Talk:Spanish Inquisition
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Archive
I've archived the previous talk page as it was becoming unmanageably long. If anyone feels the need to copy back recent discussions, please do so. Hobomojo 05:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Asterisk
What is the meaning of the asterisk in the second sentence? Eli lilly 23:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ask Hobomojo he owns the article. - Jeeny Talk 04:19, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Otranto
I once read that the massacre at Otranto in 1480-1481 was an inspiration for the inquistion. Fvdham 19:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Lead section
The lead section of an article is supposed to be a summary of the article. Someone moved the entire lead section into the body of the article and called it "summary". Brilliant. Now someone can write a proper WP:Lead section by summarizing the article and we can have TWO summaries. -- 71.191.36.194 23:26, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Is this article for real?
This treatment renders the inquisitions as some sort of judicial process, a bureaucracy, and relatively benign with only some torture - but only in interrogation and never as punishment (that's okay then). Quite remarkable. Oh, and by the way, interesting that the authors think burning humans alive at the stake (after first burning their face black - "bearding") does not qualify as "torture as punishment". Historical revisionism in action. -- 62.25.106.209 18:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC) ..Actually those thing appear to be myths spread as religious propaganda, when in reality the church didn't kill people - it was the secular state. http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/madden200406181026.asp
And it has been shown not may very killed at all http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3809983.stm --IceHunter 21:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- I was taught the same thing in a history class at my University. Keep in mind the inquisition couldn't judge people outside the church. But it did have quite a few who made false conversions under duress then when they returned to their previous beliefs got hauled before the inquisition. Not everyone got burned at the stake though, a lot of this has been made out to be much more volatile that it truly was. --Kraftlos (talk) 00:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
If anything this article doesn't go far enough in the direction of demystifying the inquistion. The inquisition in Spain was extremely well-organized and governed by clearly established procedures, all of which could be proven by the meticulous records it had kept. We have tomes and tomes of primary documents on hundreds if not thousands of cases, with the transcript of the interrogations, the method of torture (if applied), and the that authorized it, the witnesses, etc. Far more than what you would expect from, say, a medieval CIVIL court. -Chin, Cheng-chuan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.225.67.160 (talk) 17:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Mamelujo
Look, in a section on historiography, it is not only appropriate, but important, to set out the arguments of previous historians. You continually want to remove them as "discredited". True, there have been revisions, but Lea is still considered fundamental to Inquisition historiography. It is also inappropriate to plagiarize from another writer's work. As for the section on torture, it is hardly "better cited", since it relies on a Catholic periodical, while the section previously relied on neutral historians. The author is also in error on his figures about the percentage of those tortured, confusing the percentage put to the stake (2%) with the percentage who suffered torture. The author also does not cite his sources, thus there is no way to track his assertions any further, where as the cited historians in the previous version are well footnoted. Hobomojo (talk) 23:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the ONLY English anthology on the primary sources of the inquisition disagrees with you. The inquisitorial records are absolutely clear. The only authorized method of torture was by suspension, rack and water, and the application of torutre can only be authorized by a tribunal of inquisitors. This can be backed up by the transcrips of the interrogations and torture sessions themselves. -Chin Cheng-chuan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.225.67.160 (talk) 17:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Dismissing Fox's "book of Martyrs"
Dismissing Fox's "book of Martyrs" without even a look at the historical reference to lieutenant-general M. de Legal is not presenting a true history of the Spanish Inquisition and its affect on Protesants. Also Monty Python had a movie "Yellowbeard" that should be added to the entertainment section of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Talenblackhawk (talk • contribs) 04:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Fox's Book of Martyrs was rightly dismissed by scholarship. Look at when and where it was written. -Chin, Cheng-chuan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.225.67.160 (talk) 17:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)