>> From the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. ^M00:00:04 [ Silence ] ^M00:00:23 >> Peggy Pearlstein: Good afternoon everyone. I'm Peggy Pearlstein and I'm head of the Hebraic Section here in the African Middle Eastern Division. I want to welcome you to today's program. And I would love to sit here the entire time, but we have a delegation of people from Israel, so I have to be with them for awhile and then I will join you. And I do know that I will be able to see the webcast when it's done. So, I'm going to ask Sharon or senior reference librarian who's planned the entire program along with the Law Library to introduce everyone. Enjoy. >> Sharon: I'm going to introduce Dante Figueroa who's the Senior Legal Information Analyst and the primary staffer for Italian Vatican City and Roman Law to say a few words since they're co-sponsoring with us; Dante. >> Dante Figueroa: Hello everyone. I was told to say a few words and I want to highlight a few words. So, first of all I would like on behalf of Debbie [Inaudible] Library of Congress I would like to express our joy being here today to sponsor this big event. And also I would like to recognize Mr. Robert Newland who has been very instrumental in us participating on this event, this book presentation. Also, to Professor Aron-Beller we would like to thank you for choosing the Library of Congress to present your book. You could have chosen many other venues, so that makes us very proud that you chose this venue. Just a few comments on the book itself; I read it. I enjoyed very much. And a few comments on the formal side. The author, you can see that she understands, reads and dominates Italian, which is a very, it's a very good part for any research, a very good talent to have. And just a good example, in chapter 2 I was counting 159 footnotes, all of which, of which most of them were original. So, that is something that really shows the thorough research that the author undertook and also the narrative I found was very easy to follow for the uninitiated. This is a very specific topic in 40 years at the end of the 16th century and the beginning of the 17th. So, it's very, I was very pleased with the book and highly recommend it. And, on the substance inside, I just want to highlight a few comments that stem from the author, from the book. The first one she makes a point that the origin of the inquisition was to maintain the unity of Baghdad and the Christian world. The second is that the creation of the inquisition, its work was immersed in a conflict between religion, the religious and the secular power. So, it was an overall larger issue there. The third principle or comment that I will make about the substance of the book is the universality of the inquisition. In other words, nobody was free from the arm of the inquisition. That's the point that Professor Aron-Beller really highlights. The fourth point is the idea that somehow in a difficult world the papacy was shown to have a more lenient hand toward its subjects, one of them being the Jewish people in the Italian [Inaudible] back then. Between you and me the point is that in-- back then at the end of the 16th century beginning of the 17th century the procedures for what we call today due process were kind of different than today. Maybe we can say [Inaudible] and these processes were in a way, I know this is something very hard to, to understand or accept in a way the procedures before the inquisition were a little bit more humane than the procedures before the secular justice. Professor Aron-Beller is the expert. She is going to expand more on the topic. So, just to finish, I would like to reiterate our pleasure for the Law Library sponsoring this event and also to say that Meagan will be Tweeting. So, it's a new, in the social medial world. It's a new technique that we use and we're going to follow up this presentation with a blog and we expect to add more titles to-- for the research. Without further ado we would like to welcome, congratulate Professor Aron-Beller and expect for the next book. Thank you. >> Sharon: Thank you, thank you Dante. On behalf of the Hebraic Section in the Law Library, welcome to the African and Middle Eastern Reading Room. Our speaker today is Professor Katherine Aron-Beller. We are fortunate that the 58th Annual Meeting of the Renaissance Society of America, taking place in Washington this week has brought Dr. Aron-Beller to this continent. She is participating in a panel tomorrow where she will present a paper on, "Jews as Outsiders in the Small Towns of 17th Century Modena." Professor Aron-Beller received her PhD in Jewish History from the University of Haifa. She is currently a lecturer in the Graduate Division of the Rothberg International School of Hebrew University in Jerusalem and a lecturer at the International School in Tel Aviv University. She is also an adjunct professor at Grads College in Philadelphia where she teaches several online courses and in 2008 she was a visiting professor at George Washington University. Professor Aron-Beller is the author of many articles and has presented her work at numerous conferences and workshops. Her new book is entitled, "Jews on Trial" and copies of the book will be available for sale in the back after the lecture. I want to especially thank the Law Library to agreeing to co-sponsor such good partners. Before I turn the podium over to Dr. Aron-Beller, let me mention that this event is being videotaped for subsequent broadcasts on the library's webcast and other media. There will be a formal question and answer period after the lecture in which the audience is encouraged to ask questions and offer comments. But, please be advised that your voice and image may be recorded and later broadcast as part of this event. By participating in the question and answer period you are consenting to the library's possible reproduction and transmission of your remarks. And now, please join me in welcoming Professor Katherine Aron-Beller. ^M00:07:23 [ Applause ] ^M00:07:29 >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: Thank you to everybody's whose come to join us today. Thank you to Sharon for inviting me and also the Law Library. It's a great honor for me to be here today with you. My recent book, "Jews on Trial: The Papal Inquisition in Modena from 1598 to 1638" is my first book and a combination of ten years of research on the trials of professing Jews in the archivio di stato of Modena in Italy. I will admit at this stage that I have always been fascinated by the inquisition, rather the Spanish than the papal. But with a background of French and Latin from a school in London it was definitely easier for me to learn Italian than it was to try Spanish. But, also I was intrigued by the idea of an organization that prosecuted its spiritual offenses as opposed to criminal one. I was particularly interested in what constituted a spiritual offense and how an offender was to be punished. But even more so, I think, what happens when an offender is of a different religion to that of the prosecuting body. How was it ladies and gentleman, that practicing Jews could be brought before a Catholic judicial court and be sentenced? What were the crimes that they committed and was the inquisition licitly able to judge them? Surely Jews were infidels rather than heretics and it is questionable how they could be legally tried. There was another side to my interest. In the early 1990's when I started my doctorate at the University of Haifa in Israel, inquisitorial historians began to be interested in a micro historical approach to the analysis of trial records, a desire to uncover the mentalities of obscure and unknown individuals who could be connected with as a result of decoding their testimonies in their trial transcripts. So, for example, you have the excellent works of Carlo Ginsberg, "The Cheese and the Worms" and Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurieoy. I was fascinated by the opportunity to access the unknown voices of early modern Italian Jews, who without these trials would not have had any identity. They could become known through their testimony, which was meticulously recorded in the courtroom during an interrogation by a notary. I found that in a small city called Modena, northwest of Bologna by about 40 kilometers the archivio de stato, the state archives housed a complete inquisitorial archive, a Unicom patched the most extant register of any papal inquisition due to the sheer extent and organic unity of its records and trials, account books, collection of edicts and correspondence with Rome, actually more of a full inquisitorial archive than Rome, than Venice and as such an extent it was a very important place I think for me to go to. Remember that in the early modern, in early modern Europe Italy like other European countries was divided up into different states and here and in the Duchy of Modena, a Duchy of about 4672 kilometers with 275,000 residents, 750 of whom were Jews. They were apparently more trials here against practicing Jews, professing Jews and not Conversos than in any other city or state archive in Italy. So, off I went in 1995, heavily pregnant with my second child in the heat of July to the archives, situated fascinatingly enough in exactly the rooms where the inquisition was located. So, there I was sitting in the archives in the rooms where the inquisitor had conducted his trials, looking at these trials and where air conditioning, where those of you who have been to Italy will know was and still is something of the future. [Laughter] What I found then was a treasure trove for the Jewish historian. There are at least 393 trial proceedings against professing Jews between 1598 and 1670. This is the largest number of inquisitorial trials of Jews in Italy so far registered in any of the archives. Let me at this point give you a little bit of historical background. For those of you who are not so acquainted with the papal inquisition. Let us remember that it was the Spanish inquisition created in 1482 with a mandate to deal with Converso problem, which its monarchy had created. Let me explain more. From about 1391 Spain had begun to forcibly convert its Jews in the belief that it would bring about a cleansing of Catholic society. But by forcible conversions what it did was create for itself a whole spectrum of secret Jews some of whom carried on practicing their own Jewish rituals in secret. Eventually the monarch and the church realized that they had no way of determining who out of the converted Jews or their conversant children were genuine Christians and were still secretly practicing Jews. It was simpler then at that point to have a church court come to decide individual cases and so the inquisition was called to Spain and that's something that people don't think about, that originally it's a call to the papacy to say, "Please can you send us an inquisitor that will come from the papacy and be set up in Spain and create the inquisitorial court?" As we know then, there is a huge exit of Spanish Jews in 1492. It was supposed to make this process easier and, of course, more difficult for the remaining Conversos who stay in Spain and have much less ability to maintain their Jewish faith. But these Jews because they had been baptized and were defined as heretics by the inquisition deviant Christians who could be officially prosecuted by this church court and then in Portugal as we know, a similar situation occurred only slightly later. The inquisition was established there in 1537 after the Jews had been expelled in 1497. It is the Iberian inquisition that has pride of place and is seen as the most important inquisition in Jewish history. When we think of the Spanish inquisition we have associations of horror, of terror, of fear and the auto-da-fe, the act of faith where a large number of heretics, witches or Conversos were burnt at the stake. But things are slightly different when we look at Italy. So, what I want to do for the rest of my session today is to approach my talk in the following way: I'm going to begin by explaining a little bit about the papal inquisition in Italy, how it came to prosecute practicing Jews and what sort of offenses Jews were accused of and why. I will take you through a typical trial against and Jew and what sort of punishments he or she faced, using the inquisition in Modena as my case study. I will then show you how we can use these trials as historical documents that can provide us with a fascinating window into Italian Jewish life in an early modern community. I have chosen today to introduce you to Miriana Sanguineti, a wealthy Jewish woman who flirted with a Christian and got her father into trouble with the inquisition as a result. I will show you how this particular trial allows us to witness her world and how she behaved and how her father was able to discipline her for her actions. Okay, let us turn first to the papal inquisition in Italy. How did it come to prosecute professing Jews, practicing Jews, Jews who were openly living in Italy at this time? And what I see as a revolution removed in the late 16th century the counter reformation papacy created an inquisitorial system with the intention of getting rid of Protestantism in Catholic states. This inquisition in the late 16th century was bestowed by Pope Gregory the thirteenth in 1581 with direct authority to prosecute Jews. Not only was the inquisitorial court able to prosecute Jews for certain offenses, but it had the right to bring about corporal punishments or even harsher punishments of Jews. This occurred about 30 years after a papal bull of 1555, which had tried to insure that Jews, particularly in the Italian states were enclosed in ghettos and enforcing at the same time rigorous restrictive cannons such as Jews only being allowed one synagogue where they lived and only allowed to practice the professions of money lending and the selling of second hand clothing. The bull of 1581 Antiqua Judaeorum improbitas stated that the deity of the papal inquisition was not only the repression of Heresy but the supervision of Jews. The inquisition according to this bull was authorized to judge Jews for 10 offenses including offenses against common beliefs shared by Christians and Jews and I will explain to you now what these offenses were. They were in order as they appear in the bull denying belief in one God, sacrificing to demons, causing Christians to dabble in diabolism, devil worship, blaspheming Christ, particularly in public, prostitizing Christians or neophytes, that is trying to encourage them to bring them back into the Jewish religion, dissuading or abusing potential converts from baptism, sheltering heretics, possessing blasphemous books, mocking Christians, Christ or the cross and finally housing Christian witnesses or servants in their homes. Practicing Jews supposedly committed these offenses in their daily contact with the Christian community. And after 1581 provisions of this papal bull was reiterated in nearly every inquisitorial manual or textbook dealing with Jews. Jews were also enforced to publicize in their synagogues inquisitorial edicts that clarified these rules and regulations. But it was not so simple for the inquisition to put these policies into action. Jews to begin with as I was saying to you before were not heretics; they were infidels. They were also not subject to the same spiritual and penitential sanctions as Christians and they were often protected by the secular leader who obviously wanted them there in the first place, who was obviously also responsible for their presence in a particular Italian state. And if we look at the punishments against Jews for these trials and Modena we can know that these varied from fines to light prison sentences depending mainly on whether the Jew was able to pay the fine. On conviction Jewish suspects were usually fined a simple procedure, which did not involve the secular arm. The inquisition could in effect keep this quiet and use the Jewish money to establish them further in the local areas. Other sentences included a whipping in the piazza or public shaming, which meant being paraded in a public place wearing a placard for all to see, which imperiled Jewish safety. Furthermore, as I have seen the punishments meted out by the Modenaese inquisition against Jews were not consistent. They were arbitrary. It seems that no attempt was made to create a single standard of punishment as we would understand it until around the end of the 17th century. Each case was considered separately and this gave the inquisition the flexibility to adjust its disciplinary tactics in individual cases. Also important to realize is the fact that approximately 64 percent of the trials were discontinued or the suspects acquitted. And this high rate indicates that there was a strong chance that the Jewish suspect would be freed without punishment, because on many occasions the Jews guilt could not be proved. Okay, in terms of procedure there was very little difference between the trial of a practicing Jew and that of a Christian. In both cases standard rules of inquisitorial procedure were implemented and usually followed to the rule, which suggests that the inquisitions conscious mitigation, its objectivity and fairness towards Jews and its types of punishment were far milder than secular courts at this time. For example, Maria Boes in his study of Jews in the criminal system of justice, sorry the criminal justice system in Frankfurt am Main from 1562 to 1696 has highlighted the different forms of capital punishment Jewish criminals were given. Sometimes they were hung upside down by their feet or drowned, both of which were forms of capital punishment rarely used on Christians. So, what I'm trying to show you is that when we look at the inquisition in Modena we need to appreciate how similar the procedure is in a trial against a Jew with that of a Christian. Yet, returning to the papal inquisition there were differences as to how Jews were treated and I'm now going to take you through a typical trial against a Jew in Modena. By the way, just a quick word about what these trials look like. When you see-- every trial has its own sort of pamphlet and usually the questions of the inquisitors were always written in Latin, which sort of -- and the handwriting anyway is difficult to read. It's sort of a process of deciphering. It took me two years to be able to read these trials and I think I can honestly say I ruined my eyesight as a result. And the answers of the witnesses or the suspects were always recorded in Italian. Trials against Jews usually began with an annunciation made by an acquaintance, a neighbor of the suspect, or an inquisitorial spy and on occasion, of course, at the Jews. We always find that in Jewish history that the Jews who bring more damage against their co-religiousness than anyone else. The delator who in trials against Jews was usually a Christian was expected to provide real evidence with exact times and places where he or she had witnessed the offense as well as, if not more importantly, two witnesses preferably Christian who could back up what the delator or the denouncer had reported to the inquisition. Once the delator or denouncer had signed a denunciation before the notary the inquisitor interrogates those witnesses named by the delator. And the inquisition is zealous in finding the two necessary witnesses who could confirm allegations against Jewish suspects following which the Jewish suspect was arrested and summoned before the inquisitor, told to swear on the Hebrew bible or the Psalms of David and to tell the truth. Most Jews pled ignorance and remained fast in their positions before the inquisitor. And because they rarely admitted to the substance of the denunciation made against them the inquisitor worked meticulously if he had time and was not burdened by some outstanding trial of a famous heretic he conducts short and sporadic inspirations that continue over several sessions, separated by days, weeks or even months. In a trial of David DeNosio [Assumed spelling] wealthy banker and five other Jews for disturbing Christian prayer in 1604, three of the younger Jewish suspects faced up to six interrogations, each spread over six weeks. During this time a suspect was either returned to prison or if evidence was tenuous or the health of the suspect frail, he was released on bail if a friend or relative was prepared to stand surety. Then it was eventually asked if he or she wished to take legal counsel or place themselves at the mercy of the inquisition. In the event that the defendant refused legal counsel and placed himself or herself in the hands of the inquisition, the [Inaudible] at this point can use torture as a last resort against the Jews as they would in same circumstances against Christians to obtain that confession that was so important to the inquisitor. Torture was only applied to able bodied Jewish and Christian suspects and persons believed to have a chance of withstanding the physical hardship. Torture was also prohibited for children below the ages of fourteen. Statistics revealed that only thirteen percent of Jewish suspects were tortured by the inquisition in Modena. So, we need to take that statistic into account. The most common instrument of torture at this time was the strappado. Here the suspects hands were bound behind his back and lifted by a rope tied to his wrist, which were then tied around a beam in the ceiling, on the ceiling. The suspect was holed into the air left to hang for a period of time and then raised again causing wrenching and occasional dislocation of the shoulders. But the ordeal generally lasted no longer than ten minutes. We also witnessed form of torture used. In a trial against the Jew Abraham De Sakadoti [Assumed spelling] in 1602 he was tortured on a wooden rack to which he was bound by cords that were passed around his body and tightened by twisting them at the sides. The usual time period for this instrument also was about ten minutes, long enough again to dislocate the shoulders but do no more irreparable damage. In both torture methods the Jew, the victims were stripped first. In trials that I've so far examined none of the Jews who were tortured confessed to their crimes and it is questionable whether the torture ever induced victims to change their testimony. But according to inquisitorial law once a Jew or suspect had withstood torture and still refused to confess he or she has to be released without sentencing or punishment unless new incriminating evidence was subsequently discovered. Once the interrogations were completed and if the suspect was not tortured the group of Consultori, consultants, legal consultants, inquisitors would meet to decide the verdict. But the trial transcripts themselves unfortunately do not include a summary of these discussions held at these meetings that only the final opinion, the voto, the vote of each of the delegates there. The Consultori obviously also have to confer with inquisitorial headquarters in Rome, the sacred congregation of the holy office by sending it a copy of the trial proceedings. The cardinals would then decide on how the trial should be concluded. During this period at the holy office was waiting fro instruction from Rome Christian suspects were usually detained in prison whereas Jews were either allowed-- either also detained or sent home pending punishment. When instruction arrives from Rome trial sentences against Christians were usually recited on the cathedral steps or inside the church during services before a full congregation and in the presence of the bishop unless they were sentenced to a jur lightly, in which case this occurred in a private ceremony. But by contrast trial sentences against Jews seemed to have been read privately without any audience, without any audience by the inquisitor in the presence of his vicor in the interrogation. Again, this need for the inquisition to hide the trials against-- of the Jews, the difference indicates that the tribunal prefer to maintain to a level of privacy regarding the Jews that prosecute and to keep details of what it was doing for the secular authorities. And if again, they would choose to fine the Jews and not incur any punishment on the Jew besides that, that was also a way that the inquisition could keep it quiet that they had prosecuted the Jews. The Jews sentencing then was not for public ears. The notary reports that the inquisitor reads the sentence in a clear voice, emphasizing that it was an important moment not only for the Jews who nervously awaited punishment but also for the message contained in the verdicts in the text of the verdict. Christians were usually given spiritual punishments known as solitary penances and a detailed regimen of penance or confession, [Inaudible] prayers, public shamings and attendance at religious services. More serious offenses for Christians resulted in galley service, meaning that they would ride on the seas for basically the rest of their life until they died off from such terrible circumstances, prison sentences and banishments and capital punishment, although the use of such measures in Italy was rare. And how different from what we know I think of the Spanish inquisition. The intention of these relatively mild punishments was to forgive the sinners and reeducate them morally and religiously so that they might be reintegrated into society and bring salvation to their soles and not financial ruin to their families. So, that we therefore sense this inquisitorial restraint and its authority over the Jews, a combination of its own legalism and its position vis a vie the secular power, which prevented it from assuming full control or implementing inquisitorial law in its treatment of Jews. And I think that at this time it seems that we are looking at a fascinating realism in the inquisitors attitude towards the Jews and his offense, a tenancy to discipline the Jew according to legal practices based on truth rather than religious discrimination. And I think that as historian it makes me much more comfortable to use these trials as the sources of my research when I know that the pages of these dossiers are not sort of, you don't sense the terrible fear of the Jew as he stands before an inquisitor. You sense this, definitely this concern that he will be let out, be set free but not the fear that you read when you read a lot of the Spanish sources. Okay, let me turn to Miriana Sanguineti. What I have to say about Miriana Sanguineti is based on the particular trial records against her father, Viviano Sanguineti, a wealthy Jewish banker who in 1602 is accused of dissuading his daughter from being baptized. This judicial proceeding is one of a number of trials in the archives that revolves around the accusation of dissuading others from being baptized, an offense that was punishable by the inquisition. I've decided to share this trial with you because I see it as revealing invaluable information regarding the self representation of a young wealthy and engaged Jewish woman as well as her behavior and musings regarding baptism on the eve of the establishment of the ghetto in Modena in 1638. Such first hand information is not available elsewhere. The inquisitions interrogation of protagonists and witnesses also allows the micro historian to view Mirina's relationship with a Christian man as well as the intimate and indiscrete conversations she had with the Christian's tradespeople and servants from neighboring households. As such, one could question the relationship between Miriana and Lou Di Vico Merendola [Assumed spelling] her Christian admirer according to an analysis of the testimony. Finally the roles of neighboring witnesses and Viviano Sanguineti in this tale are assessed as well as Miriana's ambivalent fillings toward her own Jewish fiance her first cousin, Michelo Sangunet, who she was supposed to marry at this time who hardly gets a mention. What we can see from the trial is that Miriana Sanguineti had clearly been tempted to convert and marry her Christian admirer. In the end, however, the trial reveals she remains a Jew and marries her first cousin, Michelo Sangunet, clearly an arranged partner for her, which might explain I think why this young Jewess looks further afield for a potential spouse in the first place. But he main question hereto is why a Christian admirer and I will let you ponder this a little longer. Let's remember in setting the scene for this story, the prior to ghettoization, the windows and balconies and Jewish houses looked at other windows across alleyways and piaaza and it was from Miriana's window the quintessential liminal border between her Jewish world and that of the Christian that she conducts most of her conversation and relationship with Lou Di Vico. We have a typical Romeo and Juliet scene. Remember too that at the beginning of the 17th century depending on the economic status of the family wealthy Jewish women spent most of their time in their own households with which their social and economic identity was associated either those of their parents before marriage or their husband or parents-in-law, as was the case of Miriana after her wedding. Respectable women had no reason for spending time in the local piazza or in the local markets. Christian neighbors or their servants would see them at their balconies as they passed through the piazza or as often happened when they entered the Jews' homes to assist them in some tasks or duties. But Lou Di Vico Merendola's age, address and profession are not stated in the trial and that is often very frustrating for the micro historian who is really trying to piece all the different parts together. We don't always know where these particular witnesses or the Christian witnesses are from and what their age is and sometimes we don't know their profession either. But that Merendola lives locally can be assumed because of his familiarity with Miriana's servants and their frequent communication during his courtship with Miriana. There's also no written record as to Miriana's age at this time but she was Viviano's oldest daughter and to judge by customary marital ages at the time, she is probably in her late teens. Lou Di Vico gives no indication in this testimony how his relationship with Miriana begins nor does he mention how many times they met over their four month courtship prior to Miriana's wedding to her cousin. Lou Di Vico does indicate that he had gone into Miriana's house and on one occasion had met her outside her home, but there is no suggestion of clandestine meetings or sexual intimacy. What then does this courting really mean in early modern Italy? Now Di Vico testifies that his relationship with Miriana took place mostly through intermediary. One senses then a major flirtation rather than a full blown relationship, an infatuation perhaps that led the young man into the false belief that he could enhance his personal and economic status and win a wealthy Jewish girl and Miriana onto dangerous paths, so dangerous in fact that she herself pulls back. Her father's anger, an important consideration but not I think the decisive motive. From an early stage of her courtship, Miriana is uncertain and doubtful that Lou Di Vico would marry her and according to the Christian witnesses she rejects the engagement rings that Lou Di Vico has sent her. Perhaps Lou Di Vico himself is a dubious character with a reputation for seducing young women, a reputation that Miriana herself hears about. Lou Di Vico himself testifies. She, Miriana, replied to me at the time that she did not believe my words. Fearing that when she had converted to Christianity, I would not marry her and wondering whether I was deceiving her. We went on like this for many months. Perhaps Miriana had particularly strong reasons for suspecting his intentions, because he proposed that when Miriana escaped her father's house, she should go to his house and not a neutral place. Okay, the fear that he would seduce her and not really take care of her and marry her in the end. But Lou Di Vico is keen to emphasize to the inquisitor that he has done everything possible to win Miriana. He'd gone out of his way to provide a variety of different rings to confirm his devotion and not the type of rings that lovers normally gave when they were betrothed but rings with strong Christian motifs. A gold crucifix ring and a ring sculpted with Madonna of Reggio, a local popular Madonna and token of the fact that he was trying to convert her as well as promising her that his intentions were sincere. And it certainly is right of Lou Di Vico to blame Miriana for the arrangements of her catechism, which she according to Lou Di Vico, had demanded. She testified, sorry Lou Di Vico testified finally, Miriana resolved to make herself a Christian and to become my wife on two conditions: first when she had flared her father's house she would come directly to my house and I would arrange for her to be catechized and instructed in the faith. Second, my companion and I would go to Miriana's house and accompany her for her security to my home; that is we would meet up by means of another woman, Madonna Antonio Beratzi, the wife of the man who sells brandy in the district of the Jews. Was Miriana intelligent enough to realize that neither situation was attractive? If she placed her hands in the hands-- if she placed herself in the hands of a dubious suitor she might be seduced and then abandoned. If, however, she chose to put herself in the care of a Christian gentle woman, she feared that Lou Di Vico would not fulfill his promise and this would lead to poverty after baptism or as she told Katarina, another Christian, women who become Christians go begging. Miriana's fears regarding the poverty of Jewish women after conversion were well founded. A large number of Jewish women as well as men living in misery approach the duchal core in Modena to request stipends as well as licenses to beg for arms as a result of conversion. And I think that Miriana must have seen these women from her window or heard about them. So that conversion for Miriana was truly or to be precise would have been truly a matter of choice. But one should not hastily come to conclusions about the frequency of this happening. Miriana's case was far different from the norm if only because her origins were wealthy. She had room for pause and reflection and certainly physical security and her withdrawal from her courtship with Lou Di Vico was almost surely acts of her own initiative, a combination of her own hesitancy and inability to trust Lou Di Vico and her fear of being a neophyte and being a new convert without support financial or otherwise. So the temptation to leave her Jewish surroundings were real for Miriana at the beginning. She was curious not just about the Christian world beyond her window, but it seemed the longer that she contemplated conversion the more doubts and problems arose in her mind. Can I just ask Sharon, how much more time do I have? Do you want me to cut short and then take time for questions? Alright another few minutes, okay I'm going to talk for a few minutes about the Christian servants because I think this is such a fascinating story and then I'll conclude. Seven Christian men and women tell the inquisitor that Miriana Sanguineti had spoke to them during their courtship with Lou Di Vico. And one assumes that if the circle had been bigger, if more Christian women or men had been involved the inquisition would have found additional witnesses. These seven witnesses are servants, teacher and artisan even in Miriana's household and neighboring ones all of whom had individual conversations with the Jewess. But all of these people of lower status who as a result enjoy a degree of social autonomy moving freely in the streets and gossiping with their neighbors in the piazza and in the households where they worked. These servants were probably close to Miriana's age and stronger attachments might have developed. Spatial and social closeness make gossip between these seven Christians inevitable. In fact, most of them confirm that they discussed and gossiped about Miriana's predicament amongst themselves and it ultimately was the surest source of inquisitorial information. Remember too that to be involved in helping a potential convert move towards Christianity gave these witnesses a self-importance as they stood before the inquisitor, which was clearly reflected in their testimonies and is something that needs to be decoded when you're looking at the whole situation. But having said this it is clearly questionable how much contact is Christians really had with Miriana. Antonia, Katarina, Sebastiano and Giovana were not servants in Miriana's household nor would their contact with Miriana had been frequent. Nevertheless, there is discrepancy between the wet nurse Faustina's testimony and that of the other six witnesses. Faustina we know had more contact with Miriana than other witnesses because she actually served in the Sanguineti household as a wet nurse for the month prior to Miriana's wedding. She testified that Miriana had kept a ring, the Madonna of Reggio with her whereas Antonia Katarina nee Di Vico all testified that Miriana had returned the ring to Lou Di Vico. But Faustina embellishes her conversation with Miriana must be suggested. And she stood before the inquisitor. She boasted and exaggerated her knowledge of the matter and what she had hear from Miriana. She testified that Miriana said Christian prayers rather than Jewish ones, although this is probably an exaggeration so it is doubtful that Miriana Sanguineti would know any Christian prayers. Faustina also invokes the image of Miriana disliking eating on a table carpet or bathing in the Jewish ritual bath the Mikveh once she was to be married. Was Miriana really reacting to the use of a tablecloth without a linen cover or had Faustina misunderstood everything, particularly the exact terms of Miriana's lament? ^M00:47:03 [ Silence ] ^M00:47:09 >> Let us turn to Viviano Sanguineti. Viviano Sanguineti remains the most elusive character hardest to decipher than Miriana since we have no character witnesses about him. [Inaudible] there is less evidence of Sanguineti the suspect standing trial before the inquisition than any other character. Testimony suggests that Miriana's rejection of Lou Di Vico in part responded to a sense of duty or obedience she felt towards her father. Apparently Miriana told Giovano that she did not want to give such offense to her father because it would kill him. But, how do we judge Viviano Sanguineti? Sanguineti admits to his anger in his own testimony before the inquisitor suspecting that my daughter might be courting this young man or he her, I admonished her saying that she should remember her duty to live according to the Jewish law. So she was the Jewess and had to live as a Jewess. More importantly, it was not permitted to court a Christian and she should remember to live as a Jewess all her life. Then Sanguineti intervened to stop Miriana and Lou Di Vico's courtship was normal. Sanguineti wanted to protect is daughter as he understood this. But even more so he surely wanted to safeguard his honor and the binding religious, social and legal restrictions that strengthened his family unity. Sanguineti desired to prevent his daughter's baptism, which to him was beyond doubts unthinkable. Let me conclude. These trials I believe provide the earliest evidence of a branch of the papal inquisition taking judicial actions against Jews on an unprecedented scale attempting systematically to discipline a Jewish community pursuing this aim for several centuries. Jews like Viviano Sanguineti could find themselves answerable to a local ecclesiastical court that could threaten the standing financial and otherwise should they slip and violate the strict rules governing daily interaction with Christians. At the same time for all the high-minded principles the inquisition espoused its operators were usually placated by money because they were able to pay the fines Italian Jews in the early modern period managed to endure prosecutions without much bodily harm. I think it is also important that we do not sense this terrible fear of the Jewish suspects that stood before the inquisition that we can with more confidence decode these documents and use them to uncover the interaction and relationship between Christian majority and Jewish minority at a local level. For the social and cultural historian it is this critical interweaving of relations, the encounter between members of the Christian and Jewish communities which are the trials finest characteristics. Thank you very much. ^M00:50:31 [ Applause ] ^M00:50:40 >> Sharon: Any questions? >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: Sure go ahead. ^M00:50:44 [ Inaudible audience question ] ^M00:51:23 >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: I think in general from what I found that Jews tend to keep as far away as possible from Christians. I mean we know that anywhere in Italy the separation of Jews during holy week they have a curfew. When we [Inaudible] at the same time as their Passover, the Jews naturally will stay away and we sense that often also during their major holidays. So, I didn't sense that particularly we can relate any of the trials to specific activity during festival, Jewish festivals. Yes. ^M00:51:55 [ Inaudible audience question ] ^M00:52:22 >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: Absolutely. Yea, thank you. Thank you for cataloging in the right way. Yes, any other questions? ^M00:52:29 [ Inaudible audience question ] ^M00:52:36 >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: In Modena the ghetto was formed in 1638. >> [Inaudible audience question] >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: I believe it is. Absolutely, I think that over time Jews realized that it's better to keep their heads down and to separate. One thing that I'm working on now is the accusation against Jews for image desecration for the accusation that they would show disrespect for Christian images in particular. And I found that after 1638 these accusations dropped because Jews are not sort of finding themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time during a Christian procession, which carried images that they were not supposed to be at. They were always expected to sort of run away and not be present for any Italian religious procession that came through the streets and this was often, you know almost daily you would have sort of a crucifix and images being carried and also the Holy Eucharist being carried through the streets. These accusations definitely drop after 1638; so definitely more of a visual and a separation of this world between Jews and Christians. I'd like to develop this further and this is actually something that I'm talking about tomorrow about sort of Ghetto and non-ghetto society and how do you understand Jewish Christian interaction differently once you have an existing physical barrier enclosure, separation from Christian society. Yes. ^M00:53:58 [ Inaudible audience question ] ^M00:54:05 >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: Oh, sorry. Yea, sorry I rushed through a bit at the end. Sanguineti is charged. He is given a fine and he pays it, sort of its again this taking of money from the Jews, this feeling that the Jews the money is so important. And what I found also and I think I mentioned was that the inquisitorial building in Modena is completely paid for by the Jews by their fines. And this was really, this was a trial that at the beginning of the establishment of the inquisition initially in Modena and yes, Sanguineti is fined and he's given a warning and that is the end. And I sort of, I didn't sort of talk about it so much because obviously for me it's such a fascinating trial. It's just, so interested to really understand how Miriana is such an intelligent woman, sort of really plays with Christianity. What are the attractions of it for her that she sort of, is it that she's just reacting to the fact that she's in an arranged marriage. She's a teenager. She doesn't really want to marry this guy, you know her first cousin that she's forced to marry and how does she sort of play with Christianity behind, beyond her window. So, I'm sorry I got carried away with that and I didn't talk so much about the trial. Yea. ^M00:55:23 [ Inaudible audience question ] ^M00:55:30 >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: No Miriana wouldn't because she had a diary, which means that the church would have come in, would have taken her diary and would have demanded that Viviano hand it over to Lou Di Vico all at once, which would have been a very big embarrassment also for the Jewish community, small Jewish community where Miriana has a very important role in that community. She's a member of the Sanguineti family, one of the most important Jewish families in Modena at this time, but yes if she had chosen to convert and she had done it with the help of the bishop and the inquisition, she would have had to, she would have been, the diary would have been taken out of the hands of her father and given to this Christian admirer. >> [ Inaudible audience question ] >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: How does that affect the Jewish community? >> [ Inaudible audience question ] >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: You mean if she wasn't wealthy? If she wasn't wealthy the assumption was that the church would provide a diary with her and that some work is being done by specific historians to actually what happens. But, what I found is there is this terrible since of disappointment among the Jews to convert to Christianity in Modena and I've seen some of the pleas by, by these Jews who live there to the Juke for financial support because the Church often didn't carry through their promises to the Jews who did choose conversion at this time. >> We were more likely to be brought before the English if you were wealthy because they wanted the money? >> Professor Katherine Aron-Beller: I think I can say definitely that the interest of the inquisitor to go through a full trial is much more likely to go through a full trial is much more likely if the Jew is financially able to pay a fine at the end of it. But I do see trials against poor Jews as well and that I'll finish really that you can see that there is the interest of the inquisition to try and get money from the Jews. Yea. >> Sharon: Thank you all for coming. [Applause]