What do you think?
Manuel de l'inquisiteur (Les Classiques De L'histoire De France Au Moyen Age, 44)
Qu'etait reellement l'Inquisition? Comment fonctionnait-elle? Et pourquoi? Dans son Manuel de l'Inquisiteur, le dominicain Bernard Gui (1261-1331) fournit toutes les reponses qui permettent de comprendre la realite de cette institution. Document historique d'une importance fondamentale, le Manuel montre que l'Inquisition etait autre que ce qu'en a fait la legende.
368 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1324
About the author
Bernard Guidoni
5 booksPublished also as Bernardo Gui, Bernard Gui, and Bernardus Guidonis.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
Read
May 9, 2022Read for Trinity Term Primary Tutorial: Medieval Heresy
February 28, 2024
Interessant als tijdsdocument maar vrij eentonige lectuur.
February 13, 2014
Wow. Although probably intended as textbook, this prolific inquisitor had a good grasp of the popular heretics of that time, and wrote a novel about them. The depth of questions, and poignantly endless list, seemed to mean, the accused had no chance to turn the tides.
If Gui wanted an interview, you might as well coat yourself in flammable liquid ... you're going up in smoke.
The writing style was part (short) introduction of the heretic type, then the question list. I gathered only the most-skilled inquisitor could use the list with any real effectiveness for finding the truth. The inflexible style reminded me of a poorly-written school textbook. That is, "this is how it was, because I said so."
The author failed to suggest how to score the answers. The directness (for guilt) of the questions lacked any realistic possibilities of interviewee to explain themselves. Also, albeit not required, the motivation of the inquisitor is not clearly established.
Was is it as simple as not recognizing the Pope, to be deemed a heretic? Seems like the typical enforcement officer response of, "sorry, just doing my job" and limitless power of the inquisitor is frightening.
Seems they just went after the big fish, to set an example. Why not set aside a chapter for the peasants, a commoner that participates in small groups to practice religion on a small scale? I am probably losing the definition of "heretic" that the inquisitors were after.
"You're guilty, now confess!" Wait, is that is happening now? ;)
If Gui wanted an interview, you might as well coat yourself in flammable liquid ... you're going up in smoke.
The writing style was part (short) introduction of the heretic type, then the question list. I gathered only the most-skilled inquisitor could use the list with any real effectiveness for finding the truth. The inflexible style reminded me of a poorly-written school textbook. That is, "this is how it was, because I said so."
The author failed to suggest how to score the answers. The directness (for guilt) of the questions lacked any realistic possibilities of interviewee to explain themselves. Also, albeit not required, the motivation of the inquisitor is not clearly established.
Was is it as simple as not recognizing the Pope, to be deemed a heretic? Seems like the typical enforcement officer response of, "sorry, just doing my job" and limitless power of the inquisitor is frightening.
Seems they just went after the big fish, to set an example. Why not set aside a chapter for the peasants, a commoner that participates in small groups to practice religion on a small scale? I am probably losing the definition of "heretic" that the inquisitors were after.
"You're guilty, now confess!" Wait, is that is happening now? ;)
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews