Alack, what heinous sin is it in me To be ashamed to be my father’s child!
But though I am a daughter to his blood, I am not to his manners, O Lorenzo, If thou keep promise I shall end this strife, Become a Christian and thy loving wife.
(Jessica in The Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare, Act II, Scene iii) In The Merchant of Venice, Jessica, the daughter of Shylock the Jew, fell in love with a Christian. With his assistance, she fled her father, her house and her faith. She displayed surprisingly little grief at leaving the world of her father, or robbing him of his riches. It is a similar story that we find in the Inquisitorial archives in Modena, though this tale is historical, not a fiction.2 It also finishes differently.
Miriana Sanguinetti, the daughter of the wealthy Jewish banker Viviano Sangui-netti, although tempted to convert and marry her Christian admirer, Ludovico Mirandola, in the end remained a Jew and married her first cousin Michello Sanguinetti.
This judicial proceeding is one of a number of tales in the archives that revolve around the accusation of dissuading others from being baptized. From 1598 to 1638 there were eighteen processi executed by the Inquisition in Modena against professing Jews for this offence. The tribunal, almost as a matter of course, brought charges of hindrance or dissuasion against the parents of any young person who had purportedly toyed with the idea of converting and had then experienced a change of heart.3 But it was not just parents of the potential convert who were arraigned; brothers, sisters, cousins and supposed friends or business acquaintances were also indicted. The clause regarding dissuasion of baptism in Gregory XIII’s Papal bull Antiqua iudaeorum improbitas was based upon the bull Turbato corde, issued by Pope Clement IV (1265–68) in 1267, intended to bring Jews who committed this offence under Inquisitorial jurisdic-tion. In medieval times this rarely occurred, but in seventeenth-century Modena
Jews were sentenced to various punishments for this offence including public shaming and fines of up to 250 scudi.4
This chapter opens with a survey of the eighteen proceedings in our period, followed by a micro-historical analysis of the trial against Viviano Sanguinetti, mentioned above, who was accused of dissuading his oldest daughter Miriana from being baptized in 1602.5 This processo in particular reveals invaluable information regarding the self-representation of a young, wealthy and engaged Jewish woman, as well as her behaviour and musings regarding baptism on the eve of the establishment of the ghetto in Modena. Such first-hand informa-tion is not recorded elsewhere.6 The Inquisition’s interrogation of protagonists and witnesses allows the micro-historian to view Miriana’s relationship with a Christian man as well as the intimate and indiscreet conversations that were had with Christian tradespeople and servants from neighbouring houses. As such the chapter questions the relationship between Miriana and Ludovico according to an analysis of the testimonies. Finally, the roles of neighbouring witnesses and Viviano Sanguinetti in this tale are assessed, as are Miriana’s ambivalent feelings towards her Jewish fiancé.
Of the eighteen cases, eight involved the purported dissuasion of potential male converts, nine potential female converts, and one a neophyte who had actually been baptized already for two years by the time the Jews were indicted for having tried to dissuade him.7 Eleven of the eighteen cases involved the impeachment of a family member or a future spouse of the potential convert.
In seventeen of the cases, the main suspects were men, although in two cases wives of the suspects were indicted with their husbands. In one processo, that of Mariana Mantuano of 1633, Mariana came to denounce herself, testifying that she had wanted to convert but had then changed her mind, clearly believing that this was the best way of defending herself and preventing further exposure to judicial proceedings.8 Although she was imprisoned, she was released without punishment. Of the eighteen processi, six ended with the fining of Jews, one with a public shaming, two with the acquittal of the suspect, while nine processi were discontinued.
Ten of the processi opened with a delation by a Christian who had heard rumours that neighbouring Jews were contemplating conversion and contended that they were doing their Christian duty by denouncing those who obstructed their conversion. One processo opened with the delation of a Jew, Michele Sangui-netti, who in 1617 accused Gabriele Sora and Davide Diena, two prominent bankers in Modena, of dissuading their cousin Francesco Maria Novi, previously Rabbi Salomone Datti, a ‘maestro da scola degl’Hebrei’ in 1615 prior to conver-sion.9 Allegations were soon dropped when it became clear that the accusation was a ruthless attempt by fellow Jews to bring vengeance on co-religionists. The seven remaining processi had no specific delators but were opened ex officio.10
The eight potential male converts were of mixed ages, from teenage boys to middle-aged men. Four of the processi provide short accounts of single teenage boys, most of them poor, two of whom worked as apprentices in Jewish shops, attracted to conversion in order to advance their financial standing or escape familial confinement. All four investigations were discontinued for lack of evidence. Testimonies suggest that these teenagers independently sought out Christians to help them. In 1601, Stephano de Malvertio delated that he had been approached by Israel, the 15–year-old son of Davide Sacerdote, while visiting the latter’s tailoring shop in Vignola.11 Realising that the boy was considering baptism, he took him to the Archpriest of the Cathedral, who suggested that he go straight away to the Bishop. According to the testimony of de Malvertio, Bishop Gaspare Silingardi did not have a place to keep the boy during the day and requested that de Malvertio take him home. During this interval in de Malver-tio’s home, the delator reported that Israel had taken flight and gone back to his father’s house. He believed that Israel’s father Davide Sacerdote was responsible for dissuading him. When Israel was interrogated he told the Inquisitor that he had only wanted to convert for a brief moment, an instant when he had been angry with his father. In 1609 Emmanuel de Corrigio, a teenager had come to Modena from Carpi and toyed with the idea of conversion after coming to the big city. He soon changed his mind, although his father Leone was indicted and imprisoned by the Holy Office. The trial was dropped due to lack of evidence.12
As Brian Pullan has shown, prisons could often be fertile grounds for Jewish prisoners to consider the idea and then convert to Christianity. Such a transition could bode well for a Jewish convict, especially if his sentence was lengthy.13 The attention and care of Christian protectors would certainly have been an incentive, although the Jewish prisoner Francesco Bono, dying of typhus in 1584 in a Venetian gaol, needed no incentive and chose to convert for what seems purely religious zeal.14 Two of the potential converts in the Modenese processi were themselves prisoners in the civil gaol of the city, Joseph de Cerra in 1600 and Angelo de Thodeschi in 1602, who was serving a sentence for possession of stolen goods. Joseph de Cerra had been visited in prison by several prominent Jews, who had discovered that he was waning in his faith. The Jews were punished for their interference with fines. In Angelo de Thodeschi’s case, it was his immediate family members who were indicted, since they had purport-edly overheard him shouting from his cell that he wished to convert to Catholi-cism. According to witnesses, they had come five or six times a day to shout at him in Hebrew from the outside of his prison, causing a huge disturbance and clearly bringing attention upon themselves. When Angelo de Thodeschi was interrogated he denied that he had any intention to convert, although his family members were sentenced to pecuniary punishments ranging from 10 to 225 scudi.15
A study of the nine processi for dissuasion of Jewish women shows that although most of them were young, they came from different economic situa-tions and circumstances. Like Miriana Sanguinetti, there were two other cases of wealthy, young unmarried girls, Laura de Norsa in 1617 and Sarza Levi in 1630 (both of whose ages are not given), who purportedly contemplated conversion.16 Like Miriana too, Sarza Levi had a Christian admirer, Francesco Grappi – her violin, clavichord and Spanish guitar teacher – who testified that he was ready to take charge of Sarza’s transition to Christianity, should she choose that path.
Sarza Levi herself was never summoned to the Inquisition; nor is there any indication from Francesco Grappi, who had been persuaded to ‘court’ Sarza by two clergymen after hearing a rumour that Sarza was contemplating conversion, that there was any feeling on his side for Sarza.17 Sarza’s father, Benedetto Levi, was given a 50–scudi fine.
Whether these women really pondered conversion must be doubted.
Laura de Norsa’s brother Cesare de Norsa of Soliera was imprisoned, and argued that his delation was a conspiracy by neighbouring Christians, all of whom had recently clashed with him or his wife.18 In 1614, Cesare had been imprisoned by the ducal court, accused by Pietro Cavallo of raping the wife of an innkeeper in Carpi while her husband was away. Proceedings were suspended when it was discovered that there had been no violence behind the adultery.19 As aggressors of the Jew, then, these Christians testified that the young Jewess had toyed with the idea of conversion and disclosed her conviction to them, but was dissuaded from being baptized by her brother Cesare de Norsa with whom she lived.
Ursolina Bonzaga, in particular, testified that Laura’s desire to be converted was based on her dejection and the ill treatment that she received in her brother’s house. Moreover, she reported that Laura was even beaten by Cesare.20 These witnesses argued before Inquisitor Tinti that Cesare had sent his sister away to Carpi to thwart her conversion, with the excuse that she was to attend the pregnant wife of his cousin, Donato Levi, who lived there. During his interroga-tion, Cesare brought a letter from Donato, confirming that this was the reason why Laura had gone.21 The real motive was probably to protect Laura from the clutches of the Inquisition. Laura herself was never summoned before the Inqui-sition, and de Norsa was absolved with a warning that if more information was uncovered against him he would be re-tried.22
Examples of poorer Jewish women who were potential converts included a young girl Brunetta, whose father Leone Montesanto had already begun the process of conversion with his younger daughters in 1605. Brunetta’s case was taken up by the wealthy Donato Donati of Finale, who had already suffered the loss of his niece to Christianity, and now offered Brunetta a dowry of 1,000 scudi as long as she remained a Jew.23 His plea was to no avail, since Brunetta decided to accept baptism with her whole family. The processo remained a preliminary
investigation and neither Brunetta nor Donato Donati was summoned to the Inquisition for investigation.
Bribing poor young women to remain firm in their religion was certainly a ploy that was used on numerous occasions.24 Bella de Praga, a poor young Jewish woman, known as the ‘Tedeschina’ (whose profession is unclear), consid-ered conversion in 1615 and came before the Inquisition to denounce not her father, but an old Jewish banker, Samuel de Sanguinetti, for dissuading her.25 She reported: ‘Samuel Sanguinetti said to me that if I did not convert he’d give me money.’26 When the Inquisitor asked her if she still wanted to convert, she said no and the trial was discontinued without the impeachment of Sanguinetti.
Of the two ‘potential’ female converts who were married, neither showed any real interest in conversion. In 1634, Livia Leoni, the wife of Mattasia, who had already accepted baptism with the rest of his family, was approached in her convent by Rabbi Natanael Trabotti, among others, who attempted to dissuade her by forcing entry into the institution.27 Trabotti was not called to testify and Livia was ordered to leave the duchy, as a result of her supplication to Duke Francesco I to help her ensure that her dowry, the meagre sum of 40 scudi, be returned by her husband.28
In Modena, at best, Inquisitors were able to fine Jewish suspects found guilty of dissuading the baptism of others, rather than bring about the conver-sion of those who had been dissuaded. The Holy Office was not supported by any formal or organised methods to encourage conversion or by bureaucratic assis-tance from any other authorities, leaving conversion of Jews, as Andrea Zanardo has confirmed, to rely upon the public conscience (pietas) of individual citizens or ecclesiastics.29 In Modena, the Opera Pia del Neofiti was established as late as 1671, and the Casa dei Catecumeni, which was to be administered by the Inquisi-tion, was not established until 1700, 157 years after its establishment in Rome in 1543 and 143 years after its establishment in Venice in 1557.30
The tribunal’s limited authority over those who impeded conversions in Modena was far different, then, from its position in Venice, where Brian Pullan has shown a link between the activities of the Holy Office and the Casa dei Catecumeni particularly during the 1580s, when the Casa worked to support the Inquisition in finding suspects who impeded the baptism of others, as well as monitoring gossip among neophytes.31 In Rome, too, as Marina Caffiero has confirmed, the cardinal vicar and the Casa dei Catecumeni assisted in the contro-versial cases of conversions and baptisms dealt with by the Holy Office.32
In 1749 Anna del Monte – a wealthy young Jewish girl living in the ghetto, the direct granddaughter of Angelo Zevi, one of the fattori (communal heads) of the Jewish community in Rome – was arrested and sent to the Casa dei Catecumeni, as a result of an allegation by Sabbato Coen, a neophyte, that she had promised to marry him.33 According to Sermoneta, the reason why Coen
had denounced her to the ecclesiastical authorities was a personal vendetta against her family, and not against herself. But her diary, which was discovered by Sermoneta,reveals the traumatic consequences that she faced as a result of his denunciation.34 During her thirteen days’ stay, she faced, according to Sermoneta, ‘fifty-four meetings, discussions and conversations with thirty-eight different people and was forced to listen to at least eighty consecutive hours of preaching’, as well as promises of riches and a ‘good marriage’.35 According to her diary, the priests who questioned del Monte accused her of having a relationship with Coen. She told her interrogators that she did not even know him:
Believe me, Signore, that young men have never frequented our house, nor can anyone boast of having spoken to me, either in the house, or outside it, or of having seen me at the window talking to any living soul. For our custom is different from that of your Lords, since our maidens don’t go out before they are married. I have never been able to associate with anyone.36
Potential converts living in Rome and Venice who flirted with the idea of baptism were incarcerated in the Casa dei Catecumeni and induced to convert, on the testi-mony of the Christian witnesses alone.37 The differences between the situations in Rome and Venice and that in Modena are astounding. In Rome from 1577, Pope Gregory XIII had re-established the obligatory practice of Jews attending weekly proselytizing sermons, but in Modena the lack of conversionary tactics meant that Jews were not forced to attend conversionary sermons until 1637, on the eve of their enclosure in the ghetto.38
Tellingly, the Inquisition would have wanted to do more. In Miriana Sanguinetti’s case, in 1604, by the time the Inquisition opened investigations against Viviano Sanguinetti, Miriana had already been married for seven and a half months. Neither the episcopal vicar nor Dr Emilio, a secular priest and Miriana’s clavichord teacher, who had clearly tried to encourage her, had denounced Viviano to the Holy Office in the hope that, if he was imprisoned, Miriana might have the courage to convert. The conversion and baptism of a wealthy Sanguinetti would surely have been a major source of victory for the church, yet there was no official mechanism to bring this about.
Here follows a skeletal outline of the trial proceedings of 1604.
Dramatis personae of the processo of Viviano Sanguinetti Archangelo Calbetti de Recanati – Inquisitor General of Modena from 1600 to
1607.
Viviano Sanguinetti – a Jewish banker.
Miriana Sanguinetti – daughter of Viviano Sanguinetti.
Ludovico Mirandola – Miriana’s Christian admirer.
Alberto de Bassio – Miriana’s Christian tailor.
Dr Paulo Emilio – Miriana’s Christian clavichord teacher.
Caterina de Bonai – a Christian servant in a neighbouring house.
Sebastiano de Ludignani – a 26–year-old Christian servant in a neighbouring house.
Antonia Barozzi – a Christian and wife of the local vendor of brandy.39 Faustina – a Christian wetnurse in the Sanguinetti house.
Giovanna de Alexandri – a 22–year-old Christian servant in a neighbouring house.
Michello Sanguinetti – Miriana’s Jewish fiancé.
20 May 1602: Ludovico Mirandola recounted his relationship with Miriana and the arrangements that were to be made regarding her catechism and conver-sion. He told the Inquisitor that in the end she had changed her mind. Ludovico blamed Viviano for dissuading his daughter from baptism.40
22 May 1602: Alberto de Bassio informed the Inquisitor that he had spoken to Miriana on many occasions, that he had urged her to become a Chris-tian, as was his duty, and that she had confirmed her love for Ludovico. He even admitted to informing Ludovico of Miriana’s feelings.41
Same day: Dr Paulo Emilio told the Inquisitor that he had taught Miriana the clavichord, once a week, every Thursday, for eighteen months prior to her wedding and that they had held various conversations. He confirmed that he knew of Miriana’s relationship with Ludovico and knew too of Miriana’s fear that Mirandola would abandon her after she had converted to Christianity.
Same day: Caterina de Bonai admitted to being Ludovico’s messenger, sent to Miriana on a number of occasions to persuade her to convert. She also confirmed that Miriana did not trust Ludovico. However, Caterina was unable to confirm that Viviano had dissuaded his daughter from being baptized.
Same day: Sebastiano de Ludignani confirmed that he had talked to Miriana, both at her window and inside her house, when he had accompanied his aunt Faustina, a Christian wetnurse, to Viviano’s house to nurse Viviano’s son.
Sebastiano also said that Miriana had been unable to trust Ludovico. Sebastiano also testified that Viviano had dissuaded his daughter from being baptized. But such an accusation, he told the Inquisitor, was hearsay, since it came from his aunt and not directly from Miriana.
Same day: Antonia Barozzi testified that Miriana had told her ‘twenty-five
Same day: Antonia Barozzi testified that Miriana had told her ‘twenty-five