SO would Torquemada qualify for paladin?

[Elder-Basilisk]

It's worth noting here that in Europe of the time (at least in Northern Europe--that's where my research is focussed at the moment), torture was not done to convict a person of a crime but rather to extract a confession once a person had already been decided guilty. The people of the time believed it wrong to execute or otherwise punish someone who still maintained his innocence. Therefore after they'd decided someone was guilty they still needed to make him confess. Interestingly enough, at least in Nuremberg, the initial confession under torture was not considered sufficient for this purpose. The criminal also had to confess before the city council after a break from his torture. As the author of Nuremberg in the 16th Century puts it, one can't say that they were completely insensitive to the possibility of punishing an innocent man.

Now that doesn't justify torture by a long shot but I think it puts the medieval and early modern world into a bit better perspective since these days, extracting confessions by torture is generally done in order to gain evidence for a trial which is quite the opposite of the historical situation.

I think SHARK makes a good point worth thinking about for the purposes of a role-playing game too. Does it make a difference if the people Torquemanda was pursuing were really demon worshippers?

As I see it, a fanatical Inquisitor type in a fantasy world could be evaluated like this:

1. There are real Cthulu cultists out there and the Inquisitor ferrets them out and punishes them with few, if any innocents caught in his net: LN or possibly LG

2. There are real Cthulu cultists out there and the Inquisitor ferrets them out ruthlessly catching many innocents in his net as well. But hey, you can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs right: LN or LE

3. There are real Cthulu cultists out there and the Inquistor uses them as an excuse to purge his enemies and enrich himself: LE, NE, or CE.

4. There aren't any Cthulu cultists but the Inquistor thinks there are and executes a bunch of people who're vaguely threatening to the current order: LE (or possibly LN if the inquisitor actually believes they're guilty).

5. There aren't any Cthulu cultists out there and the Inquisitor knows it but he uses (or manufactures) the mass hysteria as an excuse to purge his enemies and enrich himself: LE, NE, or CE.

Not having researched the historical Torquemanda, I can't say which category he would fall into but I think they will work well for adding interesting Inquisition situations to a role-playing game. (And I think that 1 and 2 are the most interesting situations although it may be that an inquisition starts off as 1 and then there is a change of leadership (or a change in the leader) and it becomes 2 or 3).

 

[Leopold]

i agree with most but 3 & 5 sound more NE than CE or LE. He is out to server his own ends and not the ends of his church or anyone else. That is selfserving and greedy as NE is.

 

[herald]

there is a higher power in the church he must answer to. The pope, the cardinals, the bishops, there are ranks within ranks within ranks of the clergy. Somehow this guy might be a regional power and not a global power. If a higher ranking member tells him what he is doing wrong and he hears of it, he can either keep on trekking flying in the face of those that doesn't hear the true 'message' or keeping with the regimental structure within the church plead for what he is doing is right but ultimately his superiors within the church tell him to mend his ways or stop.

While Torquemada ran his "crusade" against the jews, there was not stoping him. The reason was simple, but difficult to explain.

There is a delicate balance issue of chuch and state. No Cardinal, or bishop would stand aganist him simply because they couldn't. He was doing the work of the POPE and the KING. To speak out against the Pope and King would be heretical and treasonous. Remember, the Inquisition turned from ferreting out false Christains to finding diabolist, witches and fornicators with the devil. To stand against Torquemada is to stand with the accussed. No one of power is going to run the risk of soiling themselves to defend them. Especially if it means that they can let thier debts fall by the wayside.

Hextor priests would seem to fill this ideal, but thier diety is after all, someone who "lives" in hell.

A Pholtus priest however, does fit the bill. Perhaps there is a falling out between the churches of Pholtus and Zilchus. Blinding light vs. Holy Commerce.

 

[ShadowWolf]

I would like to pint out that the Jews were not the only religion persecuted against during the Inquisition. And was he any different than the Crusaders in there slugter of the Moors? history is full of contridiction and there are many ways of looking at events. I say he could be a palidin, because right or wrong. His system of belifes said he was both lawful and good.

 

[herald]

Which system of beliefs are we talking about here?

Torquemada's or the ideals set forth in the bible.

It's simple to see that he twisted the words of the bible, he perverted them for his own view point. I'llgive tyou an example to show that I'm not trying to be inflamitory.

On this account Torquemada urged the sovereigns to compel all the Jews either to become Christians or to leave Spain. To frustrate his designs the Jews agreed to pay the Spanish government 30,000 ducats if left unmolested. There is a tradition that when Ferdinand was about to yield to the enticing offer, Torquemada appeared before him, bearing a crucifix aloft, and exclaiming: "Judas Iscariot sold Christ for 30 pieces of silver; Your Highness is about to sell him for 30,000 ducats. Here He is; take Him and sell Him." Leaving the crucifix on the table he left the room. Chiefly through his instrumentality the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492.

Torquemada grandstanded before the King and not only got away with it, but gave the King what he wanted, a religious excuse for not paying off the debts owed to Jewish Money lendors. Torquemada used a example from the Bible that didn't even apply to the situation at hand. The Jews certainly were not in the same posistion that the Romans were. The Jews weren't paying the King off so that they could Kill some one. They were paying a price of extortion. There were citizens of this country and were entitled to the same rights as as any other free men.

And this isn't the Dark Ages were talking about here either. This is the Renniasance. In this same year, Columbus is going to set sail and reach the New World. When Columbus returns from the New World on his second trip and explains to the King and Queen of Spain that he has Enslaved the people of Hispanola (What we call Cuba today), Queen Isabella is quite upset. She speaks out at court and points out that since now the people of Hispanola are Spanish subjects and suggests that they be freed and evangelised to be made Christians."

When we think of the the Spanish Inqusition, we tend to think of it happening in the middle of the Dark Ages. After all, it does sound barbaric. But it doesn't happen that way. It is an abberation of the Reniassance period, and that is why it's so shocking. Societies have moved to a more secular view and pre-Christian philosophies are being explored again at length. Invention will change this world dramatically. To act in a very backwards and barbaric way shocks people tothe very core and it becomes infamous.

Ethnic Cleansing, genocide, or even "Red Scare" or McCarthism. The effort to strike out at the unknown hidden that are "Unclean" put individuals at a very dangerous place, and whil it exists those that push for it cannot be trusted. oops, stepped onto a soap box. Let me step down.

I hope that this is informative and helpful. I didn't mean to offend or attack.

 

[ShadowWolf]

I understand what you are saying it is very simmiler to "Thou shalt not suffer a LIER to live. Lier was changed to witch to suport there propaganda. I am merly saying that depending on how warped you want the socity to be you can twist the "facts" to suport him as a paladin. In camalot Lancelot was a paladin and look how he turned out.

 

[Mort]

I understand what you are saying it is very simmiler to "Thou shalt not suffer a LIER to live. Lier was changed to witch to suport there propaganda. I am merly saying that depending on how warped you want the socity to be you can twist the "facts" to suport him as a paladin. In camalot Lancelot was a paladin and look how he turned out.

Lancelot fell, it's even in the legend that he lost his invulnerability after his transgressions (saw that here somewhere, would have to look for the source). Using Lancelot actually shows the opposite of what I think you're trying to argue

So maybe you could say Torquemada was initially a paladin (though LG cleric fits better) but let the power corrupt him.

 

[ShadowWolf]

actuly that last bit is wht I was trying to say. My brain is just not working today

 

[herald]

I am merly saying that depending on how warped you want the socity to be you can twist the "facts" to suport him as a paladin. In camalot Lancelot was a paladin and look how he turned out.

Then what your saying here is that we are having a somatical disagreement.

Anyone could say that they were a Paladin, being one is a totally differant thing all together.

Lancelot Du Luc is a fictional character. Going back and forth between real world facts and historical fiction throws the whole discussion into talespin that should be avoided.

 

[jgbrowning]

no

no, i dont think he'd qualify.

joe b.