In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

C H A P T E R 4 First Steps Marguerite Porete and William of Paris had more in common in the fall of 1308 than one might think. Both must have felt deceived by recent events. Marguerite had patiently gathered support for her writings but then apparently miscalculated if she intentionally communicated her book to the bishop of Châlons-sur-Marne. William had garnered royal and papal office and carried off his assigned part in Philip IV’s attack on the Templars but then suffered a public papal censure. In spite of these congruent trajectories, once Marguerite was in William’s custody the contest between them would obviously be unequal. Marguerite did retain some ability to influence the course of events, or at least their pace. Other “heretics” might treat an inquisition as a chance to express their ideas,1 but Marguerite chose the path of noncooperation. Such legal delaying tactics to put off the commencement of a process were not uncommon. The Templars gathered in Paris, for example, would stall by declining to appoint procurators,2 and Clement V himself delayed Boniface VIII’s posthumous heresy proceedings by refusing to consider deponents as formal witnesses.3 Playing for time was a rational strategy when holding a weak legal hand—during a delay circumstances might change, opponents might die, the political winds might shift.4 In the meantime, Marguerite’s methods forced William of Paris to maneuver carefully, since neither a confession nor self-incriminating testimony would be forthcoming. For the inquisitor, the question at hand cannot have been primarily Marguerite’s guilt or innocence, since he must have 85 known that she had admitted to acts that virtually ensured her punishment as a recalcitrant heretic. Rather the issue was how to construct an airtight legal case and ensure that the ultimate sentence would be beyond any possible challenge. William therefore employed the utmost circumspection in pursing her process. But it was also at this point that events took an unexpected twist with Guiard of Cressonessart’s irruption onto the scene. The appearance of the self-proclaimed Angel of Philadelphia was probably as surprising to Marguerite as it was to William. It was the inquisitor, however, who would have to determine how to deal with Guiard. This complicating element must have further encouraged his caution. If this beguina from Hainaut could inspire sympathy from men ranging from the famous theologian Godfrey of Fontaines to a beguinus sent to “defend the adherents of the Lord,” who could say what other supporters might be waiting in the wings? Marguerite’s Move to Paris No evidence explains the physical process by which Marguerite got from the custody of the bishop of Cambrai to that of the inquisitor in Paris. The approximate date, however, is clear. Marguerite is described in several documents from early April 1310 as having been imprisoned under William’s jurisdiction for almost a year and a half, so her incarceration in Paris must have begun sometime around October 1308. It has sometimes been suggested that Marguerite could have traveled to Paris of her own free will and remained there, at large, until being arrested.5 Although the trial documents at first glance seem to allow this possibility, on closer scrutiny this interpretation is impossible to sustain. After admitting several times that she had flagrantly violated an episcopal order to cease writing and teaching her condemned ideas, Marguerite could hardly have gone free, only to journey directly to Paris in time to be jailed by William in later 1308. The confusion stems from the way the trial documents draw on standard formats for uncooperative suspects , which were often those who attempted to evade summonses.6 The wording of these texts was intended to establish precise legal grounds for subsequent actions, not to relate an exact course of events. 86 THE BEGUINE, THE ANGEL, AND THE INQUISITOR Specifically, one document (which must ultimately reflect wording crafted by William of Paris) says first that “a certain beguina named Marguerite Porete of Hainaut was suspected for various probable causes of the stain of heretical depravity” and that “after she many times contumaciously refused to appear, [William] caused this same woman to be personally brought into his presence.”7 A second trial document says Marguerite “was suspected for various probable causes of the stain of heretical depravity, and because of this was arrested by [William].”8 In a third formulation, William directly recounts that “you, Marguerite of Hainaut, called Porete, were vehemently suspected...

Share