How convenient: when they were burned, they could be full of gratitude to their persecutors! I think Girardus’ high regard for martyrdom may have been a little embellished. “We rejoice to die through torment inflicted on us by evil men if any of us is dying naturally, his neighbour among us kills him in some way, before he gives up the ghost.” Raoul Glaber had said that they were prepared for martyrdom Girardus, according to Landolfo, stressed that they were all keen to end their lives as martyrs: This may be disconcerting, but it is not heretical. These lay people were outperforming the professionals, the monks. They rejected all the ties of this secular world, lived in complete chastity with their wives, abstained from all meats, fasted frequently and read the Bible (both testaments) daily and their elders kept up an unceasing vigil of prayer, one taking over from another, night and day. These laymen had a compelling need for virginity and purity: The group was certainly zealous and extremely ascetic. I shall not therefore assume, as many have done, that Girardus, the spokesman, was being devious and obfuscatory in his answers, because my impression is rather that he was naïve and not highly educated. Reading the account in Landolfo’s history gives me the impression that there was more of a desire to find heresy, on the part of the investigator, than there was a desire to conceal it, on the part of the accused. The Archbishop assumed that such people must be dangerous, although he found it difficult to get any blatantly incorrect answers from Girardus – and Girardus was eager to answer all his questions. “had come into Italy from some unknown part of the world.” Nevertheless he seems to have had access to an interrogation of the group’s spokesman, Girardus, which (or parts of which) he included in his account, – perhaps with considerable embellishments. The chronicler, Landolfo Seniore, may be a poor witness for two reasons: he was writing a long time after the event, and his aim was clearly to glorify Ariberto. The whole affair at Monforte may have had as much to do with the capture of a strategically useful strong-point as with concerns over doctrine. Archbishop Ariberto was particularly ambitious, later even training and commanding his own army, and he was very keen to assert his authority in all parts of his huge province (of 18 dioceses). The senior clergy were all drawn from the noble families of the city and were very successful at increasing the power and the wealth of the Church and of themselves at the same time. The incident must have occurred between 10, as Ariberto was Archbishop from 1018-1045 and the Bishop of Asti who led the expeditions against the castle was in office from 1018-1034.Īt this time Milano, respected as an early centre of Christianity, was a city of wealth and independence, commanding both north-south and east-west trade routes through Lombardy. In this version, Ariberto took the heretics as prisoners to Milano, where many of them were burned, not by the Archbishop, but by the leading citizens. Raoul Glaber seems to have known nothing about their religious practices, because he said they worshipped idols like pagans, and performed disgusting sacrifices with Jews! He ended with stories of demons and devils.Īccording to an Italian chronicler called Landolfo Seniore, who was working in Milano, the Archbishop of Milano, Ariberto, heard about the heresy on a visit to the Bishop of Torino, and had a long interview with one of the Monforte heretics named Girardus. They tried to convert the heretics, but had to burn the most recalcitrant at the stake, because the heretics would rather be martyred than give up their way of worshipping God. According to the chronicler, Raoul Glaber, it occurred at Monforte in the diocese of Asti, and was discovered by the ruler of Torino and his brother, the bishop of Asti. This piece looks briefly at a second case of possibly illuminist heresy in the 11th century.
0 kommentar(er)
