A History of the Inquisition of Spain; vol. 4

by Henry Charles Lea

[694] Andres de Burgos, Reportorio de todas las Prematicas, fol. xxxix (Medina del Campo, 1551).

[695] Córtes de los Reinos de Leon y de Castilla, IV, 589.

[696] Nueva Recop., Lib. VIII, Tit. iv.

[697] Bibl. pública de Toledo, Sala V, Est. xi, Tab. 3.

[698] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Lib. 939, fol. 106; Lib. 81, fol. 27.—Archivo hist. nacional, Inq. de Valencia, Leg. 31.

[699] Archivo hist. nacional, Inq. de Valencia, Leg. 299, fol. 80.—Alberghini, Man. Qualificat., cap. xvi.

[700] This was not the case in Italy where, in 1555, the Inquisition assumed jurisdiction over blasphemy. There were occasional conflicts with the secular authorities, especially in the Venetian territories, as when, in 1595, the podestà of Brescia refused to allow a blasphemer to be imprisoned by the inquisitor. The Roman Congregation protested, but the podestà prevailed and punished the offender, probably with greater severity than the Inquisition would have done. There was the same difficulty of distinction between heretical and non-heretical blasphemy. In 1606 the Congregation decided that puttana de Dio was not heretical although outside of Rome it was held to be so.—Decret. S. Cong. S. Officii, p. 29 (MSS. of Bibl. del Reale Archivio di Stato in Roma, Fondo Camerale, Congr. del. S. Officii, Vol. 3).

[701] Cartas de Jesuitas (Mem. hist. español, XV, 191).—Nueva Recop., Lib. I, Tit. i, ley 10.—Autos Acordados, Lib. VIII, Tit. ii, Auto 1.

[702] Archivo de Simancas, Inq., Leg. 552, fol. 13.

[703] Archivo de Alcalá, Hacienda, Leg. 544², Lib. 4.