The Lodève Processes
	Translated by David Burr, History Department, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.

This group of processes and sentences from Lodève is small enough to be included in a single document. The people whose confessions are given here were all sentenced on July 3, 1323. The entire process is in the Collection Doat, vol. 28, ff. 8-37. The documents translated here, the interrogations (or what the inquisitors call "the confessions"),are published by Manselli in Spirituali e beghini in Provenza, 309-19 and translated into French by him in Spirituels et béguins du Midi, 290-99.

Bernard Durban

Bernard Durban, blacksmith of Clermont, living at Lodève, who says he belongs to the third order of the Blessed Francis, was arrested in Lodève in the year of our Lord 1320 by the Reverend Father Bishop of Lodève's representatives on suspicion of heresy and Beguin error. He swore on the holy gospels of God that henceforth he would associate with no one who was suspected of heresy, no one who aided such, and no messenger of such, and that he would profess no type of heresy. After this, as we learned in legally valid manner through his confession made in judicial process on the 5th of August in the year of our Lord 1322, having heard that his sister Esclarmonde and many others (seventeen in all), men and women, were to be burned at the stake at Lunel, he went there with someone whom he names to see these heretics and his sister burned. The next day he left with many others who had been there and passed near the place where these heretics had been burned. There were a number of bodies that had not been completely burned, and when he had walked about a quarter of a half-league someone whom he names came with certain others carrying the bones and bodies of the burned. At Bernard's request, this person whom he names gave him some bones and flesh said to have been from Esclarmonde, his condemned sister. He took and kept the flesh and bones, carrying them to his home in Lodève. Then he placed them in a wall of his house and kept them there. Asked why he wanted to have and preserve these bones and this flesh, he said it was because of the love and affection he felt for his sister. Moreover, although he was present at his sister's condemnation and heard her condemned for heresy, because of the noise from those present he could not hear what happened. He heard from some of those present that his sister had asked for her confession to be recited to her and this request had been refused. Because of this he began to wonder whether she had been condemned justly or unjustly, and had begun to suspect the latter. He revealed none of this until after his associates were arrested, nor was he discovered until a certain canon brought him to justice.

Jacqueline Amouroux

Jacqueline Amouroux, wife of Amouroux Loret of Lodève, as is stated in her confession regularly obtained in judicial process, was summoned as one suspected of heresy and beguin error by those who at that time served as the Reverend Father Lord Bishop of Lodève's representatives. Admonished by these representatives, she swore on the holy gospels of God that henceforth she would associate with no one who was suspected of heresy, no one who aided such, and no messenger of such, and that she would profess no type of heresy. After this, on the 26th of July in the year of our Lord 1322, she confessed in judicial process that during that year, around the feast of the Blessed Michael, someone whom she names came to her bringing a sack of bones and told her to take care of it. Again, she said that the same year and day someone whom she names came and gave her part of the breast belonging to a woman burned at Lunel. She took and kept it until a certain Monday when she heard that beguins were being arrested and burned for doing such things, so she threw these things in a pig pen. Shown the sack, she identified it as the one which had contained the bones and acknowledged she had indeed heard it said that they were from the beguins who had been burned. She concealed these things and confessed only after she had been arrested and led to the bishop's representatives. She says she repents.

Manenta

Manenta, wife of Bernard Arnaud, a cobbler of Lodève, as we learned in legally valid manner through her confession made in judicial process, confirmed that she sometimes displayed devotion toward the condemned and burned beguins, considering them saints because of the asperity of the life they led. She also said that she had been given by someone whom she names, and in fact still possesses, a volume which had belonged to her sister-in-law burned at Lunel, but she claimed that she displayed no devotion toward it [several words missing in record] many times that these burned beguins were saints and martyrs, but now she does not believe it, as she claims. She says she repents and is willing to accord herself with the command and correction of the Holy Church of God. She concealed these things and confessed only after she had been summoned and cited.

Bérenger Roque

Bérenger Roque of Clermont in the diocese of Lodève, a parchment-maker, as is stated in his confession regularly obtained in judicial process, knew and often associated with Pierre Bru, a priest, with Jean Durban, Esclarmond Durban, Jean Houlier (alias Essorbon), and many other beguins who were condemned and burned. He was present at some of their executions and, because he saw while they lived that their lives were holy and their actions admirable, at the time of their deaths, he believed they had met a good end and died well. He was at Lunel when the beguins were burned, and as he returned home someone named by him gave him a piece of flesh belonging to one of those who had been burned. He took it due to the devotion in which he then held these heretics, because he himself had experienced their holy lives and behavior. He put this piece of flesh in a pomegranate shell on a table in his house and left it there two or three months. Having been told by others that it could not be corrupted, he inspected it after that time and, seeing that it was rotting, he removed it from his house and threw it into a field when he was on the way to his garden.

Again, he said he had seen in his house someone named by him kiss the heart of a beguin burned at Lunel.

Again, he said that, when he returned from Lunel after the burning, someone named by him showed him, while they were in a hostel at Montpelier, a sack in which there were many bones and body parts of those who had been burned, and they agreed with one another that the beguins had accepted their death and martyrdom well.

Again, he said he was present at the burning of those who had been condemned at Béziers, when two were removed from the fire. He concealed these things and revealed them only after he had been arrested, nor [several words missing] then he acknowledged everything. He says he repents.

Martin d'Antoine

Martin d'Antoine, alias Allègre de Clermont, of the diocese of Lodève, having been in the year of our Lord 1320 arrested at Lodève by representatives of the Reverend Father Lord Bishop of Lodève on suspicion of heresy and beguin error, swore that henceforth he would not receive anyone suspect of heresy, anyone who defended it, or anyone serving as messenger for heretics, and that he would adhere to no type of heresy himself. Later, however, as we learned in legally valid manner through his confession made in judicial process, when he heard that certain beguins, male and female, were to be burned at Lunel, he went with certain others named by him to Lunel. The day after they were burned, when the fires were completely extinguished, some bodies remained almost in their entirety, as he says. His group found Esclarmonde Durban, took her (or her cadaver), and broke it up further so that they could put it in a little sack. Martin himself took the woman's heart or kidney and brought it to Clermont. He kept it there and still has it in his house, as he says. Asked why he took something from this woman rather than the others, he said it was because, having seen and known her, he knew that she had led a good life, and because he had heard that, as she was going to the flames, she asked that what she had said be read to her and they had refused. Thus he believed that she had been unjustly condemned. He said he showed the aforementioned heart or kidney to some people named by him and one of them (whom he named) looked at the heart, crossed himself, kissed it, and asked Martin to give it to him in its entirety or divide it with him, giving him half. Martin refused, as he says. He hid it and denied under oath that he had it until he was arrested, even denying it afterward until someone who had been present revealed the whole thing. He says he repents.

Bernard Malaure

Bernard Malaure, a butcher of Lodève, was arrested in the year of our Lord 1319 at Lodève on suspicion of heresy and beguin error by the vicars of the reverend father lord bishop of Lodève. He replied in dubious and imperfect manner to the many questions he was asked concerning the faith. He acknowledged that he had heard many people say the friars who had been imprisoned and punished because they did not wish to obey the constitution made by the lord pope were saints and martyrs, and he acknowledged that he had sometimes said the same thing to others.

Again, he was at Capestang when three beguins were burned there for the first time. He saw them burned and said he had never seen people die such good deaths.

Again, he said that to act against the rule of the friars minor is to act against the Gospel and gospel faith, and he said he believed that those who impugned the short habit worn by the fraticelli acted against the Gospel and the faith.

At length he swore on God's Holy Gospels before the aforesaid vicars that henceforth he would never receive anyone suspected of heresy, their agents, or those who aided them, and that he would never adhere to any type of heresy, that is, that he would always obey the commands of the church and our orders as well.

Afterward, in the year of the Lord 1322, having been cited and failed to appear, he was considered contumacious and took flight. He finally appeared, as we learned in legally valid manner through his confession made in judicial process, and confessed that a year earlier, having heard that some beguins were to be burned at Lunel, he and another person (whom he names) went there and saw these beguins placed in the fire and burned. Early the next morning he and others decided to go to Montpellier. When they passed the place where the beguins had been burned, in great fear and unknown to the others, he took some flesh of the levada or mezina of those beguins. Asked why he took the flesh, he said it was because he then believed they were unjustly condemned and saints. He remained in this belief up to the time he heard that those who had relics of these beguins had been captured.

Again, he said that while he was at the church of Saint-Antoine at Lodève with Friars François Aribert, Etienne Seret, Jacques de Cestairargues, Jeannet de Clermont, and Jean Baus (all later condemned and burned), he heard from some of them that the pope could not alter the life of the Friars Minor because it was founded on the Gospel and, if he changed it, he would act against the Gospel. He hid all this for a long time and, at the suggestion of someone whom he names, fled and remained a fugitive for some time. Later, however, he came and confessed the aforesaid, saying he repented.

Bérenger Jaoul

Bérenger Jaoul, storekeeper of Lodève, as we learned in legally valid manner through his confession made in judicial process, associated with beguins who were later condemned for heresy, turned over to the secular arm, and burned at Béziers, Lunel, Capestang and Lodève. He heard them assert that like Christ, who underwent persecution by priests, ministers of the law prevailing in their age, they would suffer persecution by ministers of the Roman church. They said they had learned this from the doctrine of Friar Pierre Déjean. These things would occur, as they said, because of their goodness, and because they led a good life. They added that those who ruled the Roman church lived in pomp, luxury, pride and arrogance. They said the Roman church was carnal and sat in the midst of luxury. They also said many other things which he does not remember because he is a layman and not well versed in these matters, as well as because it happened five years earlier. He said he did not adhere to this doctrine, but due to the frequency with which these things were repeated to him he began to have doubts and vacillate. Now, however, he has no doubt at all that the aforesaid doctrine is heretical and perverse.

Again, he heard them speaking and disputing about the power of the supreme pontiff who now rules the church, especially in connection with his reprobation of those who were called "spirituals," because these spiritual friars defended their evangelical vow, saying the rule of Saint Francis vowed by them was evangelical and that the pope could not dispense from it any more than he could dispense from the Gospel. They also said the beguins burned by him were condemned and burned because they held these beliefs and thus they thought and maintained them to be martyrs. He heard these things from people who were burned at Lodève and also, more than twice, at Easter two years ago from someone he names. As he talked with this person on several occasions the latter said those who had been burned were martyrs, but he does not believe this at present, or so he says.

Again, he said that this person and some others whom he names were at Béziers when the beguins were burned there. They were staying in the home of Bernard Bosc. He and several others (whom he names) were present when someone named Hélie arrived that night with a sack of bones from those who had been burned. He gave them to Bérenger and others. He, Bérenger, brought them to Lodève.

Again, he said that when the beguins were burned at Lunel he was there and saw them burned. the next morning he and others whom he names went to the place where they were burned, collected some of their flesh and bones , and carried them away. He, Bérenger, took some from a certain women burned there for heresy and with another person (whom he names) he carried them to Lodève, placing them secretly in his house, so that if they were really saints - as he was led to believe by the beguins - he would be able to locate them. He revealed to someone (whom he names) in Lodève that he had them.

Again, he said he heard many times from a certain person named by him that these beguins who were burned were saints and martyrs, especially a certain person from Lodève named Astruga. He heard that she was Saint Astruga, a martyr.

Again, he said that a certain person called Pierre Arrufat of Narbonne, burned at Carcassonne the preceding year, said to him, Bérenger, that he had taken an entire women from among those burned at Lunel. He had taken her during the night, when they were still not burned up.

He hid all this and did not confess it until his accomplices were taken and even then he did not wish to come and confess until he had been promised some leniency.

Bernard Peirotas

Bernard Peirotas, a priest of Lodève, was summoned and interrogated by both the vicars of the lord bishop of Lodève and the inquisitor as suspected of associating with beguins and sharing their errors and heresies. He denied under oath that he had done anything. At length, a wandering fugitive, he was found in Montpellier and he was brought to the inquisitor in the year of our Lord 1321 at the winter feast of Saint Martin as strongly suspected of the aforesaid errors. Subjected to judicial process, he abjured all heretical belief and complicity with or protection of heretics, especially beguines and those in the third order of Saint Francis who have been condemned of heresy. He abjured all evil, unsound doctrine and promised to pursue all heretics, as well as their supporters and protectors. He promised to capture or aid in the capture of fugitive heretics. He swore and abjured all this in the accepted form.

Then, in the year of our Lord 1322, on the twentieth of July, this same Bernard, arrested on the same strong suspicion by the vicars of the lord bishop of Lodève, as we learned in legally valid manner through his confession made in judicial process, said it had been around a year since a certain person whom he names showed him a human heart which was said to belong to one of the beguins burned at Lunel during the feast of the blessed Luke the Evangelist, in the year of our Lord 1321. He saw this heart in Clermont after the abjuration made by him at Montpellier, since on the feast of St. Martin, the day he abjured, he had been ordered to return to the diocese of Lodève within fifteen days and not leave it again without special permission, which is what he did. And after he had been at Lodève around three weeks, with the permission of the lord bishop's vicar he returned to Montpellier to bring back his clothing. He passed through Clermont going to and from Montpellier, and that is where he saw the heart. He thinks it was when he was on the way to Montepellier rather than when he was returning from it.

He says he wanted to have the heart and venerate it because he heard that these people were condemned unjustly and believed it because their holy life and behavior was known to him and because, as he says, they suffered persecution through the malice of of members of the Friars Minor, Preaching Friars and others, as he then believed. When he asked for part of the aforesaid heart, he believed that these people and others, Friars Minor and beguins, executed at Marseilles, Béziers, Lodève and elsewhere, were unjustly condemned.

He continued in this belief from the time the four brothers were burned at Marseilles right through the time he was captured for the last time at Lodève in the year of our Lord 1322 on the twentieth of July, above all because he saw, as he says, that the Spiritual Friars Minor living at Narbonne and Béziers, among whom were numbered those four burned at Marseilles, were considered good men and had many followers. For that reason he was induced to believe the aforesaid. Asked if, after he was taken the last time, he still held the aforesaid belief, he said no, although after he had been thrown in prison he was sorely tempted to believe it and was uncertain whether he believed that the aforesaid were glorious martyrs unjustly condemned or the reverse. He said as much to the jailer; but he did not persist in this belief about the condemned, or so he says.

Again, he confessed that when he believed they were unjustly condemned he believed that the beliefs for which they were condemned contained truth.

Again, he said he heard from some of the aforesaid condemned that prelates and others promoted to high ecclesiastical positions lived too largely and splendidly, enjoying worldly pleasures excessively, and for that reason the spiritual power they exercised by virtue of their orders no longer had the same efficacy that it once did when they lived in poverty and behaved humbly. The aforesaid Bernard adhered to this view and continued to adhere to it, he says, although after he was arrested he abandoned the view, he says.

Again he said that when the most recent group of beguins was executed at Béziers, that is, in the year of our Lord 1321, on the Sunday of the octave of the Epiphany, Bernard went to Béziers with certain people whom he names to see the execution. He arrived in Béziers on the day after the execution and in the house of Bernard Bosc he found Déodat, his son, as well as Jean Canut, Hélion the son of Hélion the glass-maker, and certain others whom he names. They ate there and then Hélion, along with two others whom he names, brought to the house bones and cadavers of those beguins who had been burned on the preceding Sunday. They gave some of the bones to Bernard, and he saw someone whom he names kiss the bones. He placed them all in a a sack which he carried until the following octave of the Purification of the Blessed Mary, then gave them to someone whom he names. He says he received and carried these bones reverently as if they were relics of holy martyrs.

Again, in the home of Bernard Bosc he saw and recognized the clothing of those beguins who had been burned. Someone whom he names had bought it from the executioner out of devotion and had it carried to Narbonne.

Again, he says that while they were in Béziers they heard that there was to be an execution of some beguins in Agde, so they went there and found themselves in a house of poverty with certain people whom he names, and they spoke of those who had been burned, commending their probity and fidelity. From there he went to Montpellier to see the execution of some beguins which was supposed to occur there, it was said; but the execution did not take place. When he was told he was in danger of being arrested he covertly travelled to Lodève after fifteen days, where he remained in hiding for some days. Later he returned to Montpellier where he remained for around seven months. Then he visited five beguins who were being held in the prison of the lord bishop of Maguelone. He ate with them two or three times, saying that he visited them to console and comfort them. He said he loved them and would have liked to see them released from prison on account of the good lives they lived, or so he says.

Again, he said that during the time when he went to Béziers he passed through Agde and was in the house of poverty with certain beguins whom he names, and from there he went to Pézenas, where he was present at the sentencing and burning of the beguins executed there. Bernard heard, as he says, that one of the condemned called Forneron de Florensac said many injurious things to the lord bishop of Agde, or so it seemed to him. Bernard said that he then believed [Forneron] had been unjustly condemned, as had the others.

Again, he said freely and without being asked that two years had passed since his confession, yet one day while he was at Narbonne he said his diurnal and nocturnal office for the heretics who had been burned. In honor of these heretics he said the common office for many martyrs. He also conducted a special commemoration of these burned heretics. He said it in veneration of these heretics. And he knew someone else whom he names who conducted a similar commemoration. He conducted this commemoration in his diurnal and nocturnal office and outside it after his abjuration, saying he omitted saying it because he was burdened with other prayers.

Again he said that a half year before this confession, that is, after the aforesaid abjuration, he and someone whom he names talked in a certain place in Lodève - he did so of his own volition -concerning the aforesaid condemned beguins. They agreed that they were saved and unjustly condemned.

Again, he said that he had a conversation about these condemned beguins in another place with some women whom he names, and they (Bernard and the women) considered the condemned to be martyrs and saints. He also said that he held this opinion so strongly that he wished all who held the contrary opinion were dead, although on condition that they should be saved.

Again, he said that while he was at Béziers a certain person whom he names showed him a certain small parchment book in which were written all the names of the beguins who had been burned.

Again, while he was at Montpellier he knowingly received in his room and dined with many fugitive beguins who were later condemned.

Again he heard the condemned commended and called holy martyrs by many people whom he names.

Again, he knew that at the time the beguins were executed at Lunel a certain person whom he names sent letters to a certain person at Lodève whom he names containing among other things an exhortation to come and see the soldiers or martyrs fighting the good fight, and other things of that nature.

He hid all this despite his own oath and revealed none of it until he was arrested. He says, however, that he repents of all these things and wants to submit himself to the correction of the holy church as well as the lord inquisitor and his vicars. He begs that the grace of absolution be mercifully given him.

Raymond Durban

Raymond Durban of Clermont in the diocese of Lodève, as we learned in legally valid manner through his confession made in judicial process, was at Lunel with certain other people whom he names in order to see the execution of his sister and others who had been condemned in the same place. The next morning they took the body of his sister, broke it in pieces, and put it in a sack. One of the others whom he names kept the heart. He and others carried the sack to Clermont and Raymond placed what he had of his sister's body in an aperture in his house. He still has it and keeps the flesh and bones in the same place. Asked why he kept the bones and flesh, he said he hoped at the time he received it that at some future time his sister and others of that sect who were condemned and burned would be considered good people, and for that reason he kept the flesh and bones; but he no longer hopes, as he says, that they will ever be considered good, for he sees, as he says, how greatly these good people are persecuted.

He hid all this and did not confess it until he was arrested and taken to Lodève. In fact, even then he at first denied some of it in violation of his own oath. He says he repents.

Bernard Durban, Jacqueline Amouroux, Manenta, Raymond Durban, Berenger Roque, and Berenger Jaoul were all given comparatively light sentences. They were found to have given aid to heretics. All but Raymond Durban and Berenger Roque were sentenced to wear simple crosses front and rear for the rest of their lives and, as was equally standard, to eschew heresy, avoid heretics, and report any they encountered.. Raymond and Berenger were awarded double crosses. The six were also required to complete the pilgrimages which would be detailed for them in the letters of penance they would receive.

Bernard Malaure and Martin d'Antoine were less fortunate. They were sentenced to perpetual imprisonment at a prison to be assigned to them.

Bernard Peirotas was presumably even unluckier. He was judged to be a lapsed heretic. One might expect, then, that he would be turned over to the secular arm for execution. We do not know, however., because the scribe who copied the sentence tells us that the manuscript he was using breaks off at this point, several pages short of completion.

Nevertheless, inquisitorial decisions were regularly based on the advice of a body of experts recruited to review the processes and recommend sentence; and in this case we have their recommendations. They agreed unanimously that since Bernard Peirotas was a lapsed heretic he should be degraded from ecclesiastical office and turned over to the secular authorities. They recommended, however, that if he repented and requested the sacraments they should be administered to him. One assumes their advice was followed, since it was followed in the other cases.

The curious thing here is that, as the experts realized, Bernard Durban also had abjured his heresy earlier and thus he too might have been considered lapsed. The experts explain why he escaped this fate. The earlier abjuration was made without witnesses and was not duly recorded by a notary. Thus, they say, "leaning in the direction of mercy rather than toward the rigor of justice," the original abjuration should be ignored. Where that left Bernard was another matter. Some experts thought he should be sentenced simply as one who has given aid to heretics and given "simple crosses and pilgrimages." Others thought he deserved to be given double crosses., and some argued that he should be considered not merely a protector (fautor) or heretics but a believer (credens) in heresy. The majority voted for simple crosses, though, and that is what he received.

The experts also recommended simple crosses and pilgrimages for Jacqueline Amouroux and Manenta, both of whom they described as fautores. Raymond Durban was assigned a double cross and increased pilgrimages, but without explaining why. Berenger Roque was described as a credens, but a repentent one, so he too was given double crosses and increased pilgrimages.

The experts recommended that Martin d'Antoine and Bernard Malaure be given perpetual imprisonment, precisely the sentence they received. The first was judged a penitent heretic and the second a believing heretic (hereticus credens).

That leaves Berenger Jaoul. The experts note that "each and every one of the consultants considered him a believer and a protector (credenten et fautorem) who should be punished according to the rigor of the law, but because he was promised grace before he came to confess and because he revealed certain hidden things they said that even though he could be condemned to imprisonment he should be sentenced to simple crosses and pilgrimages."

It is important to recognize that these were not irrevocable decisions These sentences include the standard caveat that the inquistor or his successor has the authority to increase or diminish them as they see fit, and they often did see fit. On March 4, 1324, Berenger Jaoul, Manenta and Bernard Durban all appeared on a list of those who were given permission to remove their crosses. [Collection Doat, vol. 28, f. 115v.] In September 1329, Bernard Roque's and Raymond Durban's names appeared on a similar list [Collection Doat, vol. 27, f. 195v].

That leaves only Jacqueline Amouroux, and we know that she too had her cross removed because she too reappears in a later process, but with less happy results. On March 1, 1327 she was sentenced yet again, this time at Carcassonne, for her activities after she had abjured. Here is the confession, translated from Collection Doat, vol. 28, ff. 233v-235v.

Jacqueline Amouroux, alias Loreta, former wife of Amouroux Loret of Lodève, formerly abjured, then was sentenced to wear crosses and perform certain pilgrimages and penances for the beguin heresy or for aiding the beguins. Later, in the course of time she received clemency and was allowed to remove the crosses. As we learned in legally valid manner through her confession made in judicial process in October 1325 and January 1326, before the time the yellow felt crosses and the penances were imposed on her by the inquisitor she heard that Guillaume Serallier of Lodève was in Montpellier taking care of a certain sick man whom she names, and that Guillaume was living in poverty. For the love of God she sent him through that same person [from whom she heard it] a sext of wheat, and on another occasion through another person whom Guillaume sent to her she sent him a basket of fruit, namely figs, raisons and dried pears. Again, even after the crosses and penances were imposed on her and she abjured heretical belief and aiding the beguins, while she was at Anhan in the time of the indulgence she found the aforesaid Guillaume Serrallier there, spoke with him, and gave him some of the sausages she was carrying, as well as three or four sous. for the love of God as she says. She did so knowing that this man, Guillaume Serrallier, had been apprehended and in the court of the lord bishop of Lodève for involvement with the beguins, had been absolved, and possessed, he claimed, a good letter from the inquisitor, and yet was at that time a fugitive and had been absent from Lodève for many years due to his beguin activities and his fear of arrest. Asked if she knew he was a fugitive, or had heard it said that he was, or even thought he might be, she said she neither knew it nor had heard it said nor had even thought it. She did say, however, that her actions had nothing to do with family ties. She wished to confess no more.

She was ill for a long time and could not be heard fully. Even when she was brought in for more testimony she pretended to be ill, not wishing to respond directly to the questions. In fact, she wept.

She was, in addition, shown by the testimony of three witnesses of have committed the following: While her husband was in prison she had him told by a go-between that he should be careful not to admit having given alms to Guillaume Serrallier or consented to their being given, because if he did he would lose whatever he had. When asked about this she paled and denied it, but she finally acknowledged that she had arranged for her husband to be informed that he should tell the truth and should say he had never never seen the alms she gave. At first when she said this she added the words "to Guillaume Serrallier," but later she withdrew them and had these words, "to Guillaume Serrallier," struck out. She wished to confess nothing else.

She was asked many times; lines of defense were suggested to her; a lawyer and counsellor were offered her if she wanted them; the testimony of the witnesses against her was revealed; some explanations and defenses were heard from her; witnesses suggested by her to show her true intentions were heard; the sworn depositions of these witnesses were revealed in her presence; and when she had heard all this she gave up on the whole business and threw herself on the mercy of the lord inquisitor. Nevertheless, she still wished to confess no more.

As a two-time loser with what the inquisitor obviusly considered a bad attitude, Jacquelline might have expected to see the worst happen. In fact it did not. She was not described as lapsed (as two others were that day) or impenitent (as one other was). She was, instead, included among those destined for perpetual imprisonment. That was bad enough to be sure, but what the inquisitor gave the inquisitor could take away. Her drama may well contain still another act.

Oddly enough, the woman who helped her to pass the message to her husband was yet another veteran of the Lodève processes, Manenta. That was one of several offenses for which she was again arrested and imprisoned. We have her second confession, given in 1325, and her sentence, passed on November 11, 1328, after she had died in prison. They are translated from the Collection Doat, vol. 27, ff. 79v-82r and 97r-98r. The Latin text of the second confession is available here.

The confession is as follows:

Manenta Rosa, former wife of Bernard Arnaud Sabatier of Lòdeve, was formerly convicted of heresy or aiding the beguines and sentenced to wear crosses. She abjured, as is established in legally valid manner through her confession made in the year 1325. While she was detained in prison Amourouse Lauret , the wife of Amouroux Lauret, called out her name and when she responded told her that her husband was detained in the same prison. "Can my husband hear your voice?" Amoureuse asked; and when Manenta said he could she said, "Tell my husband he was arrested because of the alms given to Guillaume Serrallier. Tell him he should say he did not give the aforesaid alms, or agree to their being given." Hearing this, Manenta replied, "Willingly," and called to the aforementioned Amoureux as loudly as she could, telling him what his wife had asked her to say. She even had a certain man in another cell call out. The next day when the door of the cell was open she called out to him again. She thought that in doing so she did neither good nor ill, or so she says.

Again, she acknowledged that during the past Easter season, after she had accepted the crosses, she sent two sous to Raimunde Rigaude of Lodève at Montpellier, by means of Berenger Jaoul, who was still alive then (although he is now dead); for Berenger had said that Raimunde was ill. Even before she sent them she knew - for it was commonly known in Lodève - that Raimunde had left Lodève because she was afraid she would be arrested and brought into the bishop's court, as had happened to other beguins.

Again, she said that once before she accepted the crosses she, Raimunde and Berenger were talking, and they spoke of the beguins who had been condemned and burned, saying they were the best people and led the best lives in the world. But the time was, they said, like that of Christ's passion, when all persecuted Christ. Whoever thought seriously about Christ's passion and present events would recognize that the beguins who had been condemned were good people living the life of Christ.

Again, she confessed and acknowledged that after she had begun to wear the crosses and after the death of her husband, Berenger Jaoul once said much the same to her in her home and she replied that she had enough to think about in her children.

Again, on another occasion Berenger spoke to her about those who were burned at Lodève. saying that they bore their death well, neither crying out nor speaking one word, and that it was a beautiful thing to see. She said, however, that although before the time of her abjuration she thought the aforesaid condemned to be good people because of the beautiful lives they lived, from the time she abjured she never thought them to be good people or unjustly condemned. She swore that such was the case. When, after she had abjured, she heard Berenger say these things, she thought that he had spoken badly. Asked why, if she heard Berenger say these things and thought he had spoken badly, she did not accuse him, since she had sworn and promised in her abjuration to reveal such people or aid in their capture, she replied that she did not remember having promised or sworn to do so.

Having done these things, she hid them until she was arrested and put in prison, and even then she denied under oath what she later acknowledged. She says, however, that she repents.

Here is the sentence:

In the name of our Lord, amen. We, Friars Henri de Chamayou and Pierre Brun, by authority of the office of inquisitor given to us and acting in the place of B, the reverend father in Christ and lord bishop of Lodève, have discovered though inquiry made by us in legally valid manner and through her own confession that the defunct Manenta Rosa, former wife of Bernard Sabattier of Lodève, who died in the prison at Carcassonne, was seriously and repeatedly guilty of heresy, having first fallen into that crime and then, after being reconciled to the church and abjuring heresy, having damnably fallen into it yet again. Not fearing to add new crimes to the old or dreading the future divine judgment, but returning to the old heresy like a dog to its vomit, she showed by her action that her conversion was feigned and false and she was impenitent as well as manifestly incorrigible, unworthy of all grace and mercy. Although before her death she said she repented, she nonetheless died having lapsed into the old heresy and error, and thus she died with that relapse unpunished. The nature of the relapse is spelled out here clearly in the vernacular.

Justice demands that such a terrible crime and infamy, because of its frightfulness and enormity, should be punished not only in the living but in the death as well. Thus we, the aforesaid inquisitors, having God before our eyes and the holy gospels of Jesus Christ placed before us so that our judgment should proceed from God and our eyes should see what is just, and having cited before us the heirs of the deceased and those currently in possession of her goods so that they can hear our definitive sentence, sitting as a tribunal on this day and in this place and time assigned by us, having first diligently sought counsel on the matter, we pass this our definitive sentence: We pronounce the aforesaid deceased to have abjured and lapsed back into heresy, and thus, in detestation of such a wicked crime, we order that her bones be exhumed from their place of burial (insofar as they can be separated from those of the faithful) and burned.

Return to "Heresy and Inquisition" page
Return to "Medieval Sources in Translation" page
Return to "David Burr's Home Page"