Derek Hill's Inquisition in the Fourteenth Century is an in-depth examination of inquisition manuals written by two of the leading papal inquisitors of the fourteenth century: Bernard Gui's Tractatus presens de practica inquisitionis heretice pravitatis (An Up-to-Date Treatise on the Practice of Inquisition into Heretical Depravity)(c. 1325) and Nicholas Eymerich's Directorium inquisitorum (Inquisitors' Manual) (c. 1376). After describing the contents of each manual and its historical context (Chapters 1 and 2), Hill treats the major themes in detail, addressing the inquisitors' companions, relations with secular authorities and with other representatives of the Church (Chapter 3), the process of detecting, interrogating, and punishing those suspected of heresy (Chapter 4), the sermones generales (general sermons) offered publicly by inquisitors--what Hill calls "the theatre of inquisition" (Chapter 5), and a summary of the changes in thinking on inquisition and heresy that Hill sees in the half-century separating the two manuals (Chapter 6). The book ends with a brief summary entitled "Conclusions and Consequences," in which Hill evaluates the manuals' significance. There are also two appendices containing Latin texts excerpted from the Directorium alongside their English translations. Appendix A contains Eymerich's recommendations to inquisitors for interrogating suspects, while Appendix B contains the papal bull Super illius specula, issued by John XXII in 1326, that labels as heresy the invocation of demonic power to achieve an effect, an edict that was key to Eymerich's claim to expansive jurisdiction over practitioners of magic.
The Practica and the Directorium are very different works, and Hill explores their similarities and differences in depth. (He occasionally brings in two Italian inquisitors' manuals for comparison purposes, an anonymous De officio inquisitionis, and Zanchino Ugolino's Tractatus super materia hereticorum, both from the first half of the fourteenth century. Neither plays a central role in the book.) One of Hill's key points is that Gui's Practica was written for other inquisitors and intended for practical use, while Eymerich's Directorium, although containing much practical information, was meant to be a comprehensive treatise on the theology of inquisition. Interestingly, Hill has a clear preference for Bernard Gui, calling him "humane" on several occasions and describing him as someone who sought "to get the right result" (see, e.g., 85, 156, 207). By contrast, he notes that Eymerich "did not see the same problem of feeling for the individual that Gui saw" (85).
Among the differences that Hill describes are the two inquisitors' relationships to secular power. Gui, working in Languedoc, had a close working relationship with the French Crown, which was interested in eradicating heresy in its recently-acquired lands of the South. It also benefited monetarily from confiscations of the property of convicted heretics. In Aragon, where Eymerich was based, his ambitious efforts to expand inquisitorial jurisdiction threatened the social order; there were few, if any, traditional heretics such as Cathars or Waldensians, and Eymerich's pursuit of intellectuals, practitioners of magic, relapsed Jewish converts, and even unconverted Jews and Muslims, was not popular with the Aragonese Crown. Furthermore, in Eymerich's time there were few wealthy heretics, so that realizable profit from confiscations was considerably less than in early fourteenth-century Languedoc.
Gui's and Eymerich's relationships to torture were different as well. While both used torture as a technique to obtain information, Gui describes using it more sparingly, appearing to follow canon law dictates that it be used no more than once against a given suspect and only as a last resort. Eymerich's approach was "mechanical and precise" (140); he used torture repeatedly against suspects and its use became more central to the inquisitorial process. Accompanying this shift in attitude towards torture was a change in attitude towards the suspects themselves. Gui saw them as misguided individuals who needed to be returned to the Church, to be brought to perform penance for their own salvation. Eymerich saw those he suspected of heresy as possessed by, or cooperating with, demons. He was pessimistic about penitence, believing that heretics--who were presumably guided by demons--should not be given the chance to repudiate their beliefs. This difference likely informs Eymerich's use of deception and trickery designed to fool suspects into admitting their heresy, a tactic that is absent from the Practica.
Gui, for the most part, deals with suspects accused of traditional heresies such as Waldensianism or Catharism (Hill acknowledges the current debate over the existence of this heresy but chooses to use traditional terminology for purposes of discussing inquisitorial practice). In Eymerich's time, it is controversial intellectuals like Raymond Llull, those advocating radical poverty such as Spiritual Franciscans and Béguins, as well as lapsed Jewish and Muslim converts, who are most often subjected to inquisitorial attention. In the Directorium, Eymerich justifies extending his jurisdiction to practitioners of magic and even to non-Christians, which he does chiefly through accusations of magic. The case against the Jewish magician Astruc de Pieira set a precedent for proceeding against non-Christians, but also alienated King Peter IV, leading to Eymerich's temporary exile from Aragon.
One of the most significant conclusions Hill draws from his reading of the Practica and the Directorium is that over the course of the fourteenth century, the inquisition became an institution. This process of institutionalization, he finds, was a necessary step in the development of the early modern "Inquisition." While earlier historians saw a continuity between the medieval inquisition and its early modern incarnation, this view was challenged in the 1990s by Richard Kieckhefer, who argued convincingly that the medieval "inquisition" was an office that various papal appointees carried out in different locations, rather than one cohesive institution. [1] Hill argues here that while there were signs of institutionalization even in Gui's Practica, Eymerich's Directorium "shows signs of increasing institutionalisation....Unlike Gui, [Eymerich's] concept of inquisition did not need a superior body to set it in motion by defining heresy; it could search out heresy...of its own volition" (216).
Hill enumerates other changes he sees in the Directorium from the inquisitorial practice described in Gui'sPractica. For one thing, Eymerich's focus on magic and sorcery as forms of heresy anticipated--if not contributed to--the early modern witch-hunting phenomenon. Second, Eymerich's systematic approach to torture and rationalization of its routine use also left a mark on post-medieval inquisition and jurisprudence. As Hill observes, Eymerich's approach to inquisition "presupposed a society in which the heterodox thought of any kind was less tolerated, and the inquisition became, potentially at least, a more throughgoing [sic] form of social control" (211), one that followed the outlines of the persecuting society envisioned by R. I. Moore. [2]
Hill's analysis of the two manuals and his view of their import is not without problems. First, the definitional issue must be wrestled with: can we speak of a medieval "inquisition" or only medieval "inquisitors"? Hill resolves this question by using the lower-case "inquisition" as shorthand, and acknowledges that "there was no administratively unified inquisition in Western Europe in the Middle Ages" (2). Nevertheless, repeated use of the term "inquisition" may serve to reify the concept in the mind of the reader more than is warranted.
The extent to which the manuals present a realistic view of how inquisitors actually operated in the fourteenth century may also be questioned. Although he acknowledges that the manuals "are not wholly objective descriptions of how the inquisition worked" (3), Hill believes that they present "the clearest view that we have of how the inquisition actually worked, and of its ideology and thinking...because they treat the whole inquisitorial process in a systematic and linear way" (2). This does not resolve the question of whether they are more prescriptive than descriptive, though, and accordingly conclusions about the institutionalization of the practices described in the manuals may rest on shaky ground.
There are other, less pressing, problems. Hill frequently mentions cases that inquisitors handled without giving us details or background that would have provided useful context. For example, he invokes Raymond Llull frequently when discussing Eymerich's attack on intellectual heresy, and Astruc Pieira when discussing both Jews and sorcery, but nowhere in the book is there a description of their cases. Furthermore, by focusing on the Practica and the Directorium, the geographic scope of the book is limited to Languedoc and Aragon. Hill tries to mitigate this regional focus by bringing in manuals from northern Italy for comparison purposes, but they receive relatively little attention.
There are a few minor errors that could be corrected in future editions. Footnote 34 on page 10 gives an incorrect title for Christine Caldwell Ames' 2005 article in the American Historical Review, and on page 73, "Practica" is misspelled.
Hill has written a thoughtful analysis of important works on medieval inquisitorial theory and practice that makes a significant contribution to our understanding of the repression of heresy in the fourteenth century. His arguments about the increasing institutionalization of inquisition by the late fourteenth century are important for understanding not only the manuals' own time, but inquisition's later versions. This is a rewarding study for any student of medieval or early modern inquisition.
--------
Notes:
1. Richard Kieckhefer, "The Office of Inquisition and Medieval Heresy: The Transition from Personal to Institutional Jurisdiction," Journal of Ecclesiastical History 46 (1995): 36-61.
2. R. I. Moore, The Formation of a Persecuting Society: Authority and Deviance in Western Europe, 950-1250, 2nd ed. (Malden, MA : Blackwell, 2007).