Page:A history of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, volume 3.djvu/303

THE TEMPLARS. 287 and twenty-nine refused to admit any evil in the Order. Then he assembled them and divided them into the two groups. The re- cusants declared that they adhered to their assertion, and that if they should subsequently confess through fear of torture, prison, or other affliction, they protested that they should not be believed, and that it should not prejudice them, nor does it appear that any constraint was afterwards put upon them. The others were asked whether they had any defence to offer, or whether they were ready for definitive sentence, when they unanimously declared that they had nothing to offer nor wished to hear their sentence, but sub- mitted themselves to the mercy of the Church. What that mercy was we shall see hereafter. All bishops were not as mild as he of Clermont, but in the fragmentary recitals before the commis- sion it is not always easy to distinguish the action of the episco- pal tribunals from that of Frere Guillaume's inquisitors. A few instances will suffice to show how, between the two, testimony was obtained against the Order. Jean de Rompreye, a husband- man, declared that he knew nothing but good of the Order, al- though he had confessed otherwise before the Bishop of Orleans after being thrice tortured. Robert Yigier, a serving brother, like- wise denied the accusations, though he had confessed them before the Bishop of Nevers at Paris, on account of the fierceness of the torture, under which he understood that three of his comrades, Gautier, Henri, and Chanteloup, had died. Bernard de Yado, a priest, had been tortured by fire applied to the soles of the feet to such an extent that a few days afterwards the bones of his heels dropped out, in testimony of which he exhibited the bones. Nine- teen brethren from Perigord had confessed before the Bishop of Perigord through torture and starvation — one of them had been kept for six months on bread and water, without shoes or upper clothing. Guillaume d'Erre, when brought before the Bishop of Saintes, had denied all the charges, but after being put on bread and water and threatened with torture, had confessed to renounc- ing Christ and spitting at the cross — a confession which he now retracts. Thomas de Pamplona, under many tortures inflicted on him at St. Jean d'Angely, had confirmed the confession made by de Molay, and then, upon being put upon bread and water, had confessed before the Bishop of Saintes to spitting at the cross, all of which he now retracts. These instances might be multiplied