[MUSIC] Hi, how are you doing? Glad to see you're still with us! If you recall our last video, we introduced the figure of the inquisitor, and discussed how these churchmen became the embodiment of religious persecution from the 13th century onwards. Many inquisitors are known to us through the documents they left behind, and many made for themselves a rather infamous place in history. Some of them you may have heard of, <b>Jacques Fournier</b> who became Pope <b>Benedict XII</b> in 1334, <b>Nicolas Eymerich</b> who was the Inquisitor General of the Crown of Aragon in the second half of the 14th century, or <b>Thomas of Torquemada</b>, Grand Inquisitor of the Holy Office of the Inquisition in the late 15th century, a dark character to which inquisitors owe much of their fame, despite the fact that he did not properly belong to the category of medieval inquisitor we defined in our last lesson. Today, we are going to follow one of these men, who became rather famous himself by the end of the 20th century, thanks to a book and a movie. If you have read <i>The Name of the Rose</i>, Umberto Eco's novel, or have seen the movie (and if you haven't, what are you waiting for?) you surely remember the evil Bernard Gui, the Dominican inquisitor who plays a fundamental role in the torment and execution of two falsely accused monks and an innocent bystander, a girl, who is, of course, accused of being a witch; a hateful fanatic who wields the power of the Church for his own personal vendetta and accepts without scruple absurd confessions obtained through torture. Well, Bernard Gui was a Dominican, all right; he acted as inquisitor for many years, and he was still alive at the beginning of the 14th century, when the story happens. But that's about all of it! The rest of the details are rather fictional, and although they make for a wonderful historical drama, they have also fostered all sorts of prejudices about inquisitors. It is not my intention to defend them here, but, as historians, we are expected to make an effort to understand the actions of the people of the past, no matter how dreadful they may seem to us. It is their reasoning we must look for if we want to really understand their commitments and concerns. And Bernard Gui was certainly committed, and certainly concerned about the enemies and the threats that, according to him and many others, surrounded late medieval Church. He was born around 1261, entered the Dominican Order before turning 20, and was appointed as Inquisitor for the region of Toulouse in 1307, a position he occupied for almost 18 years. During that time he brought to trial more than 600 people, and the 10% of them, (about 40 men and women), were surrendered to secular authorities to be burnt at the stake. He would finally die peacefully in his bed in 1331, at the age of 70 years old. He was the author of several works, but the most important of them was undoubtedly his <i>Practica Inquisitionis Heretice Pravitatis</i> (Conduct of the Inquisition into Heretical Wickedness) one the most renowned manual for inquisitors, for the audience of this work were precisely his colleagues. Written in Latin, the <i>Practica</i> is composed of five books that compile Gui's own experience as Inquisitor. His aim is to gather all the information available about the different heretical groups, so that they can be easily unmasked: Cathars, Waldensians, Beguins, Pseudo-apostles, et cetera, but more interesting for our course and this unit, sorcerers. As we have already discussed, after Pope Alexander IV, clairvoyants and sorcerers were not brought before inquisitorial courts unless they were involved in heretical doctrines and acts. But in the decade of the 1320s, Pope John XXII placed all sorts of sorcerers, without distinction, under the jurisdiction of inquisitors. From then onwards, summoners and worshippers of demons, those who made deals with them, those who modelled wax figures, and those who desecrated the sacraments were all considered, and dealt with, as heretics. Who were these sorcerers Bernard Gui was concerned with? In his manual, he devised a questioning form so that every inquisitor could obtain the truth from these awful sinners, who would try to hide themselves by all means. He says: "the plague and the error of sorcerers, clairvoyants, and summoners of demons take numerous and different shapes in several provinces and regions, closely related to the multiple inventions and false and vain imaginations of such superstitious people, who pay attention to the spirits of error and the doctrines of demons." They had to be questioned about their practices, What did they know? What had they heard? Had they cast spells on children? Had they helped barren women to conceive? What kind of substances had they fed to others: hairs, fingernails? Had they predicted the future? Had they healed people through enchantments? But, for Bernard, the most appalling of all is the desecration of orthodox Christian practices and rituals for magical purposes: rituals performed with the Holy Host or blessed oils, mimicking the sacraments, for example, baptizing wax figures shaped in the image of an actual person, and then piercing them with needles to harm him or her. Bernard Gui was also interested in knowing where these sorcerers had learnt their ways, how much they actually believed, and who had come to them for such services. He warns his colleagues: "you will question thoroughly, bearing in mind the quality and condition of each person, because the questioning cannot be the same for everybody. You will question men in one way and women in another." And here we come to a very interesting point, because at this moment, the early 14th century, sorcery was related to both men and women. In fact, a very specific kind of magical endeavour was only attributed to men: <b>necromancy</b>. And that will be, precisely, the topic we will discuss in our next video, the last mandatory lesson of this unit. Yes, last but not least, we will talk about demons and the less than easy way that medieval men found to summon them to do their bidding. Can't miss that one, can you? [MUSIC]