The Friar of Carcassonne (41 page)

*
“I'll tell you why they call us heretics”:
Testimony of shepherd Pierre Maury in Duvernoy,
Le Régistre
, pp. 924–926. Cited in Brenon,
Pèire
Autier
, p. 259.

*
“Those who adore such images are idiots”:
Testimony of Sébélia (Sibylle) Peyre in Duvernoy,
Le Régistre
, p. 580. Cited in Brenon,
Pèire
Autier
, p. 261.

*
“Oh no, it's a fine thing”:
Testimony of Sébélia Peyre in Duvernoy,
Le
Régistre
, p. 581. Cited in Brenon,
Pèire Autier
, p. 262. Sébélia, a woman, did not have this said to her. She was present when Autier made the quip in answer to a question asked by the shepherd Maury. Spirited to the last, Sébélia, who was to be burned at the stake, then told the inquisitor-bishop Fournier that they had all had a good hearty laugh at the joke.

*
A large theoretical framework had been built around the notion of
Franciscan poverty:
David Burr,
Olivi and Franciscan Poverty: The Origins
of the Usus Pauperus Controversy
, Philadelphia 1989. The foremost English-language specialist on the Spirituals, Professor Burr also hosts a very informative Web site:
http://www.history.vt.edu/Burr/OliviPage/Olivi_Page.html
.

*
Francis' injunction to eat what was put before them:
Burr,
Spiritual
Franciscans
, p. 139.

*
“So it goes, there is no more religion”:
Jacopone da Toda, cited in Burr,
Spiritual Franciscans
, p. 103. The details of the Conventual-Spiritual controversy are drawn from the two works of Burr cited here.

*
“saints of God and the foundation of His church”:
The exasperated Dominican was Raimond Barrau, writing in the 1330s. Pierre Botineau, “Les tribulations de Raimond Barrau, O.P. (1295–1338),”
Mé-langes
d'archéologie et d' histoire de l'Ecole française de Rome
, 77, 1965, pp. 465–528.

*
The heterodoxy of the later Spirituals arose from a lush forest of
apocalyptic and mystical thought:
The scholarship on the subject is also a lush forest. Of particular use for my brief evocation of the topic was Marjorie Reeves,
The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages
, Oxford, 1969.

*
Stupor Mundi
—who was christened in the same baptismal font in Assisi
that had served to christen Francis:
Julien Green,
God's Fool
, p. 21.

*
That proceeding has come down to us because the transcripts of
Fournier's activities survived in the archives of the Vatican:
The story of the villagers of Montaillou became internationally known with the publication of Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie's superb microhistory
Montaillou: The Promised Land of Error
, trans. Barbara Bray, New York, 1978. Their story was brought to its bitter end by Weis,
Yellow Cross
.

*
And the last Good Man of Languedoc was lured across the Pyrenees:
The story of the Good Man, Guillaume Bélibaste, is told in O'Shea,
Perfect Heresy
, pp. 239–246.

*
“quills upon a fretful porcupine”:
H. K. Mann,
Tombs and Portraits
of the Popes of the Middle Ages
(originally 1928), Whitefish, MT, 2003, p. 56.

*
“For poverty is good, and chastity is greater, but obedience is greatest
of all”:
Cited in Burr,
Spiritual Franciscans
, p. 196.

*
Two eyewitnesses left accounts of what happened next:
Angelo Clareno and Raimond de Fronsac.

20. T
HE
T
RIAL

*
Bonagratia de Bergamo, questioned and tortured Bernard throughout
late 1317 on his relation to the Spirituals:
Friedlander,
The Hammer
, p. 256.

*
During the last months of Cardinal de Castanet's life in 1317, he drew
up the initial list of forty charges against his Franciscan foe:
Dmitrewski, “Fr. Bernard Délicieux, O.F.M.,” 17, p. 474.

*
A second, more comprehensive list of sixty-four charges:
Dmitrewski, “Fr. Bernard Délicieux, O.F.M.,” 17, p. 486.

*
“I will not respond to the question”:
Declaration of Bernard Délicieux, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 52.

*
“Whereas inaction before those who cause harm to others must
rightly be odious to all men of good sense”:
Entered into the court record, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 33.

*
“You lie through your teeth!”:
Testimony of Arnaud de Nougarède, in Duvernoy,
Le procès,
p. 192. Once again, as explained above, French “in your throat” has been changed to English “through your teeth.”

*
As the friar was expected to be available at almost all times during his
trial, holding him here was only a matter of convenience, as well as
security:
I am indebted to Cathar expert Jean-Louis Gasc for this insight. Jean-Louis took me on a tailor-made “Bernard Délicieux tour” of the Cité in the summer of 2009.

*
The trial at Carcassonne began on September 12, 1319, and concluded
on December 8:
Extremely useful to me in making sense of what is often a confusing document, especially with regard to procedural matters, was the introduction in Friedlander,
Pro–cessus Bernardi Delitiosi
.

*
had little time for the self-inflicted woes of the self-important mendicants:
Etienne Baluze, a seventeenth-century French historian, minced no words in his 1693 work on the Avignon popes: “He [Fournier] obviously hated the mendicant orders. He promoted very few of them . . . He willingly listened to their quarrels, but he seemed strangely inclined to side with subordinates against their leaders.” Cited in introduction to Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 22.

*
Three men of Albi—those who were deposed in Avignon in June
1319—claimed to have been in Bernard's presence in the spring of
1304:
Duvernoy,
Le procès
: testimony of Guillaume Fransa (p. 63), Pierre de Castanet (p. 66) and Bernard Bec (pp. 68–69).

*
no bird could fly to Rome fast enough from Languedoc to see the
pontiff alive:
Comment attributed to Bernard Délicieux in all three testimonies cited immediately above.

*
As with the story of treason, Bernard made implausible denials. The
book was not his, or perhaps it was:
Testimony of Bernard Délicieux, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, pp. 54, 92–93, 122 (confession).

*
He told a lengthy and entirely credible story of a Dominican friar, no
less, warning a prelate of Narbonne of their outright falsehoods:
Testimony of Bernard Délicieux, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, pp. 106–107, 109. Bernard stated that the Dominican friar Jean Marty, in the 1280s, warned Archbishop Pierre de Montbrun that something was terribly awry with the inquisition at Carcassonne. Other Dominicans, according to Bernard, suggested that the Order be relieved of inquisitorial duties until the culprits were removed. The archbishop did not act. Bernard stated that the matter was raised again with Pope Clement V by other scandalized Dominicans.

*
Bernard named the inquistion clerks he believed behind what was essentially
a scheme to keep the inquisition active in Carcassonne:
Testimony of Bernard Délicieux, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 109. The clerks were southerners, Jean Falgous and Guillaume de Malviès. Bernard claimed that Jean Marty, the Dominican pleading with the archbishop of Narbonne, believed these men decided to hoodwink the credulous northerner, inquisitor Jean Galand, with invented tales of widespread heresy—all in the interest of keeping the inquisition alive and their positions intact.

*
He enumerated once again his complaints about imaginary Good
Men, then recited a devastating taxonomy of the type of people whom
the inquisitors of the 1280s and 1290s convicted and despoiled:
Testimony of Bernard Délicieux, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 108. It is a magisterial demolition. We can conjecture that Fournier must have seen that Délicieux was on solid ground here. There had indeed been reason to take action against the inquisitors.

*
anyone who causes to be released from the custody of the inquisition
any duly convicted prisoner . . . is automatically, as a result of that
action, excommunicated:
The written “monition” of the judges to Bernard, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, pp. 122–123.

*
“to ensure the inquisition was completely paralyzed and persuade the
king of France to abolish it altogether”:
Testimony of Bernard Bec, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 67.

*
who, at time of the disputation of Toulouse in 1304, were the inquisitors
at Carcassonne and Toulouse?:
Questioning of Bernard Délicieux, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 130. Adroitly detecting and underlining the importance of this seemingly trivial question is Friedlander,
Processus
Bernardi Delitiosi
, p. 22.

*
“[The judges], seeking and attempting to effect the conversion of
Brother Bernard and the salvation of his soul, warned him once,
twice, thrice”:
Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 138.

*
“Despite the justifications and excuses put forth by me in my statements
and responses on favoring and obstructing, I now admit my
guilt”:
Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 138.

*
On Saturday, December 8, 1319, crowds jammed the market square of
the Bourg of Carcassonne:
Dmitrewski, “Fr. Bernard Délicieux, O.F.M.,” 18, p. 18.

*
there were prelates and noblemen and notables in their splendid finery,
among them:
Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 146. The list of distinguished guests is included in the final judgment.

*
“Having finally assigned him to strict confinement in the Wall”:
The request for mercy appears at the end of the final judgment, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 147.

*
“He [Bernard] committed or encouraged others to commit many
great and shameful crimes”:
The royal appeal is included with the court documents, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, pp. 148–150.

*
The pope had no such scruples:
I use the word advisedly. In institutional settings, particularly one as fraught with intrigue as the medieval papal curia,
scruple
can mean one thing—and its opposite.

*
“My Lord the Most Holy Pope John XX II”:
Duvernoy helpfully added this information in a footnote at the end of the trial document.
Le
procès
, p. 151.

A
FTERWORD

*
“It should be noted that in all the arguments put forth by the reformers”:
Hauréau,
Bernard Délicieux
, p. 27.

*
he was no saint, either:
At Bernard's trial, a consul of 1299, and thus a foe of the friar, testified that the Franciscan had enjoyed the favors of a mistress—until reprimanded by his superior. Despite its source, I find the accusation plausible. A commanding man in his late thirties, adored by the crowds, at the height of his powers: the nature of many men makes such dalliance possible; the nature of many women, for whom the cassock or collar presents a challenge, even more so. However, all the specialists of Délicieux—–Biget, Dmitrewski, Dossat, Duvernoy, Friedlander, Hauréau—ignore or dismiss the allegation. (Testimony of Guillaume de Villeneuve, in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, pp. 161–162.)

*
“This little book contains many characters”:
Cited in the final judgment (sentencing), in Duvernoy,
Le procès
, p. 144.

*
John Paul II, felt compelled . . . to apologize on behalf of the Church
for the excesses of its inquisitors:
On March 12, 2000, in Rome. The pope also let it be known he was alluding to the Crusades, anti-Semitism, and a few other matters large and small. In the very next breath, however, he pardoned those who had attacked the Church over the centuries. So John Paul's extraordinary initiative pioneered a new genre: the forgiving apology.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abulafia, David.
Frederick II: A Medieval Emperor.
London: Penguin, 1988.

———.
A Mediterranean Emporium: The Catalan Kingdom of Majorca
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Albaret, Laurent, ed.
Les Inquisiteurs: Portraits de défenseurs de la foi en
Languedoc (XIIIe––XIVe siècles)
. Toulouse: Privat, 2001.

———.
L'Inquisition: Rempart de la Foi?
Paris: Gallimard, 1998.

———. “Les Prêcheurs et l'inquisition.”
Cahiers de Fanjeaux
, 36, 2001, pp. 319–41.

Ames, Christine Caldwell. “Does Inquisition Belong to Religious History?”
The American Historical Review
, 110, 1, 2005, pp. 11–37.

———.
Righteous Persecution: Inquisition, Dominicans, and Christianity in
the Middle Ages
. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009.

Baraz, Daniel.
Medieval Cruelty: Changing Perceptions, Late Antiquity to the
Early Modern Period
. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003.

Barber, Malcolm.
The Trial of the Templars
. Cambridge: Cambridge University 263 Press, 1978.