individual was allowed any communication with him, he was abandoned by all the world and deprived of every species of consolation. Wo to the compassionate mind that dared to show any sympathy for a victim of the Inquisition. The accused was plunged into a frightful dungeon till the Inquisitors saw fit to interrogate him.

[12] Once the crime of suspected heresy was established in the initial accusation, the Inquisitors ordered the arrest of the accused. From that moment, there were no privileges or protection for him. Regardless of his status, he was taken in front of his family and friends, and no one dared to resist. From the moment he was in the Inquisition's custody, no one was allowed to communicate with him, he was abandoned by everyone and left without any form of comfort. Woe to the compassionate soul who dared to show sympathy for a victim of the Inquisition. The accused was thrown into a terrifying dungeon until the Inquisitors decided to question him.

In the mean time the officers of the Inquisition proceeded to the dwelling of the accused, and drew up an inventory of all his goods, which were immediately seized. His creditors lost their debts; his wife and children were left in the most pitiable desertion; wives and daughters the most virtuous and accomplished, have many times been seen reduced to the horrible necessity of gaining a wretched existence by prostitution, occasioned by their destitute state and the contempt attached to them from being connected with a person apprehended by the Holy Office. After he had passed many days and even months in prison, the Inquisitors caused him to insinuate, by means of the jailor, that he demanded audience; for it was a constant practice of this Tribunal to contrive that the accused should be the person to demand. The prisoner, appearing before his judges for the first time, they questioned him as if they did not know him, and engaged him by the most crafty methods, to acknowledge his crime. Llorente Hist. de la Inquisicion.

In the meantime, the officers of the Inquisition went to the accused's home and made a list of all his possessions, which were immediately taken. His creditors lost their debts, and his wife and children were left in a heartbreaking situation. Wives and daughters who were once virtuous and accomplished were often seen forced into the dreadful position of resorting to prostitution due to their dire circumstances and the shame associated with being connected to someone captured by the Holy Office. After spending many days and even months in prison, the Inquisitors had him suggest through the jailer that he wanted to request an audience; it was standard practice for this Tribunal to make the accused the one to initiate such requests. When the prisoner faced his judges for the first time, they questioned him as if they didn’t know who he was and used deceitful tactics to force him to admit his guilt. Llorente Hist. de la Inquisicion.

[13] ‘The least mixture of African, Indian, Moorish, or Jewish blood taints a whole generation. Nor does the knowledge of such a fact die away in the course of years, or become unnoticed from the obscurity and humbleness of the parties. Not a child in this populous city (Seville) is ignorant that a family, who, beyond the memory of man, have kept a confectioner’s shop in a central part of the town, had one of their ancestors punished by the Inquisition for a relapse into Judaism. I well recollect how, when a boy, I often passed that way, scarcely venturing to cast a side glance on a pretty young woman, who constantly attended the shop, for fear, as I said to myself, of shaming her. A person free from tainted blood is defined by law, ‘Christiano viejo, limpio de toda mala raza.’ An old Christian, free from all bad race and stain. The severity of this law, or rather of the public opinion enforcing it, shuts out its victims from every employment in church or state, and excludes them even from fraternities, or religious associations, which are otherwise open to persons of the lowest ranks. I verily believe that were St Peter a Spaniard, he would either deny admittance into heaven to a people of tainted blood, or send them to a retired corner, where they might not offend the eyes of the old Christians.’

[13] ‘Just a hint of African, Indian, Moorish, or Jewish ancestry taints an entire generation. And the knowledge of this fact doesn’t fade away over time or go unnoticed due to the obscurity and humility of those involved. Not a single child in this busy city (Seville) is unaware that a family, who has run a confectionery shop in a central location for as long as anyone can remember, had one of their ancestors punished by the Inquisition for returning to Judaism. I clearly remember, as a boy, often walking past that shop, hardly daring to glance at a pretty young woman who worked there, fearing, as I told myself, that I would shame her. A person considered free from tainted blood is legally defined as ‘Christiano viejo, limpio de toda mala raza.’ An old Christian, free from all bad race and stain. The harshness of this law, or rather of the public opinion that enforces it, excludes its victims from any position in church or state, and even bars them from fraternities or religious groups that are otherwise open to even the lowest ranks of society. I genuinely believe that if St. Peter were Spanish, he would either deny entrance to heaven to people of tainted blood or send them to a hidden corner where they wouldn't offend the eyes of the old Christians.’

Doblado’s Letters from Spain.

Doblado’s Letters from Spain.

[14] Attorney General.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ AG.

[15] Calificacion or qualification, a judgment pronounced upon the character and tendency of any actions or speeches denounced before the Inquisition. This was done by officers holding a special commission for that purpose called Calificadores.

[15] Calificacion or qualification, a judgment made regarding the character and intention of any actions or statements condemned before the Inquisition. This was carried out by officials who had a special commission for that purpose known as Calificadores.

[16] There were three sorts of persons distinguished by the Tribunal as suspected of heresy; those who were lightly suspected, those who were seriously suspected, and those who were violently suspected. The lightly suspected were designated by the term de levi, and the seriously and violently suspected, by the term de vehementi.

[16] The Tribunal identified three types of people suspected of heresy: those who were lightly suspected, those who were seriously suspected, and those who were violently suspected. The lightly suspected were referred to as de levi, while the seriously and violently suspected were called de vehementi.

Llorente Hist. de la Inquisicion.

Llorente History of the Inquisition.

[17] Du bist ein narr das du dies glaubst.

[17] You're a fool for believing this.

[18] There were three methods of torture; the cord, fire, and water.

[18] There were three methods of torture: the cord, fire, and water.

In the first method, they tied the hands behind the back of the patient by means of a cord which passed through a pulley attached to the roof, and the executioners drew him up as high as possible. After suspending him for some time, the cord was loosened, and he fell within six inches of the ground. This terrible shock dislocated all the joints and cut the flesh even to the sinews. The process was renewed every hour and left the patient without strength or motion. It was not until after the physician had declared that the sufferer could no longer endure the torture without dying, that the Inquisitors sent him back to prison.

In the first method, they tied the patient's hands behind their back using a cord that went through a pulley attached to the ceiling, and the executioners pulled them up as high as they could. After keeping them suspended for a while, the cord was loosened, and they fell within six inches of the ground. This horrific jolt dislocated all the joints and tore the flesh down to the sinews. The process was repeated every hour and left the patient completely drained and unable to move. It wasn't until the doctor said that the sufferer could no longer handle the torture without dying that the Inquisitors returned them to prison.

The second was performed by means of water. The executioners stretched the victim over a wooden instrument like a spout, fitted to receive the body of a man, without any bottom but a stick passing across it. The body falling backwards, came to such a position that the feet were higher than the head. In this state the respiration became very painful, and the patient suffered the most dreadful agonies in all his limbs from the pressure of the cords, the knots of which cut into the flesh. In this cruel position the executioners passed into the throat a piece of fine linen, wet, a part of which covered the nostrils. They then turned water into the mouth and nose and left it to filter so slowly that one hour at least was consumed before the sufferer had swallowed a drop, although it trickled without interruption. Thus the patient found no interval for respiration. At every moment he made an effort to swallow, hoping to give passage to a little air; but the wet linen prevented this, and caused the water to enter by the nostrils. Thus it often happened that when the torture was finished, they drew the linen from the throat all stained with the blood of the vessels which had been burst by the struggles of the unfortunate victim. It should be added, that every instant, a powerful arm turned the fatal lever, and at each turn the cords which bound the arms and legs penetrated to the very bones.

The second method was done using water. The executioners stretched the victim over a wooden device resembling a spout, designed to hold a person's body, but with only a stick across it. With the body tipping backward, the feet were elevated above the head. In this position, breathing became extremely painful, and the victim endured horrific agony throughout their limbs from the pressure of the ropes, which dug into the flesh. While in this cruel position, the executioners inserted a piece of fine wet linen into the throat, part of which covered the nostrils. They then began to pour water into the mouth and nose, allowing it to filter so slowly that it took at least an hour before the victim swallowed even a drop, despite it trickling constantly. This meant that the victim had no breaks for breathing. At every moment, they tried to swallow, hoping to let a bit of air through; however, the wet linen blocked this and caused water to enter through the nostrils. Often, when the torture ended, they pulled out the linen from the throat, stained with the blood from the vessels that had burst due to the struggles of the unfortunate victim. It should also be noted that every moment, a strong arm turned the deadly lever, and with each turn, the cords binding the arms and legs dug into the very bones.

If by this second torment they could obtain no confession, the Inquisitors resorted to fire. For this purpose the executioners tied the hands and feet in such a manner that the sufferer could not change his position. They then rubbed the feet with oil and lard, and other penetrating matter, and placed them before the fire, until the flesh was so roasted that the bones and sinews appeared in every part.—Llorente, Hist. de la Inquisicion.

If the Inquisitors couldn’t get a confession from their second method of torture, they turned to fire. To do this, the executioners bound the victim’s hands and feet in a way that prevented any movement. They then applied oil, lard, and other harsh substances to the feet and held them in front of the fire until the flesh was so burned that the bones and sinews were visible everywhere.—Llorente, Hist. de la Inquisicion.

[19] When the crime imputed to the accused was not certain, and he had not entangled himself in the interrogatories, he was acquitted, on the condition that he should make a formal abjuration of his heresies and be purged, after the canonical fashion, of the suspicion attached to him. After this, he was absolved ad cautelam, or, in other words, as having been suspected of heresy.—Llorente, Hist. de la Inquisicion.

[19] When the crime charged against the accused was unclear, and he hadn’t gotten caught up in the questioning, he was acquitted on the condition that he formally renounce his heresies and be cleared of any suspicion in the approved manner. After this, he was absolved ad cautelam, or in other words, as someone who had been suspected of heresy.—Llorente, Hist. de la Inquisicion.

[20] One who makes a voluntary confession, and takes his trial on the strength of the evidence which he gives against himself, rather than the testimony of other witnesses.

[20] Someone who admits guilt willingly and relies on the evidence they provide against themselves instead of relying on the testimony of others.

[21] As a specimen of the modern Catalan dialect, the original of the above letter is subjoined.

[21] As an example of the modern Catalan dialect, the original of the letter above is included.

Mol Ille Sor

Mol Ille Sor

Estan en la Campana ab Juan Baptista Viada All, de Casas lo Dia 12 del corren, parlan de Sermons de Animas: meapar mol, que el digué de esta Manera; de que ell abia oyit á differens, que no creyan ab lo Infern, ó ab lo Purgatori, peró que ell si, que hi creya.

Están en la Campana con Juan Baptista Viada All, de Casas el día 12 del corren, hablando de Sermones de Ánimas: me parece mucho, que él dijo de esta manera; que él había oído a diferentes, que no creían en el Infierno, o en el Purgatorio, pero que él sí creía.

lo que delate a V. S. por descargo de mi conciencia.
Mataró and November 17, 1819.
S. M. hl—S.
Franch. Plana Juster. In the street outside the Portal de Batlleix.

Typographical errors corrected by the etext transcriber:
the the cause=> the cause {pg 13}
he was dismissed=> he was dismissed {pg 40}
make arrangements=> make arrangements {pg 71}
morning up his defence=> drawn up his defence {pg 74}
executing them=> executing them {pg 96}
conception of of the said Juan Antonio=> conception of the said Juan Antonio {pg 136}
The executioners=> The executioners {pg 150}
of of property=> of property {pg 175}
on the the thirtieth day=> on the thirtieth day {pg 196}
before the Respected Joseph=> before the Reverend Joseph {pg 184}
la Riera high=> la Riera Alta {pg 217}
superstitious acts=> superstitious acts {pg 236}


Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!