Page:A history of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, volume 2.djvu/24

 g LANGUEDOC. inquisitors, in 1233, seems not to have been regarded as possess- ing any special significance. It was merely an experiment, from which no great results were anticipated. Frere GuiUem Pelisson, who shared in the labors and perils of the nascent Inquisition, and who enthusiasticaUy chronicled them, evidently does not con- sider it as an innovation worthy of particular attention. It was so natural an evolution from the interaction of the forces and materials of the period, and its future importance was so little suspected, that he passes over its founding as an incident of less moment than the succession to the Priory of Toulouse. ''Frere Pons de Saint Gilles," he says, " was made Prior of Toulouse, who bore himself manfully and effectively for the faith against the heretics, together with Frere Pierre CeUa of Toulouse and Frere Guillem Arnaud of Montpellier, whom the lord pope made inquis- itors against the heretics in the dioceses of Toulouse and Cahors. Also, the Legate Archbishop of Vienne made Frere Arnaud Cata- la, who was then of the Convent of Toulouse, inquisitor against the heretics." Thus colorless is the only contemporary account of the establishment of the Holy Office.* How httle the functions of these new officials, were at first un- derstood is manifested by an occurrence, which is also highly sug- gestive of the tension of public f eeUng. In a quarrel between two citizens, one of them, Bernard Peitevin, caUed the other, Bernard de Solier, a heretic. This was a dangerous reputation to have, and the offended man summoned his antagonist before the consuls. The heretical party, we are told, had obtained the upper hand in Toulouse, and the magistrates were all either sympathizers with or behevers in heresy. Bernard Peitevin was condemned to exile for a term of years, to pay a fine both to the complainant and to the city, and to swear publicly in the town-haU that he had lied, and that de Sober was a good Catholic. The sentence was a trifle vindictive, and Peitevin sought counsel of the Dominicans, who recommended him to appeal to the bishop. Episcopal jurisdiction in such a matter was perhaps doubtful, but Eaymond du Fauga entertained the appeal. A few years later, if any cognizance had been taken of the case it would have been by the Inquisition, but R. I. III. 573).
 * Pelisso Chron. p. 13. Cf. Bern. Guidon. Vit. Gregor. PP. IX. (Muratori S.