Talk:Tomás de Torquemada

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Confusing comment[edit]

' many still believe that he and the Spanish Inquisition generally were responsible for injustice and suffering in their use of torture, anonymous denunciation, and execution by fire in the so-called auto de fe, or "act of faith."' This is highly confusing -- is it asserted by those not 'the many [that] still believe' that the torture, anonymous denunciation, etc. did not cause injustice and suffering, or that they did not exist?

removed link[edit]

This is the link I removed from the bottom of the page, and you can see by a quick glance this "Catholic Encyclopedia" is apparently from the dark ages. While apologizing heavily for the article's subject, the encyclopedia, among other things, seems to refer to Islam as "Mohommedianism". I haven't heard that in... well, quite frankly, my entire life in a serious context. The entire thing is unencyclopedic and adds nothing to this article.

If you have never encountered the term "Mohommedianism" or "Mohammedan" as a synonym for Islam in "... well, quite frankly, my entire life in a serious context", then the depth of your historical reading has been extremely shallow. Until quite recently, historically speaking, the terms "Mohammedanism" or "Mohammedan" were quite commonly, and even preferentially, used. The 1953 Edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica, for example, has article titles that include "Mohammedan Architecture", "Mohammedan Art", "Mohammedan Campaigns", "Mohammedan Institutions", "Mohammedanism" and "Mohammedan Law". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dionysius17 (talkcontribs) 16:07, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Encyclopaedia is used in many articles as a source. To remove it as a source in one article out of hundreds is reckless. I have restored it as a source... -Zulu, King Of the Dwarf People 1:35, 20 February 2006

Yeah, the Encyclopaedia was written in 1917, but even so, it was a bit jarring to read that Torquemada's "enhanced interrogation" may have been necessary to keep the Jews from taking over Spain. The solution to bad speech is more speech, though. Miraculouschaos 00:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison Torquemada - Darth Vader[edit]

I removed "Also those that draw comparisons to the Fictional Jedi Knights of the Star Wars Expanded Universe and the Historical Knights Templars, draw parallels between Darth Vader and Toquemada as they both brought the downfall of the respective orders and were the leaders of great purges to wipe out the order." from 'modern allusions to Torquemada', as Torquemada never tried to wipe out the Knights Templar, nor did he bring about their downfall. It seems a bit much of an honour for a man born in 1420 to have been instrumental in the bringing down of an order that was actually suppressed in 1312. Thomas Antonius 08:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But did not also the Jedi Knights Survive the was also so with the Knights Templar they were just significantly fewer in number.Winn3317

This is ridiculous - comparing Torquemada to Darth Vader and the Jedi Knights to the Templars?! Doh! ThePeg 23:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a close comparison. Darth Vader is a fictional character, and so is Jesus. The Catholic church worships a fairy story, and Star Wars is also a fantasy. (talk) 22:43, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be insulting, but you clearly have no idea what you're talking about, and have never read any historical book about Jesus. Whether you believe He was God or not, he did exist. Any serious historian knows as much. Bobby Neirs (talk) 02:39, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fitting company for him[edit]

This Torquemada was voted into "most evil men in history" along with Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, etc. in a recent Discovery Channel programme. Maybe this could be mentioned. 14:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Torture in the auto de fe[edit]

the article implies that torture was part of the auto de fe but following the link to the article specifically about the auto de fe it contains a statement that torture and burning were not part of the auto de fe... it claims torture never happened after sentencing... i'm just casually reserching but i would like to know. which one is it? bloody scourge of torture or religious ritual after sentencing and before execution?

From what I understand, the auto de fe was when the sentences were publicly made. If you were repentant, you were sent off to perform penance; if you were not, you would be handed over to the civil authorities to be sentenced by them. --Bobby Neirs (talk) 02:42, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]


I added an information about Andrzejewski's novel "The Inquisitors", which deals with the subject of Torquemada's life. I am not certain, however, if it fits into "Modern allusions" category, because making a historical figure the main character of a novel is definitely something more than just an allusion. Maybe it would be wise to add a new category with informations regarding historical novels (or movies) about the Inquisition and Torquemada? I suppose the abovementioned Andrzejewski's work is not the only one...

Modern Allusions[edit]

I think in the film Meet the Parents, Ben Stiller's character made a comment about another character in the film calling him "Dr. Torquemada". If anybody knows anything about it they can add it to the modern allusions section. --Nehrams2020 07:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This section should be re-named. They are direct references, not "allusions". In this context, "allusions" is not the right word, and can even be considered a weasel word.

I agree. I will change it. --Managerpants (talk) 16:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This Article Has Been Vandalized[edit]

I deleted several 'he was bald' from the main text but it still sounds very confusing Dr. Pnz 23:55, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Hmm. "torqueo" or "torquere" is Latin for "torture" and "quemada" is spanish for "burned"... exolon 03:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Torquemada is also a place in Spain, and it seems to be close to the place where the the article states this man was born. Is there really some etymological connection as Dejbrianuk says? If not, then what about a relationship to the place? Bluerasberry (talk) 22:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reference in "Roma Eterna"[edit]

The Robert Silverberg novel seems to reference Torquemada in one chapter. There is a character by the name of "Torquatus", which could easily be seen as a latinization of "Torquemada". They also share a ruthless sense of righteousness and condemned to death people thought to be impure or corruptive influences on society. Torquatus is not Catholic, or even Christian, of course, but then the whole premise of the novel is about an alternate history where Christianity never emerged, so that's not surprising. The only other problem is that this section of the novel is set in 2568 AUC (1815 AD), over 300 years after Torquemada's time. However, the obvious similarities in both name and character make it seem that Silverberg was making an intentional reference, even if the dates are a bit off. Is this worth adding to the "Modern allusions" section? Lurlock 17:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re torture preferences and section appropriateness[edit]

Does the line "It is reputed that one of Torquemada's prefered methods of extracting confessions was to shove a red hot iron into the anus of the accused." really belong in the section "Question of Jewish descent"?

mkm 14:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, the line doesn't belong there, and I removed it. Also your question doesn't belong with the questions about "Roma Eterna" so I made it a new section. Pete St.John 18:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV Violation[edit]

I have removed "In modern times, Torquemada has become symbolic of the great evils perpetrated by the Roman Catholic Church during the Inquisition." "great evils" is subjective and obviously not a neutral POV as required by Wiki rules.Kmerian 20:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would have added the word "reputed" instead of deleting the line. I think most peopole would agree that the Inquistion had unhappy effects, and some responsibiltiy accrued to the Church of the day. Pete St.John 18:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we not confuse objectivity with utter stupidity? Even for the contemporaries of Torquemada, Spanish Inquisition was a cruel and barbarous device; if Turkish sultans could have denounce it, surely we can define it for what it was - a crime? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, please. If someone called the Holocaust terrible you wouldn't question their neutrality. Those were "great evils." —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:05, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Torquemada was NOT representative of the Roman Catholic Church or the InquistionS; if anything, he was representative of a specific time and place in Spanish, Christian, and Inquisitorial history. Let's also not forget that the heads of the Roman Catholic Church were among those contemporaries that decried Torquemada's Inquisition practices. And frankly, this whole article needs a lot less editorializing and a lot more source references. This is supposed to be an informative and neutral encyclopedic biography, not an essay on the wrongfulness of injustice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Regarding "Torquemada was NOT representative of the Roman Catholic Church or the InquistionS... he was representative of... Spanish, Christian, and Inquisitorial history"
    I believe Torquemada is representative of the Spanish Inquisition and of the Portuguese Inquisition (of other Inquisitionss? I wouldn't know), but he was one Inquisitor among others, not "the boss", just the most notorious. At that time, Inquisition used torture and other crimes to steal from Jews, to take their homes, businesses and country, or to force their convertion. Both the Portuguese and Spanish branches eventually caused an increased number of refugees fleeing to the Americas, where the Inquisition soon established new branches; as well as imigration within Europe, to Holland, France, England and other countries where protestants numbers were rising (and were not institutionalized, nor evil).
    What could possibly be representative of five hundred to a thousand years of human retrocess? Burning Greek science, like geometry? Destroying art, like "pagan" temples and sculptures? Burning, torturing and killing "witches" defined as those who can read, or write, or have books, or make medicines from herbs, or cook different, or bathe, or wash their hands? Any human retrocess is representative, especially if you take them all together. IMHO, though, the most representative is the institutional destruction of books, arts and crafts. The destruction of accrued ancestral information useful in any way for future generations, interrupts the information flow between past and future generations, which forces each new generation to restart science from zero (or a lot closer to zero than otherwise).
    Maybe Torquemada is not representative enough? He is certainly guilty of his crimes, of his cruelty, and of all the pain and suffering he caused. Justice would be punishing him, whoever gave him power, and whatever institution they worked for. Justice did not happen, it never happened. But it could still come. Meanwhile, the best representation of human retrocess is, as never before, sponsoring the constant editing and rewriting of the past to suit their current interests. Care is necessary: hic sunt dracones.
    HYPOTHESIS: an internal power struggle could have existed in Italy (within the church?) between , on one side, the military who drove the Mores out of the Iberic Peninsula, merchants who invested in new maritime routes/expansion/lands, and the clergy controlling the Inquisition; against, on the other side, the military who were successfully containing/expeling Moslims from eastern Europe, those interested/preferring control over land commerce with the East, and another part of the clergy.
    In this HYPOTHETICAL scenary, the Inquisition would have received a clear mission: expel the jews from Spain and Portugal. Something like "We want control of the king, commerce, religion, of everything, but there's a problem: under the Mores, the Jews became influent/rich/powerfull/whatever - and this is not good for us. Make them leave, make them die or make them join us".
    That would explain (but never justify) the violence employed by the Inquisition in both countries, among other similarities. Sysfxx (talk) 05:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lot's of POV[edit]

There is so much wrong here. For example Torquemada dying of syphilis? That is found nowhere. Only one source seems to be used and it's POV. Henry Kamen's book The Spanish Inquisition points out that the Inquisition was far ahead of civil courts in respecting legal due process. The Inquisition never made to many parts of Spain, especially after the 1st century of its existence. Someone needs a complete rewrite and to eliminate the myths. I removed the worst examples, but there is still work to be done.

This is from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Much has been written of the inhuman cruelty of Torquemada. Llorente computes that during Torquemada's office (1483-98) 8800 suffered death by fire and 9,654 were punished in other ways (Histoire de l'Inquisition, IV, 252). These figures are highly exaggerated, as has been conclusively proved by Hefele (Cardinal Ximenes, ch. xviii), Gams (Kirchengeschichte von Spanien, III, II, 68-76), and many others. Even the Jewish historian Graetz contents himself with stating that "under the first Inquisitor Torquemada, in the course of fourteen years (1485-1498) at least 2000 Jews were burnt as impenitent sinners" ("History of the Jews", Philadelphia, 1897, IV, 356). Most historians hold with the Protestant Peschel (Das Zeitalter der Entdeckungen, Stuttgart, 1877, pp. 119 sq.) that the number of persons burnt from 1481 to 1504, when Isabella died, was about 2000. Whether Torquemada's ways of ferreting out and punishing heretics were justifiable is a matter that has to be decided not only by comparison with the penal standard of the fifteenth century, but also, and chiefly, by an inquiry into their necessity for the preservation of Christian Spain. The contemporary Spanish chronicler, Sebastian de Olmedo (Chronicon magistrorum generalium Ordinis Prædicatorum, fol. 80-81) calls Torquemada "the hammer of heretics, the light of Spain, the saviour of his country, the honour of his order". —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One cannot help but note the irony of the person complaining of POV sources going on to quote the Catholic Encyclopedia in a effort to cleanse the image of the Spanish Inquisition! (talk) 13:39, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The allusion to St. Pedro de Arbués as having been murdered by a homosexual Catholic bishop not only had no attribution, but was simply inaccurate. See the wikipedia article on St. Pedro and it clearly states that he was killed by several people. (talk) 00:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Opinions as fact - Its Wikipedia.[edit]

It starts out okay with some basic recountings from history (I suspect cribbed from a public domain encyclopedia)

Then we get gems like this: Torquemada was a certainly relentless adversary; however, the black legend that has grown up around him fails to take into account that Torquemada was one of the chief reformers of the Spanish Inquisition.

No refs to back up that whitewashing opinion whatsoever. Its maddening, what did he do or did not do as a reformer? Wikipedia at its finest. REF IT!... Just gonna blank this statement out. If it has some basis in fact it can be reinstated but this is a major POV issue.

It then goes on to list numerous trivia and pop culture references on Torquemada. So much so that it overwhelms and takes up a huge chunk of the article. Is this what the legacy of Tomas "Hammer of the Heretics" Torquemada? The article comes across like a bad joke that people make of the quality of Wikipedia. --Eqdoktor (talk) 08:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Must have been written by a Catholic propagandist.[edit]

"This basic distrust for Jews, converts and otherwise, as well as the dubious sincerity of Moorish converts, was a driving factor in the implementation of the Spanish Inquisition." No. Spain was broke. The inquisition was institutionalized theft of Jewish property. Look it up. This so-called article would be laughable if it were not so poisonous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:54, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"There certainly WAS a mistrust of converts, both Jewish and Muslim, as would be expected of any forced or otherwise pressured conversions! There can be little doubt that many of the conversos (Jews converted to Christianity) continued their Jewish faith behind closed doors. The problem was the belief rampant at the time that they were seeking to undermine Christianity and were evil, devil-worshipers, etc. This was hardly the case, and there is no evidence to indicate it was. No doubt the economic factors played a great part in Ferdinand's mind, but to totally discount the effect of many firebrand priests railing against the conversos on public opinion is also wrong."````Phred6666 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phred66 (talkcontribs) 04:19, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems to be very one-sided[edit]

The writer seems to have taken the opinion that as long you are a faithful catholic torture is pretty much okay, and not so much of a problem really. I mean if Isabella liked it... I hope this page can be fixed to present a more neutral, less obviously pro-catholic POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The writer of this article implies that since torture was common at the time, the inquisition can't be blamed for using it. Does that mean that evil practices are acceptable, as long as it is widespread? Besides, the brutality of the torture the inquisition used is still far worse than anything else practised at the time.

The author quotes: "of those called to appear before the Holy Office, most were released after their first hearing without further incident." Now, here's a more accurate quote from Wiki's article on the Inquisition: "After a denunciation, the case was examined by the calificadores (qualifiers), who had to determine if there was heresy involved, followed by detention of the accused. In practice, however, many were detained in preventive custody, and many cases of lengthy incarcerations occurred, lasting up to two years, before the calificadores examined the case.[47] Detention of the accused entailed the preventive sequestration of their property by the Inquisition. The property of the prisoner was used to pay for procedural expenses and the accused's own maintenance and costs. Often the relatives of the defendant found themselves in outright misery." "The results of the trial could be the following: 1.The defendant could be acquitted. In actual practice, acquittals were very rare." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachel's Mom (talkcontribs) 03:46, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that sounds more like it - perhaps if the inquisition had nothing to gain by convicting the accused, they would let him go. But if the accused was rich, there was no getting away from their clutches - regardless of the accused's guilt. Talk about Torquemada being "incorruptible"... Perhaps he was incorruptible when it came to accepting bribes to set one free, but certainly not if it was a matter of keeping or losing the fortune of an accused man!

Here is more from Wiki's inquisition article regarding their fairness and "incorruptibility": The entire process was undertaken with the utmost secrecy, as much for the public as for the accused, who were not informed about the accusations that were levied against them. Months, or even years could pass without the accused being informed about why they were imprisoned. The prisoners remained isolated, and, during this time, the prisoners were not allowed to attend mass nor receive the sacraments. The denunciations were anonymous, and the defendants had no way of knowing the identities of their accusers.[46] This was one of the points most criticized by those who opposed the Inquisition (for example, the Cortes of Castile, in 1518). In practice, false denunciations were frequent, resulting from envy or personal resentments. Many denunciations were for absolutely insignificant reasons. The Inquisition stimulated fear and distrust among neighbours, and denunciations among relatives were not uncommon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachel's Mom (talkcontribs) 03:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questin about the Picture[edit]

In a conversation some years ago with Angel Alcala, author of The Spanish Inquisition and the Inquisitorial Mind, he mentioned that there no pictures of Torquemada were known to exist.

What is the provenance of the illustration here?

--Al-Nofi (talk) 19:06, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Click the picture for a description and info including artist and date, if known-I believe this picture has such information listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phred66 (talkcontribs) 04:23, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just one question, folks.[edit]

What is all this vague imprecations of "severe" torture? The Catholic Church sanctioned three forms of torture, the rack, stress positions and waterboarding. No torture that can endanger the life of the suspect is permitted, because clerics cannot shed blood. An inquisition with Roman representatives or sanctioned by Rome abide to those rules. Ref. Homza, The Spanish Inquisition: An Anthology of Sources. Please, no more of those vaguely phrased and unproven assertions. Jonathan Chin

IMO, "severe torture" is a redundancy. Mainly, I disagree with the logic of the sentence, "No torture that can endanger .... cannot shed blood." There are procedures that can lead to death of the subject without blood being shed, and as far as that goes, there were clerics, such as William the Conqueror's associate Odo, who went into battle armed with a mace instead of a sword, in order to evade the very prohibition you mention. Terry J. Carter (talk) 15:02, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I anybody paying attention here?[edit]

I just reverted this change from March (!) How could such an obvious vandalism have stood so long? Wefa (talk) 14:18, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Am I correct that you removed the following:
He was famously described by the Spanish chronicler Sebastián de Olmedo as "The hammer of heretics, the light of Spain, the saviour of his country, the honour of his order". He is known for his zealous campaign against the crypto-Jews.
Perhaps you could clarify.
Aberdeen01 (talk) 07:54, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. No. I restored that particular sentence. Read the history. It had been deleted in March, so that the intro read (for months!) "was a [...]Inquisitor General of Spain, and confessor to crypto-Jews and crypto-Muslims of Spain". Which is of course patent nonsense. I restored the Olmedo quote and the following sentence. Wefa (talk) 15:10, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Modern reference in fiction[edit]

Another reference to Torquemada in modern fiction / drama is by Mr. Deity. It may be worth mentioning in this wiki article. In particular see this video, (he is mentioned after 3min 22sec). In the (fictional) plot Mr Deity remembers the dyer consequences of a prank call to Torquemada.
Aberdeen01 (talk) 07:54, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Book burning[edit]

This sentence: "To stem the spread of heresy and anti-Catholicism, Torquemada promoted the burning of non-Catholic literature, especially the Talmud and, after the final defeat of the Moors at Granada in 1492, Arabic books as well." is not supported by this source:De Camp, L. Sprague, The Ancient Engineers, 135-6.
On page 132 of the same book it states, "Cardinal Jiminez, successor to Torquemada as Grand Inquisitor, had a haul of 24,000 books burned at Granada."
Therefore, I am removing said sentence and its source. If there is a source that supports said sentence then please post it here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


...a black cloak that had designs of hell’s flames or sometimes demons, dragons and/or snakes engraved on it.

Did the writer mean embroidered rather than engraved? Dick Kimball (talk) 14:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article still has many problems, perhaps exemplified by this typo--the garment of shame was a sanbenito. It needs a rewrite, which I don't have time to do. I read [[Henry Kamen]'s 1998 book on the Inquisition and several others many years ago, and learned that Spanish rulers had for years fought the Inquisition's extension into Aragon/Catalonia. I don't remember if Fernando let them in, or his predecessor, or if they were let in as part of the negotiations with the Rome which ended both the succession struggles and allowed Fernando and Isabella to unite "the Spains". I think after Kamen's work, historians agree that Spanish inquisitors were much more strictly controlled than in France and Italy, and the "leyenda negra" may have relied on incidents in other countries. I actually looked this article up because I remembered that the Torquemada family had a summer house in the mountains near the Camino de Santiago in either Villafranca del Bierzo or Astorga--unfortunately, neither those nor this article doesn't mention that at all. Of course the other problem is the tendency of some Spaniards to whitewash the Inquisition problem entirely (I actually had to put in some effort to see one either in a church or museum somewhere near the Camino's end)....12:38, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Anti-Catholic ranting and raving.[edit]

For the most part this article is nothing more than anti-Catholic ranting and raving, with absurd lines about "helpless heretics" and the "fanatical Inquisition". These are clearly value judgments which have no place in an objective historical analysis of Torquemada and the Inquisition. I understand there are a lot of you out there who have personal grudges against the Inquisition based on your biases and subjective beliefs, but wikipedia is not a forum for you to spout your opinions. This is a place for objective history and nothing more. Your biased comments will be removed.

Mel Brooks[edit]

No study of Torquemada would be complete without quoting what is arguably the worst pun ever to appear in cinema.

I refer of course to Mel Brook's take on the Spanish Inquisition in "History of the World, Part I":

"Torquemada, do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada, do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada, do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it - you can't Torquemada (talk him outta) anything!" Partnerfrance (talk) 11:33, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tomás de Torquemada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:03, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article priority[edit]

It seems very strange for a search for "Torquemada" to turn up an article about an obscure comic book, rather than this article about the real person. Having the comic book article referenced via an "other articles" link would be fine, but as the main article seems wrong. Paul Koning (talk) 14:25, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Add - In Popular Culture[edit]

The video game Red Dead Redemption contains a location called Torqùemada. (Torquemada is a settlement and a Mexican Army base of operations in Red Dead Redemption) SquashEngineer (talk) 13:23, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Converso origins of Torquemada: the sources and reference used do not back up the claim at all and are very flawed, so I removed the two parts stating there were some (detailed explanation below).[edit]

I removed two extremely serious flawed parts pertaining to the "converso ancestors" question in the Torquemada web page.

I explain here why this was justified (short version: the references used do not back up the claim at all):

I'll start with the second one (which helps to explain also why the first one is wrong too, see below):

"He came from a family of conversos (converts from Judaism); his uncle, Juan de Torquemada, was a celebrated theologian and cardinal[4] whose grandmother was a conversa. The 15th Century chronicler Hernando del Pulgar, a contemporary to de Torquemada and himself a converso, recorded that Tomás de Torquemada's uncle, Juan de Torquemada, had an ancestor, Álvar Fernández de Torquemada, who was married to a first-generation conversa.[5][6]"

A french author (whose main field of publication is antisemitism, Holocaust history and Holocaust denial about which he published inn peer reviewed historical journals), Gilles Karmasyn, has published online, in 2018, an examination of this question and, doing so, has produced a detailed criticism of this wikipedia part and its sources (here, especially note 7: It took me some time to cross check each one of its statements (well many months in fact because I checked the whole study, not only the problem of the wikipedia page), but now I can concur. So here it is: no source, either primary or secondary, ever stated that Tomas de Torquemada's Uncle, Juan de Torquemada, had a converted grand mother. Hernando del Pulgar's Chronichles DO NOT (contrary to what is stated in this wikipedia paragraph) state such a thing AT ALL. First, Alvar de Torquemada was not "an ancestor" of Juan de Torquemada. He was his father. Second NO author (and not Hernando del Pulgar) ever wrote Juan's father was married to a conversa. He did not even wrote that his grand-father was married to a conversa (it was not the case, of course). The only existing statement made my Hernando del Pulgar was that some Juan's ancestors ("abuelos" meaning grand-parents OR even previous ancestors like great gradnparents or great great etc., the term beeing quite ambiguous) were from converso *lineage* (with no mention of any conversa and which does not even states thos ancestors were themselves converted, but only from converted lineage)... which sends any converted jew pretty far back in Juan's genealogy, so even farther in Tomas's). Gilles Karmasyn gives several historians' position that del Pulgar cannot even be trusted about such remotely jewish ancestors.

The sources presented in the wikipedia article as backing up the (much incorrect in fact) statement about a converted grand mother are:

5. Falk, Avner. A Psychoanalytic History of the Jews, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996, p.508 ISBN 0838636608

Which is provided with a direct link to the page:

Well: Avner Falk DOES NOT mention Juan de Torquemada, nor Hernando del Pulgar! So no, Falk's book cannot be a source for stating (even wrongly) that Hernando de Pulgar would have written that Alvar de Torquemada was married to a conversa... Worst: Falk states (without providing any kind of source) that Tomas de Torquemada was himself a much perturbated jewish convert! This is of course a completely false and ridiculous statement. Avner Falk's book is totaly wrong, worthless and irrelevant here.

Second reference used for the same Hernando del Pulgar's fake statement:

6. "Tomas De Torquemada |". Retrieved 2019-12-01.

It provides a link to:

Where NOWHERE is to be found anything close to (or even far from) "The 15th Century chronicler Hernando del Pulgar, a contemporary to de Torquemada and himself a converso, recorded that Tomás de Torquemada's uncle, Juan de Torquemada, had an ancestor, Álvar Fernández de Torquemada, who was married to a first-generation conversa."

The only thing that can be read on this page is: "He [Torquemada] was the nephew of a celebrated theologian and cardinal, Juan de Torquemada, who himself was a descendant of a converso."

This phrase is not even backed up with a specific reference, though, in the bibliography, one can find Hernando del Pulgar's Chronicle where, indeed he states that, far, far away exists a converted jew (Juan's ancestors beeing of converso lineage, in del Pulgar's words). So here (6) either, the reference does not back up the wikipedia paragraph content.

Remember that we are not even talking Tomas de Torquemada, but about his uncle, about whom no primary source states any converso origin. So that the whole part that I cited is worthless and should be removed.

Now, even before that part, in the second paragraph of the introduction one can find this:

"Torquemada, who himself had converso ancestors,[4][5][6]"

As we have seen. 5 (Avner Falk) is totaly worthless: stating that Tomas de Torquemada was himself a jewish convert is plainly wrong. It does not back up that part in the introduction since it is a worthless source.

6. ("Tomas De Torquemada |") does NOT even state that Tomas had converso ancestors, but only that he was the nephew of Juan who had converso ancestors, which in fact, does NOT even imply that Tomas would have (more remote of course) converso ancestors, since (for example), as Inquisition Historian Benzion Netanyahu remarks: Juan would have a converso ancestor from his mother's side BUT Tomas de Torquemada's father would be only a half brother of Juan with a different mother (see Gilles Karmasyn's page for details). We also have spanish authors who explicitely state that Tomas de Torquemada was totaly pure and noble (Jeronimo Zurita).

So, no, 6 cannot even be used as backing up "Torquemada, who himself had converso ancestors"

As for 4:

4 "Meditations, or the Contemplations of the Most Devout". World Digital Library. 1479. Retrieved 2013-09-02.

Well, this is a work by Juan de Torquemada himself and it does NOT contain anything pertaining to Tomas's or even to Juan's converso ancestry. So his does NOT back up "Torquemada, who himself had converso ancestors". It shoudl not be there either.

So both parts that I quoted were removed because the references cited to back them up DO NOT back them up at all.

Gilles Karmasyn's study (see above) does in fact prove that, in order to be able to state that Tomas de Torquemada coudl have, somewhere, a converted jewish ancestor, one has to go very far, in fact far enough not to know anything for sure, and that the closest such ancestor would be a great great grandmother (or great great grandfather). Again: no primary source ever talks explicitely about a converso in Tomas's ancestors. The only primary source talking about Tomas's genealogy states that it was noble and pure. The few secondary sources that talk about Tomas's would be converso "ancestors" *always* rely only on Hernando del Pulgar's talking about Tomas's uncle, *Juan* de Torquemada, from which, in fact, deducing that Tomas himself is descended from a converso, is a bad idea, Pulgar beeing unreliable (in the eyes of several historians) and this "converso ancestors" beeing a very remote hypothesis...

For the reader's information, Gilles Karmasyn does study also the spanish and german versions of the Tomas de Torquemada wikipedia page and has pointed comparable flaws.

I hope my explanations were clear.

Ernest (talk) 14:10, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that Gilles Karmasyn is sufficiently notable to be considered an authority here.--Aristophile (talk) 14:23, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I did use Gilles Karmasyn's study as a basis (and because he does provide his sources very thouroughly) and, as I said, I checked myself, but I justified each time why the sources do not back up the claim in this page. I did not rely on GK. I detailed in each case. You could have checked for yourself, or even discussed my demonstation, which you did not. It took you 5 minutes to reverse my edit, barely the time to read my detailed explanations. You did not bother to verify a single aspect of my demonstration. You would have realized for example how ridiculous the Avner Falk source is... In fact I don't understand such a brutal reversal, without discussing the issue Ernest (talk) 14:36, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]