![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
In the 1998 film "Dangerous Beauty," Veronica Franco is tried NOT before the Spanish Inquisition, but rather the Roman Inquisition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavenexiana ( talk • contribs) 18:36, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Some sections are adequately referenced; others are completely unreferenced. A refimprove banner should be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.35.164.102 ( talk) 18:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Was the Spanish Inquisition really ever expected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.29.61.49 ( talk) 14:40, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
¡¡Never!!
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change "Hennigsen" to "Henningsen".
212.10.158.3 ( talk) 16:47, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Done Thanks,
Celestra (
talk)
18:58, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
the article mentions Dangerous Beauty as involving the Spanish inquisition. I believe that is a mistake. The trial took place in Venice and involved the roman inquisition, or perhaps the Venetian. But certainly not the Spanish. This claim should be excised from the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.52.232.221 ( talk) 13:10, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
One sentence under the Torture section reads as follows:
"The scenes of sadism found in popular writers on the inquisition are not based in truth.[64] Modern scholars have determined that torture was used in only two percent of the cases, for no more than 15 minutes, and in only less than one percent of the cases was it used a second time, never more than that.[54][62]"
First of all, the first sentence's phrase "found in popular writers" is way too vague and sweeping for the sentence to have any clear meaning. How about listing at least some of the popular writers whose scenes are "not based on the truth" ? In addition, the phrase "not based on the truth" could also mean a vast range of different things, from vastly exaggerated the extent of the torture" to "mentioned a couple of insignificant factual errors".
But my biggest problem is that — having no expertise whatsoever in the subject — I simply don't know what to think. References are given for the very limited extent of the torture in the second sentence quoted above. But presumably someone else could have cited the works listed in the bibliography as "revisionist books", with a totally different claim.
Please note that I am not saying anything claimed in the article is inaccurate. I am simply saying that I have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not what is claimed is accurate or not.
And calling six books all published between 1982 and 2006 "revisionist" is certainly something I have no idea how to evaluate. But certainly the *claim* that they are "revisionist" -- yet another terminally vague descriptor -- needs to be supported by convincing evidence. Who said they were revisionist? What are the reputation of the individuals who said this, and what is the reputation of the authors of the books said to be revisionist? (Reputations as indicated by which universities they work at, with what titles, and/or which history awards have they received.)
It is easy for me to imagine that whoever wrote that section of the Wikipedia article, and whoever labeled those six books "revisionist", may be total experts on the subject, and that the article totally accurate historically. It's also easy for me to imagine that, at the opposite extreme, these parts of the article may have been written with a biased POV.
I just don't know how to tell. Daqu ( talk) 17:10, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
I find the first two paragraphs of this section somewhat confusing.
The first paragraph mentions that at the end of the 12th century Pope Lucius issued a bull to combat the Albigensian heresy. A few sentences later, it mentions that in 1232 Pope Gregory IX established a Papal Inquisition during the era of the Albigensian heresy. Could the Inquisitions be placed in the order they happened?
I don't understand the second paragraph that mentions there wasn't an Inquisition in Castille. Since the section is specifically about previous inquisitions I don't understand the importance or significance of mentioning that there wasn't one in Castille. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.117.1.175 ( talk) 22:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
In the introductory parargraph, various reasons for the Inquisition were given, but none that I remember from my Spanish History Class. I'm not an expert, but I wish a scholar would step in and clarify. My understanding is that Ferdinand and Isabella wanted to unite their new kingdom which was filled with people speaking different languages and practicing different religions and with regions accustomed to being their own kingdom with very different cultures. They had recently united Castile and Aragon and then regained the south of Spain from Muslim hands and wished to unite all of Spain under one culture- Catholicism. They feared that leaving false converters in the ranks would only lead to dangerous outside alliances which would threaten their reign. Yes, it was also used just to punish those who might oppose them. And an "us against them" approach to governing was an obvious bid to form an "us" and to claim divine right (or at least papal approval) to their reign. What they told me in Spain was that while the Inquisiton was awful, it essentially made Spain in the sense that it unified and defined the culture of the country and created a strong enough monarchy to keep the country united for centuries. Of course there are still plenty of regions of Spain that would still like to break off and be their own country... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.81.68 ( talk) 19:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Question, asking the reader. Should be rephrased.
"Included in the Indexes, at one point, were many of the great works of Spanish literature. Also, a number of religious writers who are today considered saints by the Catholic Church saw their works appear in the Indexes. At first, this might seem counter-intuitive or even nonsensical—how were these Spanish authors published in the first place if their texts were then prohibited by the Inquisition and placed in the Index? The answer lies in the process of publication and censorship in Early Modern Spain. Books in Early Modern Spain faced prepublication licensing and approval (which could include modification) by both secular and religious authorities. However, once approved and published, the circulating text also faced the possibility of post-hoc censorship by being denounced to the Inquisition—sometimes decades later. Likewise, as Catholic theology evolved, once-prohibited texts might be removed from the Index."
173.168.32.87 (
talk)
16:38, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
On this page:
On the linked-to page, galley:
Perhaps the resolution is that the Spanish Inquisition is not ancient. But perhaps one or the other could be verified and clarified.
The article on galleys refers to ancient Greece, Rome, Cathage etc. It does not refer to late medieval/early modern galleys used by Spain, France, Turkey etc. Those galleys used prisoners or slaves, and is where the notion of rowers chained to oars comes from. The point is that the ancient world didn't practice it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.161.78.193 ( talk) 09:15, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Bobagem ( talk) 02:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
The article describes the persecution of Protestants. I presume this mainly occurred in the Spanish Netherlands (1581-1714). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.73.245 ( talk) 03:01, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
No, it occurred anywhere where there were protestants...which realistically were wherever you could find catholics, Jews, and Moslems. Also, if you're the one who stated that "There weren't enough Protestants in Spain to be persecuted", you must cite where you heard this. Until then this addition to the articles should be deleted. Also, persecution can happen even where small populations are victimized. Unless you can back up that there were absolutely no protestants in Spain, then of course they could still be persecuted. 98.210.88.228 ( talk) 23:09, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I believe the summary paragraphs should reflect the scope of the Inquisition in terms of the number of cases and executions. The summary as now written doesn't give a clue as to whether the victims of the Inquisition totaled one hundred or one million. The summary should also reflect the changing views of the Inquisition. If you're as old as I am, you were taught the "black legend" -- that the Spanish were an unusually cruel and intolerant people and that the Inquisition burned a vast number of victims. To the contrary, as detailed in the main text of this article, more recent studies show that Inquisition victims -- at least in terms of numbers of executions -- were far fewer in number. In fact, it would appear that executions for "witchcraft", i.e. heresy, in the rest of Europe equaled or exceeded per capita the number of executions of the Inquisition in Spain. Smallchief ( talk 11:54, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Seriously, catholic apologists, do you not understand that when you take things as far as you have done you fool nobody? If you're that blatant in your historical revisionism everyone can see the zipper on your costume. Saying things like "oh well torture was only used to extract false confessions so it wasn't so bad" makes it clear to everyone what you're up to. I'm not going to try to convince you to change the article, this is wikipedia so whatever ideological group stakes their claim to the article can basically have their way with it, but if any of you actually want to spread your dumb propaganda you'll have to tone it down. As it stands you couldn't fool a child with your pathetic hang wringing. I just wanted you to know this; I harbor no delusions about the slightest thing being done to improve the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.56.162 ( talk) 16:51, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Dealt with above.
|
---|
It was purported, unjustly, by User:Stalwart111, that the claims made by me do not match the sources which I duly cited. The claim is untrue, as I can prove by translating fully into English the Hebrew sources cited by me. The Hebrew dates are brought down in the anno mundi system of calibrating dates. The information is vital in this article, and ought to be upheld, since it deals specifically with places in Spain and the types of persecution suffered by the people. I can also cite additional references which deal on the same topic. Davidbena ( talk) 06:09, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
|
This is primarily addressed to Davidbena though I might also ping Ryn78 who reverted the first time. Initially, the claims were unsourced which was a problem. Ryn rightly reverted to a previous version and David reinstated the edit with a new source (or series of sources). The problem is that the second edit changed the meaning of the second paragraph which had previously been sourced to a fairly factual account of the number of Jewish people killed. That source was fine for a summary of the number of Jewish people killed. But it does not correlate with (and is not an adequate source for) the claims added by Davidbena.
I wanted to raise this here rather than getting into anything remotely resembling an edit war. We are all experienced editors in good standing and I suspect this is probably an academic matter with an academic solution, rather than anything problematic. Quick fix - David, do you have a source for the latter claim so we can leave the old claim in and add your information? (Rather than replacing one with the other?) Is there any way you could divide the sources for the first part? That's obviously less of an issue, just a matter of formatting, but I thought I would undo the whole lot so we could address it all and then add it back in. Cheers, St★lwart 111 06:02, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
User:Stalwart111, Shalom! In the Hebrew source which I’ve provided, I have diligently copied down the record of events as described by the author ( Gedaliah ibn Yechia) in those troubling times. I call your attention to his work, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, pp. רסז – רסט, in PDF pp. 276–278 (Hebrew). The Hebrew transcription is herein followed by an English translation:
[סוף עמ' 276] בשנת הקכ׳׳ח היו גזרות נגד היהודים בעיר בדרש ובשנ' ה' אלפים קל"ה בעיר בילקרו. בשנת ה' אלפים קכ"ט היה במלכות קסטילייא וליאון מצרפת צרות משונות על היהודים וכל הקללות נתקיימו בהם [ראש עמ' 277] ובפרט בעיר טוליטולה מתו ברעב בשני חדשים יותר מעשרת אלפים נפשות והנשים רחמניות בשלו ילדיהן ומהבהבות הצמח ואוכלים אותה והרבה קהלות נהרגו בקדוש ה'. בשנת ק"נ העלילו על קהל טורה ולגריט וקירואן ובורגש ובמלכות ארוגן ולינצה מיוריקה וברצלונה ורובם המירו וקצתם ברחו וקצתם נהרגו. ...ואומר ס' יוחסין שבשנת קנ"א היה גזירה גדולה בקטלוניאה וקסטילי' וארגן והמירו יותר ממאתים אלף נפשות ונתנו סיבה על ערוב אנשי ישראל עם נוצריות כי הבנים הרגו אבותיהם. וכבר הזכרתי זה.... וראיתי אגרת ארוכה שכ' רבינו חסדאי קרישקוש המספר באורך זעם הזמן מהרבה צרות וגזירות והריגות שהיו בגלילות ספרד בשנת קנ"ב ובפרט הריגת כל זרע הרא"ש ותלמידיהם כי בברחי כל האריכות לא העתקתיה כלו רק בקוצר. ... ר"ח תמוז שנת הקכ"ב, היא שנת אלף שכ"א לחורבן, דרך קשתות האויב על קהלות סיביליאה רבתי עם שהיו בה ו' או ז' אלפים בעלי בתים הציתו אש בשערים והרגו בה עם רב אך רובם המירו ומהם מכרו לישמעאלים מהטף ומהנשים והיו מסילות היהודים יושבים בדד ורבים מתים על קדוש השם ורבים חללו ברית קדש. ומשם יצא אש ותאכל כל ארזי הלבנון העיר הקדושה קהלת קורטובה. גם שם המירו רבים ותהי לחרבה וביום צרה ותוכחה יום שהוכפלו בו הצרות י"ז תמוז חמת ה' נתנה על עיר הקדש אשר משם תצא תורה ודבר ה' והוא טוליטולה ויהרגו במקדש ה' כהן ונביא. שמה קדשו ה' ברבים והם זרע הכשר והנבחר זרע הרא"ש [ראש עמ' 278] זצ"ל הם ובניהם ותלמידיהם גם לשם המירו רבים לא יכלו לעמוד על נפשם על שלש אלה רגזה ארץ מלבד קהילות אחרות סביבותיהם בא מספרם כמו ע׳ עיר ובכל זאת אנחנו פה על משמר והיה לנו יומם ולילה למשמר. ויהי בשביעי לחודש בלע ח׳ ולא חמל בקולות ולינצה כמו אלף בעלי בתים והיה המתים בקדוש ה׳ כמו ר"נ אנשים והנשארים הרה נסו ונמלטו מעטים ורבים המירו משם פשטה הנגע בקהלות מיוריקה העדינה לחוף ימים ישכון ביום ר״ח אלול באו פריצי׳ וחללוה בזזוה שללוה ועזבוה כמצודה שאין בה דגים ומתו בקדוש ה׳ כמו ש׳ נפשות וכמו ת״ת נמלטו במגדל חמלך והגשארים חמירו
Translation of Hebrew text:
“[End of page 276] In the year 5,128 [anno mundi] (= 1367/8 CE) there were decrees against Jews in the city of Paderas (sp.?), and in the year 5,135 [anno mundi] (= 1374/5) in the city of Villagroy (sp.?). In the year 5,129 [anno mundi] (= 1368/9 CE) there was in the kingdom of Castile and León diverse troubles from France against the Jews and all of the curses were fulfilled in them [Beginning of page 277], and, especially, in the city of Ṭulayṭulah (Toledo) more than ten-thousand souls had perished in the famine within two months, while ‘compassionate women cooked their children’ (i.e. an allusion to Lamentations 4:5), and were roasting the sprouting vegetation and eating it, while many congregations were killed in martyrdom. In the year [5],150 [anno mundi] (= 1389/90 CE) they spread a malicious report about the community of Turre and Legorreta (sp.?) and Qairouan and Burgos and in the kingdom of Aragón and Valencia, Majorca and Barcelona, and the majority of them changed their religion, while a few of them fled, and a few of them were killed… Now, the book Yuchasin says that in the year [5],151 [anno mundi] (= 1390/1 CE) there was a harsh decree in Catalonia and Castile and Aragón that caused more than two-hundred thousand [Jewish] souls to change their religion, the reason being, they said, was because of mixed marriages – the men of Israel with Christian lasses, for the sons had killed their fathers. But I have already mentioned this. …. Now I have seen a long letter that was written by our Rabbi Hasdai Crescas who speaks in length about the rage of the time, of many troubles and decrees and killings that were in the provinces of Spain in the year [5],152 [anno mundi] (= 1391/2 CE), and, in particular, the killing of the entire family of Rabbeinu Asher and his disciples, insofar that when I fled, I did not copy down its entire lengthy narrative, [but rather] only a short rendition [of the same]. ….The New Moon of the lunar month Tammuz, 5,122 ( sic) (= 1361/2 CE), it being the one-thousandth and three-hundred and twenty-first year from the [Temple’s] destruction, the enemy made ready their bows against the congregations of Seville, the great city, a people who were numbered therein about six or seven thousand homeowners. They set fire to the gates and killed therein a great multitude of people, but most of them changed their religion, among whom were those who they sold to the Ishmaelites, ranging from small children unto women, whereas the thoroughfares once belonging to the Jews sat solitary (i.e. were then emptied of its quarters), and many there were who died a martyr’s death, while there were many who profaned the holy covenant (i.e. became apostates). From there, fire went forth and devoured all the ‘cedars of Lebanon’ (i.e. the fine and goodly people), even that holy city – the congregation of Córdoba! Also, it was there that many changed their religion and it (i.e. the place) became desolate, which things fell out on a day of trouble and of reproof, a day in which troubles were doubled (i.e. repeated a second time), [even on] the seventeenth day of the lunar month Tammuz, the wrath of God was laid upon the holy city, which heretofore had been a place where the Divine Law and God’s word went forth, it being Ṭulayṭulah ( Toledo), and they killed in God’s sanctuary, both, priest and prophet (i.e. allusion to Lamentations 2:20). There it was that they publicly brought sanctity to God’s name (i.e by choosing death over apostasy), they being a most fitting seed and the elect, even the family of Rabbeinu Asher, [Beginning of page 278], of blessed memory, they and their sons and their disciples. At that place, also, many there were who changed their religion and who could not defend themselves. Over these three things was the land sorely distraught, aside from other communities within their radius, whose numbers came to about seventy towns; and, in spite of it all, we are still here upon our watch, ‘and we had taken up a watch, both, by day and night’ (i.e. an allusion to Nehemiah 4:3). It then came to pass on the seventh day of the [lunar] month that God made a consumption and did not take pity upon the cries of Valencia; approximately one-thousand households, whereas those who died while sanctifying God’s name were about two-hundred and fifty men, while the rest took flight in the mountains and a few escaped, but many there were who changed their religion. From there, this plague spread to the communities of Majorca which was a most delicate [city], [a city] situate on the seashore. On the New Moon of the lunar month Elul, the unruly class came and desecrated it, robbed it, plundered it, leaving it like a net depleted of its fish, and they died a martyr’s death, approximately three-hundred, while about eight-hundred managed to escape in the tower of the king, but all the rest changed their religion…” END of QUOTE
Wherefore, on account of the above testimony, I have written: “All Jews in Spain were affected by the persecution that ravaged the country during those years, especially those communities residing in the kingdom of Aragón, and in València, the isle of Mallorca, Barcelona in the region of Catalonia, in Seville and Córdoba which are both in Andalusia, Burgos and Toledo (called then by Jews after its Arabic name ‘Ṭulayṭulah’) in the region of Castilla, as well as some other seventy towns and villages thereabouts.”
What is most striking about Rabbi Isaac bar Sheshet’s responsa concerning these “Anūsim” of his day was that even during their marriage and divorce procedures they remained with only JEWISH PARTNERS, as we find in his Questions & Responsa (responsa no. 6, 11 and 14), even though in the particular divorce case mentioned by him, the couple’s marriage was terminated by the judicial system set up by the Christians rather than by a rabbinic court.
The one stricture that Rabbi Isaac bar Sheshet deemed fit to impose upon these Jews who were compelled to hide their religion is outlined carefully in responsum # 12 of his Questions & Responsa, and repeated by Rabbi Yosef Karo in his Code of Jewish Law, the “Shūlḥan Arūkh” (Yoreh De’ah 124:9). Based on the following, I will try to suggest a better edit. Feel free to help me here. - Davidbena ( talk) 22:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
User:Stalwart111, Shalom! My suggestion is to merge the following passage with my newer and more detailed edit. Thus, this paragraph will be changed, that is, the one that begins: “Nevertheless, in some parts of Spain towards the end of the 14th century, there was a wave of violent anti-Judaism, encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija. In the pogroms of June 1391 in Seville, hundreds of Jews were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona,” and will now begin in this modified way:
Several responsa bearing on the widespread persecution of Spanish Jewry between the years 1389 and 1392
of our Common Eracan be found in contemporary Jewish sources, such as in the Questions & Responsa of Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet (1326 – 1408).[1] A description of these horrificevents which plagued the Jewish communities of Spain is also written in Gedalia Ibn Yechia’s Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah, (written ca. 1586),[2] as well as in Abraham Zacuto’s Sefer Yuchasin and in Solomon ibn Verga’s Shevat Yehudah, who relate how tens of thousands of Jews during these years were evicted from their homes, while many were killed with cruel deaths, while some managed to flee the country, and still others who chose to convert to Christianity in order to save their lives. Those who could not escape from Spain concealed their true religion, and came to be known as "Anūsim," meaning, "those who are compelled [to hide their religion]."
AllMany Jews in Spain were affected by the persecutionthat ravaged thein that country during those years, especially those communities residing in the kingdom of Aragón, and in Barcelona in the region of Catalonia, and the town of Burgos. In 1362, the Jews of Seville and Córdoba which are both in Andalusia, as well as Toledo (called then by Jews after its Arabic name "Ṭulayṭulah") in the region of Castile,[3] were all affected by anti-Jewish fervor, as well as some seventy other towns and villages in the regions thereabout.[4] The Jewish inhabitants of València and the isle of Majorca werenot spared the plight of their countrymen, neitheralso persecuted, as were some one-hundred and thirty Jews in Barcelona.[5] Persecutions came to a head again in 1390/1, encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija, affecting the Jews in Catalonia, Castille[6] and Aragón,in whichduring which time some 200,000 Jews changed their religion.[7] In the pogroms of June 1391 in Seville, hundreds of Jews were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona.[8] Many Jews living in Seville, Córdoba and in Usún (a place in Navarra), Turre and Burgos, succumbed to pressure and converted, as did the whole of Al-Andalus (Andalucía), besides many other great cities.[9]
References
|
---|
[1] Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet Perfet, in his Responsa, treats mainly on the status of Jews (Anūsim) who were compelled to hide their religion in face of persecution in responsa no’s. 6, 11, 12 and 14 of Questions and Responsa of Ben Sheshet, Vilnius 1879, pp. 13, 15 and 16 in PDF (Hebrew); On Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet’s own forced conversion, see: Isaac ben Sheshet Perfet, Encyclopaedia Judaica (ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik), vol. 10, 2nd ed., Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007, p. 49. [2] Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, pp. רסז – רסח , in PDF pp. 276–278 (Hebrew) [3] Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, p. רסח, in PDF p. 277 (end) (Hebrew) [4] Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah, Jerusalem 1962, p. רסט, in PDF p. 278 (top) (Hebrew) [5] Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah, Jerusalem 1962, p. רסט, in PDF p. 278 (top) (Hebrew) [6] Solomon ibn Verga, Shevat Yehudah, Lvov 1846 (p. 76 in PDF) (Hebrew) [7] Abraham Zacuto, Sefer Yuchasin, Cracow 1580 (p. 266 in PDF) [8] Kamen, Spanish Inquisition, p. 17. Kamen cites approximate numbers for Valencia (250) and Barcelona (400), but no solid data about Córdoba. [9] According to Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, these disturbances were caused by a malicious report spread about the Jews. See: Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, p. רסח, in PDF p. 277 (top) (Hebrew); Solomon ibn Verga, Shevat Yehudah, Lvov 1846 (p. 76 in PDF) (Hebrew). [10] Raymond of Peñafort, Summa, lib. 1 p.33, citing D.45 c.5. [11] Kamen, Spanish Inquisition, p. 10. |
This article heavily cites Henry Kamen's Spanish Inquisition. It also has complained about the used of ibid, op. cit,... for two years. A 4th paperback edition of Kamen has been available for almost a year. It is important that Kamen citations include the edition. Do all of the existing citations to the English version refer to the first edition? 172.249.8.109 ( talk) 19:26, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Is the Art that illustrates the article popular culture? Does it deserve a bit of text? 104.173.68.20 ( talk) 23:19, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
User:Stalwart111, Shalom! As you can see, I have not rushed to submit my revised edit. The reason being is that accuracy is of utmost importance to me, besides also of giving some semblance of order to the events mentioned here, especially as they appear in the historical records of our nation. I have decided against mentioning the date 1361 since, upon further consideration of this subject, the year 1361 is a date brought down in Gedaliah ibn Yechia’s book, Shalsheleth Ha-Kabbalah (2nd edition, printed in Jerusalem in 1962), and where there is an obvious ( sic) in his rendition of accounts given there when specifically referring to that one date, meaning, there was an obvious copyist’s error in its computation. This has been confirmed by referring back to the original source quoted by Gedaliah ibn Yechia, viz. Hasdai Crescas, who writes about events in Spain only with respect to 1390/1, and which date happened to fall 1,321 years after the Second Temple’s destruction (based on the Jewish tradition that the Temple was destroyed by Titus in the year 380 of the Seleucid Era, a date corresponding with 69 CE, rather than with 70 CE) as noted by Gedaliah ibn Yechia.
This, then, is the new draft:
Several responsa bearing on the widespread persecution of Spanish Jewry between the years 1390 and 1391 can be found in contemporary Jewish sources, such as in the Responsa of Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet (1326 – 1408)[1], and in the seminal writing of Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah (written ca. 1586),[2] as also in Abraham Zacuto’s Sefer Yuchasin,[3] in Solomon ibn Verga’s Shevaṭ Yehudah,[4] as well as in a Letter written to the Jews of Avignon by Don Hasdai Crescas in the winter of 1391 concerning the events in Spain in the year 1391.[5]
According to Don Hasdai Crescas, persecution against Jews began in earnest in Seville in 1391, on the 1st day of the lunar month Tammuz (June).[6] From there the violence spread to Córdoba, and by the 17th day of the same lunar month, it had reached Toledo (called then by Jews after its Arabic name "Ṭulayṭulah") in the region of Castile.[7] From there, the violence had spread to Majorca and by the 1st day of the lunar month Elul it had also reached the Jews of Barcelona in Catalonia, where the slain were estimated at two-hundred and fifty. So, too, many Jews who resided in the neighboring provinces of Lérida and Gironda and in the kingdom of València had been affected,[8][9] as were also the Jews of Al-Andalus (Andalucía),[10] whereas many died a martyr’s death, while others converted in order to save themselves.
Encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija, the general unrest affected nearly all of the Jews in Spain, during which time an estimated 200,000 Jews changed their religion or else concealed their religion, becoming known in Hebrew as "Anūsim,"[11] meaning, "those who are compelled [to hide their religion]." Only a handful of the more principal persons of the Jewish community managed to escape, who had found refuge among the vice-roys in the outlying towns and districts.[12]
NOTES
|
---|
[1] Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet Perfet, in his Responsa, treats mainly on the status of Jews (Anūsim) who were compelled to hide their religion in face of persecution in responsa no’s. 6, 11, 12 and 14 of Questions and Responsa of Ben Sheshet, Vilnius 1879, pp. 13, 15 and 16 in PDF (Hebrew); On Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet’s own forced conversion, see: Isaac ben Sheshet Perfet, Encyclopaedia Judaica (ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik), vol. 10, 2nd ed., Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007, p. 49. [2] Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, pp. רסז – רסח , in PDF pp. 276–278 (Hebrew) [3] Abraham Zacuto, Sefer Yuchasin, Cracow 1580 (q.v. Sefer Yuchasin, pp. 265-266 in PDF) [4] Ibn Verga, Salomón (1992). Sheveṭ Yehudah [The Sceptre of Judah] (in Hebrew). B’nei Issachar Institute: Jerusalem.; Solomon ibn Verga, Shevaṭ Yehudah (The Sceptre of Judah), Lvov 1846, p. 76 in PDF) [5] Printed in the book Shevaṭ Yehudah by Solomon ibn Verga (ed. Dr. M. Wiener), Hannover 1855, pp. 128 – 130, or pp. 138 - 140 in PDF, and which history concerns only the year 1391, although the Gregorian date mentioned here is represented in his account by two dates in the Anno Mundi counting, i.e. 5,152 and 5,151, owing to the change of the Hebrew year in the Fall of that same year. [6] Letter of Hasdai Crescas, Shevaṭ Yehudah by Solomon ibn Verga (ed. Dr. M. Wiener), Hannover 1855, pp. 128 – 130, or pp. 138 - 140 in PDF; Mitre Fernández, Emilio (1994). Secretariado de Publicaciones e Intercambio Editorial (ed.). Los judíos de Castilla en tiempo de Enrique III : el pogrom de 1391 [The Castilian Jews at the time of Henry III: the 1391 pogrom] (in Spanish). Valladolid University. ISBN 84-7762-449-6.; Solomon ibn Verga, Shevaṭ Yehudah (The Sceptre of Judah), Lvov 1846, p. 76 in PDF. [7] Letter from Hasdai Crescas to the congregations of Avignon, published as an appendix to Wiener's edition of Shevaṭ Yehudah of Solomon ibn Verga, in which he names the Jewish communities affected by the persecution of 1391. See pages 138 – 140 in PDF (Hebrew). [8] Solomon ibn Verga, Shevaṭ Yehudah (The Sceptre of Judah), Lvov 1846, pp. 41 (end) – 42 in PDF); Kamen, Spanish Inquisition, p. 17. Kamen cites approximate numbers for Valencia (250) and Barcelona (400), but no solid data about Córdoba. [9] Kamen, Spanish Inquisition, p. 17. Kamen cites approximate numbers for Valencia (250) and Barcelona (400), but no solid data about Córdoba. [10] According to Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, these disturbances were caused by a malicious report spread about the Jews. See: Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, p. רסח, in PDF p. 277 (top) (Hebrew); Solomon ibn Verga, Shevat Yehudah, Lvov 1846 (p. 76 in PDF) (Hebrew). [11] Abraham Zacuto, Sefer Yuchasin, Cracow 1580 (q.v. Sefer Yuchasin, p. 266 in PDF) [12] Hasdai Crescas, ibid. |
P.S. - If anyone is interested here, I can provide a full English translation of Hasdai Crescas' letter to the Jewish community of Avignon in 1391. Better still, one can find a full translation of Hasdai Crescas' letter in Fritz Kobler, Letters of the Jews through the Ages, London 1952, pp. 272–75. Davidbena ( talk) 14:55, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I would like to remove the last sentence of paragraph 5, as well as the relevant citation [3] : "Further, the Inquisition was the first to pronounce Europe’s witch hunt a delusion and prohibited anyone from being tried or burnt for witchcraft.[3]" - Doug Beaumont:The Spanish Inquisition: Debunking the Legends. This claim is unverifiable. The citation, [3] Doug Beaumont:The Spanish Inquisition: Debunking the Legends, is from an unreliable self published article on this authors blog, and the author of this blog does not substantiate this specific claim with a specific source. He loosely cites his overall argument from the same handful of authors that this Wikipedia Article already cites, including Kamen, and Peters. I have not found any specific evidence to support this statement, and will remove it. Sbaromski ( talk) 21:12, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
"Thomas Madden describes the world that formed medieval politics: 'The Inquisition was not born out of desire to crush diversity or oppress people; it was rather an attempt to stop unjust executions. Yes, you read that correctly. Heresy was a crime against the state. Roman law in the Code of Justinian made it a capital offense. Rulers, whose authority was believed to come from God, had no patience for heretics.'"
Where is the connection between this quote and the historical account that follows? What about the following text suggests an attempt to stop rather than promote executions, or either continuity or contrast with ancient practices? The quote teases a contrast it does not develop, and frankly seems here—as perhaps it does not in context—like a half-finished, ill-focused defense of what follows: "But Moderns, all the other kings killed heretics!"
I'd propose a simple cut, unless a case can be made for connecting this or a more apt quotation to the historical account. Michael ( talk) 04:28, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
It seems at first glance that this entire article is based primarily on the work of Henry Kamen and his book "The Spanish Inquisition: a Historical Revision". Kamen is mentioned by name 18 times in the body of the article, and cited 43 times throughout. The issue I see is that Kamen is a self proclaimed revisionist, and yet his version is the primary one being presented, often without mention of the orthodoxy he is revising. Major works by scholars who are arguably more widely respected than Kamen are not mentioned nor cited anywhere (such as "The Spanish Inquisition: A History" by Joseph Pérez, to name one glaring omission). It seems odd that Wikipedia would exclusively offer the revisionist history of something, without reference to mainstream academia and the current view on the subject. I hope to change that, but I do not currently have the time for the quick completion of such a large undertaking. However, I will be doing what I can as time allows, perhaps more eyes can take a look and help bring some balance to this article? UnequivocalAmbivalence ( talk) 02:47, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Asqueladd I don't think you should be so aggressive with other editors, even if you disagree with their point of view. Asilah1981 ( talk) 10:04, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Having only the Kamen quote in the lead, when there are death toll numbers from several scholars and when they do not all agree on the death toll numbers, is not scholarly and possibly undue. I changed the lead to reflect the general scholarly consensus which is 3,000 - 5,000 executed and took out the reference for Kamen, which is still found below in the body. The alternative, which would be to list each scholar, Levack, Kamen, Henningsen, Garcia and Dedieu with their toll would be unwieldy in the lead and not very encyclopedic for the article synopsis. I feel it is much preferable to give the consensus number and leave the arguments regarding the number of executions in the body. 2602:304:788B:DF50:8CDD:5461:389A:631B ( talk) 18:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Mel Brooks - History of the World Part 1 64.57.146.12 ( talk) 16:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)chefantwon
I have removed this section [1] (well, reverted the re-addition after it was removed initially) because the section doesn't actually talk about women's role within/related to the Inquisition. It looks completely irrelevant to me, because this article is about the Spanish Inquisition, not Spanish or medieval history in general; it doesn't add anything relevant to the Inquisition specifically. There is scope for a section on the way women, specifically, were treated by/involved with the Inquisition, but this isn't it. Marianna251 TALK 15:19, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Very comprehensive article. But it reads somewhat like a research paper. Some cleanup is in order:
-- MC 141.131.2.3 ( talk) 21:46, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Someone seems to have edited out the fact that hermaphroditism and marriage between individuals with varying gender identifications were accepted by the Inquisition, as well as the example illustrating it, even though both came from reliable sources and were cited. I do not mind the deletion of the example if it is considered too offtopic but the deletion of the entire thing seems more like political discomfort to me. the entire point of the section is that XV century Europe in general, and the Spanish Inquisition were not "like modern conservatives but worse", they literally had a completely different way of seeing the world, so I think that introducing things that were accepted without controversy then and are controversial now is important to avoid a cartoonish view of the middle ages and the modern period that came after them. I also don't agree with mixing " bestiality" or "incest" with civil crimes without clarification. They are not civil crimes if we are honest, the condemnation has a moral component. I am not in favour of legalizing either but that is not the point, the point is that moral regulation through the penal code is something that all societies do, even modern ones. Mixing the "moral prohibitions" that we agree with along with the "prohibition of things objectively harmful to others", and leaving as "moral prohibition" only those we no longer agree gives the wrong idea about the Spanish Inquisition, and the time period (which was until the XIX century by the way) in a lot of ways. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alumno ESL ( talk • contribs) 06:31, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
I have access to some transcripts of the trial and I understand Old Castillian enough to translate them into English for this article or, most likely due to length, for another article of their own. They are not from any famous process and nothing gory I'm afraid, just representative not-too-long trials: one of a midwife for allegedly using pagan remedies, blasphemy, and disrespect of the inquisition. I may find some for bigamy or heresy but I'm not sure, the midwife's case would be the easiest to transcribe for me. The shortest one is over thirteen-pages long already with the unnecessary parts edited out, so I wanted to check if the community is interested and thinks that the effort is worth it before starting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alumno ESL ( talk • contribs) 21:11, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Something should be included about the pop culture reference "Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition" because it is probably what is better known about this event, than the event itself 2001:8003:6A23:2C00:838:B974:E890:20B1 ( talk) 07:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
This article needs pretty much a top to bottom re-write. Firstly, the entire "hypotheses" section is, basically in its entirety, original research. Huge swaths of the article are uncited, and many of the citations given are not in English and no translation is given to support rather controversial claims. The writing style is all over the place, the entire article is written like a persuasive essay and is rife with editorializing, weasel words, and apologetics, and is hardly of a caliber that conforms to our standards here. There are numerous violations of WP:EDITORIAL, including at least four instances of "It is important to note", "It is important to notice", "It should be noted", etc. not even counting sentences like "Most importantly, the moriscos had integrated in the Spanish society way better than the Jews...." Much of what is sourced relies much too heavily on certain relatively fringe sources, and accepts an enormous degree of historical revisionism by individual authors as ironclad facts stated in Wikipedia's voice. Honestly this article, especially given it is an article classed as Vital, needs a nearly complete re-write. UnequivocalAmbivalence ( talk) 09:58, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Saw denialist revisionism in the first paragraph. Is wikipedia the place for anti semites to pretend the Spanish Inquisition was not oppressive? 2601:644:600:3CC7:44A8:48E1:FC77:7381 ( talk) 08:19, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
As others have noted, the tendency of this article to whitewash the activities of the Spanish Inquisition is laugh-out-loud funny - or would be, if the subject matter weren't so serious. It's perfectly legitimate to include the opinions of those who think the Inquisition has been portrayed unduly negatively, but not at the total expense of the standard view, namely that it was an utterly barbaric episode that exemplified the cruelty of the medieval era. The section on torture is particularly bizarre. Not content with attempting to exonerate the Inquisition's widespread use of torture, it essentially argues that it was a sort of contemporary version of Amnesty International, where people would go as an escape from torture. Making that case is, again, entirely legitimate but not at the expense of balance and neutrality. At the moment, the whole thing reads like the work of a fanatic who wants to completely re-write history. Essentially, the section argues that torture was OK. That's simply not how Wikipedia works. The facts should be outlined and judgement left to the reader. I'd have thought that was a given at this stage in Wikipedia's history, but apparently not. Brooklyn Eagle ( talk) 21:18, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
I've removed the following line:
I do not know if it's supported by the next Spanish language source, but it is clearly contradicted by Kamen's The Spanish Inquisition, see page 190 here. Hydromania ( talk) 03:32, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
This is a weirdly political and biased page for something that happened 500 years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:449:8400:242F:E507:AC00:8901:CD20 ( talk) 12:10, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Are there any way of recording casualties accurately and putting casualty information in the infobox ? The SI sounds like a war. Do any sources call the SI a war ? Cmguy777 ( talk) 01:30, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Future of carla. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. -- Tavix ( talk) 21:59, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Spanish Casual Q&A. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. -- Tavix ( talk) 22:01, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
The "nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition" joke is now over 50 years old, first aired on the Monty Python TV show in September 1970, and yet people are still vandalizing the article with this old joke. – Epinoia ( talk) 21:28, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I noticed the map in the section "Witchcraft and Superstition" has an image where the last word of the title is misspelled as "area" instead of "Era". Should this be corrected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by StupidLongHorse ( talk • contribs) 23:03, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
The Spanish Inquisition does NOT feature as a main plotline in Assassins' Creed 2. Ezio only stays in Italy in the game; Florence, Venice, Tuscany, Monteriggioni, Forlì, and Rome for 1 level
It does however feature as the main plotline in the AC2 Nintendo DS and Apple IOS spin-off game Assassins' Creed 2: Discovery, where Ezio travels to Spain around 1492 to help the Spanish Brotherhood.
I just changed the link to redirect to the correct game.
(this was my first edit so if I did something wrong please let me know)
20:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)20:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)20:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)20:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Did Italy exist at the time in question, or was most of it in Aragon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Optymystic ( talk • contribs) 19:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
In Activity of the Inquisition -> Start of the Inquisition it says the following:
"Fray Alonso de Ojeda, a Dominican friar from Seville, convinced Queen Isabella of the existence of Crypto-Judaism among Andalusian conversos during her stay in Seville between 1477 and 1478.[37] A report, produced by Pedro González de Mendoza, Archbishop of Seville, and by the Segovian Dominican Tomás de Torquemada – of converso family himself – corroborated this assertion."
The citation [37] here is a tip defining the term converso. I have been researching the Spanish Inquisition for the last week or so, reading segments of The Spanish Inquisition - A Historical Revision by Henry Kamen [1], and The Origins of the Inquisition by Benzion Netanyahu [2] (specifically book 4, which focused on the Spanish Inquisition). I can see the shadows of the events mentioned above everywhere, but only very vague direct references to them. Does anybody know a source that the quote above could be referring to?
The closest thing I could find to the events described above was in An Overview of the Pre-suppression Society of Jesus in Spain by Patricia W. Manning [3], chapter 5.1. But, the events described here happened some time after the Spanish Inquisition had been founded.
Update - I found this little entry in Britannica's Spanish Inquisition Timeline [4] saying "November 1st, 1478. Pope Sixtus IV issues a papal bull authorizing Ferdinand and Isabella to name inquisitors to address the issue of Marranos, people who had converted from Judaism but practiced their faith in secret. Ferdinand and Isabella spread the Inquisition throughout their domains, allowing for persecution of conversos." I tried to add this citation to the suspicion of people practicing Judaism in secret, but that still leaves the connection to Fray Alonso de Ojeda. I'm new to editing Wikipedia ad I couldn't get the citation to show up. Is that because of the importance level of the article?
Roboticy3 ( talk) 19:06, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
H 2001:56A:72D4:7000:BC1C:8DA4:9080:F55F ( talk) 05:15, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
In the 1998 film "Dangerous Beauty," Veronica Franco is tried NOT before the Spanish Inquisition, but rather the Roman Inquisition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavenexiana ( talk • contribs) 18:36, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Some sections are adequately referenced; others are completely unreferenced. A refimprove banner should be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.35.164.102 ( talk) 18:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Was the Spanish Inquisition really ever expected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.29.61.49 ( talk) 14:40, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
¡¡Never!!
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change "Hennigsen" to "Henningsen".
212.10.158.3 ( talk) 16:47, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Done Thanks,
Celestra (
talk)
18:58, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
the article mentions Dangerous Beauty as involving the Spanish inquisition. I believe that is a mistake. The trial took place in Venice and involved the roman inquisition, or perhaps the Venetian. But certainly not the Spanish. This claim should be excised from the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.52.232.221 ( talk) 13:10, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
One sentence under the Torture section reads as follows:
"The scenes of sadism found in popular writers on the inquisition are not based in truth.[64] Modern scholars have determined that torture was used in only two percent of the cases, for no more than 15 minutes, and in only less than one percent of the cases was it used a second time, never more than that.[54][62]"
First of all, the first sentence's phrase "found in popular writers" is way too vague and sweeping for the sentence to have any clear meaning. How about listing at least some of the popular writers whose scenes are "not based on the truth" ? In addition, the phrase "not based on the truth" could also mean a vast range of different things, from vastly exaggerated the extent of the torture" to "mentioned a couple of insignificant factual errors".
But my biggest problem is that — having no expertise whatsoever in the subject — I simply don't know what to think. References are given for the very limited extent of the torture in the second sentence quoted above. But presumably someone else could have cited the works listed in the bibliography as "revisionist books", with a totally different claim.
Please note that I am not saying anything claimed in the article is inaccurate. I am simply saying that I have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not what is claimed is accurate or not.
And calling six books all published between 1982 and 2006 "revisionist" is certainly something I have no idea how to evaluate. But certainly the *claim* that they are "revisionist" -- yet another terminally vague descriptor -- needs to be supported by convincing evidence. Who said they were revisionist? What are the reputation of the individuals who said this, and what is the reputation of the authors of the books said to be revisionist? (Reputations as indicated by which universities they work at, with what titles, and/or which history awards have they received.)
It is easy for me to imagine that whoever wrote that section of the Wikipedia article, and whoever labeled those six books "revisionist", may be total experts on the subject, and that the article totally accurate historically. It's also easy for me to imagine that, at the opposite extreme, these parts of the article may have been written with a biased POV.
I just don't know how to tell. Daqu ( talk) 17:10, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
I find the first two paragraphs of this section somewhat confusing.
The first paragraph mentions that at the end of the 12th century Pope Lucius issued a bull to combat the Albigensian heresy. A few sentences later, it mentions that in 1232 Pope Gregory IX established a Papal Inquisition during the era of the Albigensian heresy. Could the Inquisitions be placed in the order they happened?
I don't understand the second paragraph that mentions there wasn't an Inquisition in Castille. Since the section is specifically about previous inquisitions I don't understand the importance or significance of mentioning that there wasn't one in Castille. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.117.1.175 ( talk) 22:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
In the introductory parargraph, various reasons for the Inquisition were given, but none that I remember from my Spanish History Class. I'm not an expert, but I wish a scholar would step in and clarify. My understanding is that Ferdinand and Isabella wanted to unite their new kingdom which was filled with people speaking different languages and practicing different religions and with regions accustomed to being their own kingdom with very different cultures. They had recently united Castile and Aragon and then regained the south of Spain from Muslim hands and wished to unite all of Spain under one culture- Catholicism. They feared that leaving false converters in the ranks would only lead to dangerous outside alliances which would threaten their reign. Yes, it was also used just to punish those who might oppose them. And an "us against them" approach to governing was an obvious bid to form an "us" and to claim divine right (or at least papal approval) to their reign. What they told me in Spain was that while the Inquisiton was awful, it essentially made Spain in the sense that it unified and defined the culture of the country and created a strong enough monarchy to keep the country united for centuries. Of course there are still plenty of regions of Spain that would still like to break off and be their own country... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.81.68 ( talk) 19:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Question, asking the reader. Should be rephrased.
"Included in the Indexes, at one point, were many of the great works of Spanish literature. Also, a number of religious writers who are today considered saints by the Catholic Church saw their works appear in the Indexes. At first, this might seem counter-intuitive or even nonsensical—how were these Spanish authors published in the first place if their texts were then prohibited by the Inquisition and placed in the Index? The answer lies in the process of publication and censorship in Early Modern Spain. Books in Early Modern Spain faced prepublication licensing and approval (which could include modification) by both secular and religious authorities. However, once approved and published, the circulating text also faced the possibility of post-hoc censorship by being denounced to the Inquisition—sometimes decades later. Likewise, as Catholic theology evolved, once-prohibited texts might be removed from the Index."
173.168.32.87 (
talk)
16:38, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
On this page:
On the linked-to page, galley:
Perhaps the resolution is that the Spanish Inquisition is not ancient. But perhaps one or the other could be verified and clarified.
The article on galleys refers to ancient Greece, Rome, Cathage etc. It does not refer to late medieval/early modern galleys used by Spain, France, Turkey etc. Those galleys used prisoners or slaves, and is where the notion of rowers chained to oars comes from. The point is that the ancient world didn't practice it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.161.78.193 ( talk) 09:15, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Bobagem ( talk) 02:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
The article describes the persecution of Protestants. I presume this mainly occurred in the Spanish Netherlands (1581-1714). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.73.245 ( talk) 03:01, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
No, it occurred anywhere where there were protestants...which realistically were wherever you could find catholics, Jews, and Moslems. Also, if you're the one who stated that "There weren't enough Protestants in Spain to be persecuted", you must cite where you heard this. Until then this addition to the articles should be deleted. Also, persecution can happen even where small populations are victimized. Unless you can back up that there were absolutely no protestants in Spain, then of course they could still be persecuted. 98.210.88.228 ( talk) 23:09, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I believe the summary paragraphs should reflect the scope of the Inquisition in terms of the number of cases and executions. The summary as now written doesn't give a clue as to whether the victims of the Inquisition totaled one hundred or one million. The summary should also reflect the changing views of the Inquisition. If you're as old as I am, you were taught the "black legend" -- that the Spanish were an unusually cruel and intolerant people and that the Inquisition burned a vast number of victims. To the contrary, as detailed in the main text of this article, more recent studies show that Inquisition victims -- at least in terms of numbers of executions -- were far fewer in number. In fact, it would appear that executions for "witchcraft", i.e. heresy, in the rest of Europe equaled or exceeded per capita the number of executions of the Inquisition in Spain. Smallchief ( talk 11:54, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Seriously, catholic apologists, do you not understand that when you take things as far as you have done you fool nobody? If you're that blatant in your historical revisionism everyone can see the zipper on your costume. Saying things like "oh well torture was only used to extract false confessions so it wasn't so bad" makes it clear to everyone what you're up to. I'm not going to try to convince you to change the article, this is wikipedia so whatever ideological group stakes their claim to the article can basically have their way with it, but if any of you actually want to spread your dumb propaganda you'll have to tone it down. As it stands you couldn't fool a child with your pathetic hang wringing. I just wanted you to know this; I harbor no delusions about the slightest thing being done to improve the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.56.162 ( talk) 16:51, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Dealt with above.
|
---|
It was purported, unjustly, by User:Stalwart111, that the claims made by me do not match the sources which I duly cited. The claim is untrue, as I can prove by translating fully into English the Hebrew sources cited by me. The Hebrew dates are brought down in the anno mundi system of calibrating dates. The information is vital in this article, and ought to be upheld, since it deals specifically with places in Spain and the types of persecution suffered by the people. I can also cite additional references which deal on the same topic. Davidbena ( talk) 06:09, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
|
This is primarily addressed to Davidbena though I might also ping Ryn78 who reverted the first time. Initially, the claims were unsourced which was a problem. Ryn rightly reverted to a previous version and David reinstated the edit with a new source (or series of sources). The problem is that the second edit changed the meaning of the second paragraph which had previously been sourced to a fairly factual account of the number of Jewish people killed. That source was fine for a summary of the number of Jewish people killed. But it does not correlate with (and is not an adequate source for) the claims added by Davidbena.
I wanted to raise this here rather than getting into anything remotely resembling an edit war. We are all experienced editors in good standing and I suspect this is probably an academic matter with an academic solution, rather than anything problematic. Quick fix - David, do you have a source for the latter claim so we can leave the old claim in and add your information? (Rather than replacing one with the other?) Is there any way you could divide the sources for the first part? That's obviously less of an issue, just a matter of formatting, but I thought I would undo the whole lot so we could address it all and then add it back in. Cheers, St★lwart 111 06:02, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
User:Stalwart111, Shalom! In the Hebrew source which I’ve provided, I have diligently copied down the record of events as described by the author ( Gedaliah ibn Yechia) in those troubling times. I call your attention to his work, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, pp. רסז – רסט, in PDF pp. 276–278 (Hebrew). The Hebrew transcription is herein followed by an English translation:
[סוף עמ' 276] בשנת הקכ׳׳ח היו גזרות נגד היהודים בעיר בדרש ובשנ' ה' אלפים קל"ה בעיר בילקרו. בשנת ה' אלפים קכ"ט היה במלכות קסטילייא וליאון מצרפת צרות משונות על היהודים וכל הקללות נתקיימו בהם [ראש עמ' 277] ובפרט בעיר טוליטולה מתו ברעב בשני חדשים יותר מעשרת אלפים נפשות והנשים רחמניות בשלו ילדיהן ומהבהבות הצמח ואוכלים אותה והרבה קהלות נהרגו בקדוש ה'. בשנת ק"נ העלילו על קהל טורה ולגריט וקירואן ובורגש ובמלכות ארוגן ולינצה מיוריקה וברצלונה ורובם המירו וקצתם ברחו וקצתם נהרגו. ...ואומר ס' יוחסין שבשנת קנ"א היה גזירה גדולה בקטלוניאה וקסטילי' וארגן והמירו יותר ממאתים אלף נפשות ונתנו סיבה על ערוב אנשי ישראל עם נוצריות כי הבנים הרגו אבותיהם. וכבר הזכרתי זה.... וראיתי אגרת ארוכה שכ' רבינו חסדאי קרישקוש המספר באורך זעם הזמן מהרבה צרות וגזירות והריגות שהיו בגלילות ספרד בשנת קנ"ב ובפרט הריגת כל זרע הרא"ש ותלמידיהם כי בברחי כל האריכות לא העתקתיה כלו רק בקוצר. ... ר"ח תמוז שנת הקכ"ב, היא שנת אלף שכ"א לחורבן, דרך קשתות האויב על קהלות סיביליאה רבתי עם שהיו בה ו' או ז' אלפים בעלי בתים הציתו אש בשערים והרגו בה עם רב אך רובם המירו ומהם מכרו לישמעאלים מהטף ומהנשים והיו מסילות היהודים יושבים בדד ורבים מתים על קדוש השם ורבים חללו ברית קדש. ומשם יצא אש ותאכל כל ארזי הלבנון העיר הקדושה קהלת קורטובה. גם שם המירו רבים ותהי לחרבה וביום צרה ותוכחה יום שהוכפלו בו הצרות י"ז תמוז חמת ה' נתנה על עיר הקדש אשר משם תצא תורה ודבר ה' והוא טוליטולה ויהרגו במקדש ה' כהן ונביא. שמה קדשו ה' ברבים והם זרע הכשר והנבחר זרע הרא"ש [ראש עמ' 278] זצ"ל הם ובניהם ותלמידיהם גם לשם המירו רבים לא יכלו לעמוד על נפשם על שלש אלה רגזה ארץ מלבד קהילות אחרות סביבותיהם בא מספרם כמו ע׳ עיר ובכל זאת אנחנו פה על משמר והיה לנו יומם ולילה למשמר. ויהי בשביעי לחודש בלע ח׳ ולא חמל בקולות ולינצה כמו אלף בעלי בתים והיה המתים בקדוש ה׳ כמו ר"נ אנשים והנשארים הרה נסו ונמלטו מעטים ורבים המירו משם פשטה הנגע בקהלות מיוריקה העדינה לחוף ימים ישכון ביום ר״ח אלול באו פריצי׳ וחללוה בזזוה שללוה ועזבוה כמצודה שאין בה דגים ומתו בקדוש ה׳ כמו ש׳ נפשות וכמו ת״ת נמלטו במגדל חמלך והגשארים חמירו
Translation of Hebrew text:
“[End of page 276] In the year 5,128 [anno mundi] (= 1367/8 CE) there were decrees against Jews in the city of Paderas (sp.?), and in the year 5,135 [anno mundi] (= 1374/5) in the city of Villagroy (sp.?). In the year 5,129 [anno mundi] (= 1368/9 CE) there was in the kingdom of Castile and León diverse troubles from France against the Jews and all of the curses were fulfilled in them [Beginning of page 277], and, especially, in the city of Ṭulayṭulah (Toledo) more than ten-thousand souls had perished in the famine within two months, while ‘compassionate women cooked their children’ (i.e. an allusion to Lamentations 4:5), and were roasting the sprouting vegetation and eating it, while many congregations were killed in martyrdom. In the year [5],150 [anno mundi] (= 1389/90 CE) they spread a malicious report about the community of Turre and Legorreta (sp.?) and Qairouan and Burgos and in the kingdom of Aragón and Valencia, Majorca and Barcelona, and the majority of them changed their religion, while a few of them fled, and a few of them were killed… Now, the book Yuchasin says that in the year [5],151 [anno mundi] (= 1390/1 CE) there was a harsh decree in Catalonia and Castile and Aragón that caused more than two-hundred thousand [Jewish] souls to change their religion, the reason being, they said, was because of mixed marriages – the men of Israel with Christian lasses, for the sons had killed their fathers. But I have already mentioned this. …. Now I have seen a long letter that was written by our Rabbi Hasdai Crescas who speaks in length about the rage of the time, of many troubles and decrees and killings that were in the provinces of Spain in the year [5],152 [anno mundi] (= 1391/2 CE), and, in particular, the killing of the entire family of Rabbeinu Asher and his disciples, insofar that when I fled, I did not copy down its entire lengthy narrative, [but rather] only a short rendition [of the same]. ….The New Moon of the lunar month Tammuz, 5,122 ( sic) (= 1361/2 CE), it being the one-thousandth and three-hundred and twenty-first year from the [Temple’s] destruction, the enemy made ready their bows against the congregations of Seville, the great city, a people who were numbered therein about six or seven thousand homeowners. They set fire to the gates and killed therein a great multitude of people, but most of them changed their religion, among whom were those who they sold to the Ishmaelites, ranging from small children unto women, whereas the thoroughfares once belonging to the Jews sat solitary (i.e. were then emptied of its quarters), and many there were who died a martyr’s death, while there were many who profaned the holy covenant (i.e. became apostates). From there, fire went forth and devoured all the ‘cedars of Lebanon’ (i.e. the fine and goodly people), even that holy city – the congregation of Córdoba! Also, it was there that many changed their religion and it (i.e. the place) became desolate, which things fell out on a day of trouble and of reproof, a day in which troubles were doubled (i.e. repeated a second time), [even on] the seventeenth day of the lunar month Tammuz, the wrath of God was laid upon the holy city, which heretofore had been a place where the Divine Law and God’s word went forth, it being Ṭulayṭulah ( Toledo), and they killed in God’s sanctuary, both, priest and prophet (i.e. allusion to Lamentations 2:20). There it was that they publicly brought sanctity to God’s name (i.e by choosing death over apostasy), they being a most fitting seed and the elect, even the family of Rabbeinu Asher, [Beginning of page 278], of blessed memory, they and their sons and their disciples. At that place, also, many there were who changed their religion and who could not defend themselves. Over these three things was the land sorely distraught, aside from other communities within their radius, whose numbers came to about seventy towns; and, in spite of it all, we are still here upon our watch, ‘and we had taken up a watch, both, by day and night’ (i.e. an allusion to Nehemiah 4:3). It then came to pass on the seventh day of the [lunar] month that God made a consumption and did not take pity upon the cries of Valencia; approximately one-thousand households, whereas those who died while sanctifying God’s name were about two-hundred and fifty men, while the rest took flight in the mountains and a few escaped, but many there were who changed their religion. From there, this plague spread to the communities of Majorca which was a most delicate [city], [a city] situate on the seashore. On the New Moon of the lunar month Elul, the unruly class came and desecrated it, robbed it, plundered it, leaving it like a net depleted of its fish, and they died a martyr’s death, approximately three-hundred, while about eight-hundred managed to escape in the tower of the king, but all the rest changed their religion…” END of QUOTE
Wherefore, on account of the above testimony, I have written: “All Jews in Spain were affected by the persecution that ravaged the country during those years, especially those communities residing in the kingdom of Aragón, and in València, the isle of Mallorca, Barcelona in the region of Catalonia, in Seville and Córdoba which are both in Andalusia, Burgos and Toledo (called then by Jews after its Arabic name ‘Ṭulayṭulah’) in the region of Castilla, as well as some other seventy towns and villages thereabouts.”
What is most striking about Rabbi Isaac bar Sheshet’s responsa concerning these “Anūsim” of his day was that even during their marriage and divorce procedures they remained with only JEWISH PARTNERS, as we find in his Questions & Responsa (responsa no. 6, 11 and 14), even though in the particular divorce case mentioned by him, the couple’s marriage was terminated by the judicial system set up by the Christians rather than by a rabbinic court.
The one stricture that Rabbi Isaac bar Sheshet deemed fit to impose upon these Jews who were compelled to hide their religion is outlined carefully in responsum # 12 of his Questions & Responsa, and repeated by Rabbi Yosef Karo in his Code of Jewish Law, the “Shūlḥan Arūkh” (Yoreh De’ah 124:9). Based on the following, I will try to suggest a better edit. Feel free to help me here. - Davidbena ( talk) 22:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
User:Stalwart111, Shalom! My suggestion is to merge the following passage with my newer and more detailed edit. Thus, this paragraph will be changed, that is, the one that begins: “Nevertheless, in some parts of Spain towards the end of the 14th century, there was a wave of violent anti-Judaism, encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija. In the pogroms of June 1391 in Seville, hundreds of Jews were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona,” and will now begin in this modified way:
Several responsa bearing on the widespread persecution of Spanish Jewry between the years 1389 and 1392
of our Common Eracan be found in contemporary Jewish sources, such as in the Questions & Responsa of Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet (1326 – 1408).[1] A description of these horrificevents which plagued the Jewish communities of Spain is also written in Gedalia Ibn Yechia’s Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah, (written ca. 1586),[2] as well as in Abraham Zacuto’s Sefer Yuchasin and in Solomon ibn Verga’s Shevat Yehudah, who relate how tens of thousands of Jews during these years were evicted from their homes, while many were killed with cruel deaths, while some managed to flee the country, and still others who chose to convert to Christianity in order to save their lives. Those who could not escape from Spain concealed their true religion, and came to be known as "Anūsim," meaning, "those who are compelled [to hide their religion]."
AllMany Jews in Spain were affected by the persecutionthat ravaged thein that country during those years, especially those communities residing in the kingdom of Aragón, and in Barcelona in the region of Catalonia, and the town of Burgos. In 1362, the Jews of Seville and Córdoba which are both in Andalusia, as well as Toledo (called then by Jews after its Arabic name "Ṭulayṭulah") in the region of Castile,[3] were all affected by anti-Jewish fervor, as well as some seventy other towns and villages in the regions thereabout.[4] The Jewish inhabitants of València and the isle of Majorca werenot spared the plight of their countrymen, neitheralso persecuted, as were some one-hundred and thirty Jews in Barcelona.[5] Persecutions came to a head again in 1390/1, encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija, affecting the Jews in Catalonia, Castille[6] and Aragón,in whichduring which time some 200,000 Jews changed their religion.[7] In the pogroms of June 1391 in Seville, hundreds of Jews were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona.[8] Many Jews living in Seville, Córdoba and in Usún (a place in Navarra), Turre and Burgos, succumbed to pressure and converted, as did the whole of Al-Andalus (Andalucía), besides many other great cities.[9]
References
|
---|
[1] Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet Perfet, in his Responsa, treats mainly on the status of Jews (Anūsim) who were compelled to hide their religion in face of persecution in responsa no’s. 6, 11, 12 and 14 of Questions and Responsa of Ben Sheshet, Vilnius 1879, pp. 13, 15 and 16 in PDF (Hebrew); On Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet’s own forced conversion, see: Isaac ben Sheshet Perfet, Encyclopaedia Judaica (ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik), vol. 10, 2nd ed., Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007, p. 49. [2] Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, pp. רסז – רסח , in PDF pp. 276–278 (Hebrew) [3] Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, p. רסח, in PDF p. 277 (end) (Hebrew) [4] Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah, Jerusalem 1962, p. רסט, in PDF p. 278 (top) (Hebrew) [5] Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah, Jerusalem 1962, p. רסט, in PDF p. 278 (top) (Hebrew) [6] Solomon ibn Verga, Shevat Yehudah, Lvov 1846 (p. 76 in PDF) (Hebrew) [7] Abraham Zacuto, Sefer Yuchasin, Cracow 1580 (p. 266 in PDF) [8] Kamen, Spanish Inquisition, p. 17. Kamen cites approximate numbers for Valencia (250) and Barcelona (400), but no solid data about Córdoba. [9] According to Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, these disturbances were caused by a malicious report spread about the Jews. See: Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, p. רסח, in PDF p. 277 (top) (Hebrew); Solomon ibn Verga, Shevat Yehudah, Lvov 1846 (p. 76 in PDF) (Hebrew). [10] Raymond of Peñafort, Summa, lib. 1 p.33, citing D.45 c.5. [11] Kamen, Spanish Inquisition, p. 10. |
This article heavily cites Henry Kamen's Spanish Inquisition. It also has complained about the used of ibid, op. cit,... for two years. A 4th paperback edition of Kamen has been available for almost a year. It is important that Kamen citations include the edition. Do all of the existing citations to the English version refer to the first edition? 172.249.8.109 ( talk) 19:26, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Is the Art that illustrates the article popular culture? Does it deserve a bit of text? 104.173.68.20 ( talk) 23:19, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
User:Stalwart111, Shalom! As you can see, I have not rushed to submit my revised edit. The reason being is that accuracy is of utmost importance to me, besides also of giving some semblance of order to the events mentioned here, especially as they appear in the historical records of our nation. I have decided against mentioning the date 1361 since, upon further consideration of this subject, the year 1361 is a date brought down in Gedaliah ibn Yechia’s book, Shalsheleth Ha-Kabbalah (2nd edition, printed in Jerusalem in 1962), and where there is an obvious ( sic) in his rendition of accounts given there when specifically referring to that one date, meaning, there was an obvious copyist’s error in its computation. This has been confirmed by referring back to the original source quoted by Gedaliah ibn Yechia, viz. Hasdai Crescas, who writes about events in Spain only with respect to 1390/1, and which date happened to fall 1,321 years after the Second Temple’s destruction (based on the Jewish tradition that the Temple was destroyed by Titus in the year 380 of the Seleucid Era, a date corresponding with 69 CE, rather than with 70 CE) as noted by Gedaliah ibn Yechia.
This, then, is the new draft:
Several responsa bearing on the widespread persecution of Spanish Jewry between the years 1390 and 1391 can be found in contemporary Jewish sources, such as in the Responsa of Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet (1326 – 1408)[1], and in the seminal writing of Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah (written ca. 1586),[2] as also in Abraham Zacuto’s Sefer Yuchasin,[3] in Solomon ibn Verga’s Shevaṭ Yehudah,[4] as well as in a Letter written to the Jews of Avignon by Don Hasdai Crescas in the winter of 1391 concerning the events in Spain in the year 1391.[5]
According to Don Hasdai Crescas, persecution against Jews began in earnest in Seville in 1391, on the 1st day of the lunar month Tammuz (June).[6] From there the violence spread to Córdoba, and by the 17th day of the same lunar month, it had reached Toledo (called then by Jews after its Arabic name "Ṭulayṭulah") in the region of Castile.[7] From there, the violence had spread to Majorca and by the 1st day of the lunar month Elul it had also reached the Jews of Barcelona in Catalonia, where the slain were estimated at two-hundred and fifty. So, too, many Jews who resided in the neighboring provinces of Lérida and Gironda and in the kingdom of València had been affected,[8][9] as were also the Jews of Al-Andalus (Andalucía),[10] whereas many died a martyr’s death, while others converted in order to save themselves.
Encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija, the general unrest affected nearly all of the Jews in Spain, during which time an estimated 200,000 Jews changed their religion or else concealed their religion, becoming known in Hebrew as "Anūsim,"[11] meaning, "those who are compelled [to hide their religion]." Only a handful of the more principal persons of the Jewish community managed to escape, who had found refuge among the vice-roys in the outlying towns and districts.[12]
NOTES
|
---|
[1] Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet Perfet, in his Responsa, treats mainly on the status of Jews (Anūsim) who were compelled to hide their religion in face of persecution in responsa no’s. 6, 11, 12 and 14 of Questions and Responsa of Ben Sheshet, Vilnius 1879, pp. 13, 15 and 16 in PDF (Hebrew); On Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet’s own forced conversion, see: Isaac ben Sheshet Perfet, Encyclopaedia Judaica (ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik), vol. 10, 2nd ed., Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007, p. 49. [2] Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, pp. רסז – רסח , in PDF pp. 276–278 (Hebrew) [3] Abraham Zacuto, Sefer Yuchasin, Cracow 1580 (q.v. Sefer Yuchasin, pp. 265-266 in PDF) [4] Ibn Verga, Salomón (1992). Sheveṭ Yehudah [The Sceptre of Judah] (in Hebrew). B’nei Issachar Institute: Jerusalem.; Solomon ibn Verga, Shevaṭ Yehudah (The Sceptre of Judah), Lvov 1846, p. 76 in PDF) [5] Printed in the book Shevaṭ Yehudah by Solomon ibn Verga (ed. Dr. M. Wiener), Hannover 1855, pp. 128 – 130, or pp. 138 - 140 in PDF, and which history concerns only the year 1391, although the Gregorian date mentioned here is represented in his account by two dates in the Anno Mundi counting, i.e. 5,152 and 5,151, owing to the change of the Hebrew year in the Fall of that same year. [6] Letter of Hasdai Crescas, Shevaṭ Yehudah by Solomon ibn Verga (ed. Dr. M. Wiener), Hannover 1855, pp. 128 – 130, or pp. 138 - 140 in PDF; Mitre Fernández, Emilio (1994). Secretariado de Publicaciones e Intercambio Editorial (ed.). Los judíos de Castilla en tiempo de Enrique III : el pogrom de 1391 [The Castilian Jews at the time of Henry III: the 1391 pogrom] (in Spanish). Valladolid University. ISBN 84-7762-449-6.; Solomon ibn Verga, Shevaṭ Yehudah (The Sceptre of Judah), Lvov 1846, p. 76 in PDF. [7] Letter from Hasdai Crescas to the congregations of Avignon, published as an appendix to Wiener's edition of Shevaṭ Yehudah of Solomon ibn Verga, in which he names the Jewish communities affected by the persecution of 1391. See pages 138 – 140 in PDF (Hebrew). [8] Solomon ibn Verga, Shevaṭ Yehudah (The Sceptre of Judah), Lvov 1846, pp. 41 (end) – 42 in PDF); Kamen, Spanish Inquisition, p. 17. Kamen cites approximate numbers for Valencia (250) and Barcelona (400), but no solid data about Córdoba. [9] Kamen, Spanish Inquisition, p. 17. Kamen cites approximate numbers for Valencia (250) and Barcelona (400), but no solid data about Córdoba. [10] According to Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, these disturbances were caused by a malicious report spread about the Jews. See: Gedaliah Ibn Yechia, Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah Jerusalem 1962, p. רסח, in PDF p. 277 (top) (Hebrew); Solomon ibn Verga, Shevat Yehudah, Lvov 1846 (p. 76 in PDF) (Hebrew). [11] Abraham Zacuto, Sefer Yuchasin, Cracow 1580 (q.v. Sefer Yuchasin, p. 266 in PDF) [12] Hasdai Crescas, ibid. |
P.S. - If anyone is interested here, I can provide a full English translation of Hasdai Crescas' letter to the Jewish community of Avignon in 1391. Better still, one can find a full translation of Hasdai Crescas' letter in Fritz Kobler, Letters of the Jews through the Ages, London 1952, pp. 272–75. Davidbena ( talk) 14:55, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I would like to remove the last sentence of paragraph 5, as well as the relevant citation [3] : "Further, the Inquisition was the first to pronounce Europe’s witch hunt a delusion and prohibited anyone from being tried or burnt for witchcraft.[3]" - Doug Beaumont:The Spanish Inquisition: Debunking the Legends. This claim is unverifiable. The citation, [3] Doug Beaumont:The Spanish Inquisition: Debunking the Legends, is from an unreliable self published article on this authors blog, and the author of this blog does not substantiate this specific claim with a specific source. He loosely cites his overall argument from the same handful of authors that this Wikipedia Article already cites, including Kamen, and Peters. I have not found any specific evidence to support this statement, and will remove it. Sbaromski ( talk) 21:12, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
"Thomas Madden describes the world that formed medieval politics: 'The Inquisition was not born out of desire to crush diversity or oppress people; it was rather an attempt to stop unjust executions. Yes, you read that correctly. Heresy was a crime against the state. Roman law in the Code of Justinian made it a capital offense. Rulers, whose authority was believed to come from God, had no patience for heretics.'"
Where is the connection between this quote and the historical account that follows? What about the following text suggests an attempt to stop rather than promote executions, or either continuity or contrast with ancient practices? The quote teases a contrast it does not develop, and frankly seems here—as perhaps it does not in context—like a half-finished, ill-focused defense of what follows: "But Moderns, all the other kings killed heretics!"
I'd propose a simple cut, unless a case can be made for connecting this or a more apt quotation to the historical account. Michael ( talk) 04:28, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
It seems at first glance that this entire article is based primarily on the work of Henry Kamen and his book "The Spanish Inquisition: a Historical Revision". Kamen is mentioned by name 18 times in the body of the article, and cited 43 times throughout. The issue I see is that Kamen is a self proclaimed revisionist, and yet his version is the primary one being presented, often without mention of the orthodoxy he is revising. Major works by scholars who are arguably more widely respected than Kamen are not mentioned nor cited anywhere (such as "The Spanish Inquisition: A History" by Joseph Pérez, to name one glaring omission). It seems odd that Wikipedia would exclusively offer the revisionist history of something, without reference to mainstream academia and the current view on the subject. I hope to change that, but I do not currently have the time for the quick completion of such a large undertaking. However, I will be doing what I can as time allows, perhaps more eyes can take a look and help bring some balance to this article? UnequivocalAmbivalence ( talk) 02:47, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Asqueladd I don't think you should be so aggressive with other editors, even if you disagree with their point of view. Asilah1981 ( talk) 10:04, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Having only the Kamen quote in the lead, when there are death toll numbers from several scholars and when they do not all agree on the death toll numbers, is not scholarly and possibly undue. I changed the lead to reflect the general scholarly consensus which is 3,000 - 5,000 executed and took out the reference for Kamen, which is still found below in the body. The alternative, which would be to list each scholar, Levack, Kamen, Henningsen, Garcia and Dedieu with their toll would be unwieldy in the lead and not very encyclopedic for the article synopsis. I feel it is much preferable to give the consensus number and leave the arguments regarding the number of executions in the body. 2602:304:788B:DF50:8CDD:5461:389A:631B ( talk) 18:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Mel Brooks - History of the World Part 1 64.57.146.12 ( talk) 16:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)chefantwon
I have removed this section [1] (well, reverted the re-addition after it was removed initially) because the section doesn't actually talk about women's role within/related to the Inquisition. It looks completely irrelevant to me, because this article is about the Spanish Inquisition, not Spanish or medieval history in general; it doesn't add anything relevant to the Inquisition specifically. There is scope for a section on the way women, specifically, were treated by/involved with the Inquisition, but this isn't it. Marianna251 TALK 15:19, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Very comprehensive article. But it reads somewhat like a research paper. Some cleanup is in order:
-- MC 141.131.2.3 ( talk) 21:46, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Someone seems to have edited out the fact that hermaphroditism and marriage between individuals with varying gender identifications were accepted by the Inquisition, as well as the example illustrating it, even though both came from reliable sources and were cited. I do not mind the deletion of the example if it is considered too offtopic but the deletion of the entire thing seems more like political discomfort to me. the entire point of the section is that XV century Europe in general, and the Spanish Inquisition were not "like modern conservatives but worse", they literally had a completely different way of seeing the world, so I think that introducing things that were accepted without controversy then and are controversial now is important to avoid a cartoonish view of the middle ages and the modern period that came after them. I also don't agree with mixing " bestiality" or "incest" with civil crimes without clarification. They are not civil crimes if we are honest, the condemnation has a moral component. I am not in favour of legalizing either but that is not the point, the point is that moral regulation through the penal code is something that all societies do, even modern ones. Mixing the "moral prohibitions" that we agree with along with the "prohibition of things objectively harmful to others", and leaving as "moral prohibition" only those we no longer agree gives the wrong idea about the Spanish Inquisition, and the time period (which was until the XIX century by the way) in a lot of ways. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alumno ESL ( talk • contribs) 06:31, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
I have access to some transcripts of the trial and I understand Old Castillian enough to translate them into English for this article or, most likely due to length, for another article of their own. They are not from any famous process and nothing gory I'm afraid, just representative not-too-long trials: one of a midwife for allegedly using pagan remedies, blasphemy, and disrespect of the inquisition. I may find some for bigamy or heresy but I'm not sure, the midwife's case would be the easiest to transcribe for me. The shortest one is over thirteen-pages long already with the unnecessary parts edited out, so I wanted to check if the community is interested and thinks that the effort is worth it before starting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alumno ESL ( talk • contribs) 21:11, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Something should be included about the pop culture reference "Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition" because it is probably what is better known about this event, than the event itself 2001:8003:6A23:2C00:838:B974:E890:20B1 ( talk) 07:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
This article needs pretty much a top to bottom re-write. Firstly, the entire "hypotheses" section is, basically in its entirety, original research. Huge swaths of the article are uncited, and many of the citations given are not in English and no translation is given to support rather controversial claims. The writing style is all over the place, the entire article is written like a persuasive essay and is rife with editorializing, weasel words, and apologetics, and is hardly of a caliber that conforms to our standards here. There are numerous violations of WP:EDITORIAL, including at least four instances of "It is important to note", "It is important to notice", "It should be noted", etc. not even counting sentences like "Most importantly, the moriscos had integrated in the Spanish society way better than the Jews...." Much of what is sourced relies much too heavily on certain relatively fringe sources, and accepts an enormous degree of historical revisionism by individual authors as ironclad facts stated in Wikipedia's voice. Honestly this article, especially given it is an article classed as Vital, needs a nearly complete re-write. UnequivocalAmbivalence ( talk) 09:58, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Saw denialist revisionism in the first paragraph. Is wikipedia the place for anti semites to pretend the Spanish Inquisition was not oppressive? 2601:644:600:3CC7:44A8:48E1:FC77:7381 ( talk) 08:19, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
As others have noted, the tendency of this article to whitewash the activities of the Spanish Inquisition is laugh-out-loud funny - or would be, if the subject matter weren't so serious. It's perfectly legitimate to include the opinions of those who think the Inquisition has been portrayed unduly negatively, but not at the total expense of the standard view, namely that it was an utterly barbaric episode that exemplified the cruelty of the medieval era. The section on torture is particularly bizarre. Not content with attempting to exonerate the Inquisition's widespread use of torture, it essentially argues that it was a sort of contemporary version of Amnesty International, where people would go as an escape from torture. Making that case is, again, entirely legitimate but not at the expense of balance and neutrality. At the moment, the whole thing reads like the work of a fanatic who wants to completely re-write history. Essentially, the section argues that torture was OK. That's simply not how Wikipedia works. The facts should be outlined and judgement left to the reader. I'd have thought that was a given at this stage in Wikipedia's history, but apparently not. Brooklyn Eagle ( talk) 21:18, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
I've removed the following line:
I do not know if it's supported by the next Spanish language source, but it is clearly contradicted by Kamen's The Spanish Inquisition, see page 190 here. Hydromania ( talk) 03:32, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
This is a weirdly political and biased page for something that happened 500 years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:449:8400:242F:E507:AC00:8901:CD20 ( talk) 12:10, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Are there any way of recording casualties accurately and putting casualty information in the infobox ? The SI sounds like a war. Do any sources call the SI a war ? Cmguy777 ( talk) 01:30, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Future of carla. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. -- Tavix ( talk) 21:59, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Spanish Casual Q&A. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. -- Tavix ( talk) 22:01, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
The "nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition" joke is now over 50 years old, first aired on the Monty Python TV show in September 1970, and yet people are still vandalizing the article with this old joke. – Epinoia ( talk) 21:28, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I noticed the map in the section "Witchcraft and Superstition" has an image where the last word of the title is misspelled as "area" instead of "Era". Should this be corrected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by StupidLongHorse ( talk • contribs) 23:03, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
The Spanish Inquisition does NOT feature as a main plotline in Assassins' Creed 2. Ezio only stays in Italy in the game; Florence, Venice, Tuscany, Monteriggioni, Forlì, and Rome for 1 level
It does however feature as the main plotline in the AC2 Nintendo DS and Apple IOS spin-off game Assassins' Creed 2: Discovery, where Ezio travels to Spain around 1492 to help the Spanish Brotherhood.
I just changed the link to redirect to the correct game.
(this was my first edit so if I did something wrong please let me know)
20:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)20:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)20:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)20:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Did Italy exist at the time in question, or was most of it in Aragon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Optymystic ( talk • contribs) 19:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
In Activity of the Inquisition -> Start of the Inquisition it says the following:
"Fray Alonso de Ojeda, a Dominican friar from Seville, convinced Queen Isabella of the existence of Crypto-Judaism among Andalusian conversos during her stay in Seville between 1477 and 1478.[37] A report, produced by Pedro González de Mendoza, Archbishop of Seville, and by the Segovian Dominican Tomás de Torquemada – of converso family himself – corroborated this assertion."
The citation [37] here is a tip defining the term converso. I have been researching the Spanish Inquisition for the last week or so, reading segments of The Spanish Inquisition - A Historical Revision by Henry Kamen [1], and The Origins of the Inquisition by Benzion Netanyahu [2] (specifically book 4, which focused on the Spanish Inquisition). I can see the shadows of the events mentioned above everywhere, but only very vague direct references to them. Does anybody know a source that the quote above could be referring to?
The closest thing I could find to the events described above was in An Overview of the Pre-suppression Society of Jesus in Spain by Patricia W. Manning [3], chapter 5.1. But, the events described here happened some time after the Spanish Inquisition had been founded.
Update - I found this little entry in Britannica's Spanish Inquisition Timeline [4] saying "November 1st, 1478. Pope Sixtus IV issues a papal bull authorizing Ferdinand and Isabella to name inquisitors to address the issue of Marranos, people who had converted from Judaism but practiced their faith in secret. Ferdinand and Isabella spread the Inquisition throughout their domains, allowing for persecution of conversos." I tried to add this citation to the suspicion of people practicing Judaism in secret, but that still leaves the connection to Fray Alonso de Ojeda. I'm new to editing Wikipedia ad I couldn't get the citation to show up. Is that because of the importance level of the article?
Roboticy3 ( talk) 19:06, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
H 2001:56A:72D4:7000:BC1C:8DA4:9080:F55F ( talk) 05:15, 21 April 2022 (UTC)