As a lay-employee of the Catholic Church I’m glad to hear that the developers won’t be bowing to “political correctness.” The Catholic Church has indeed had quite a few dark periods in its history and it’s important that people understand the bad times so as not to repeat them. Indulgences, in and of themselves, were not necessarily a bad thing as @Paladin pointed out. It was when those greedy clergy began “selling to the highest bidder” so to speak, that it became such a problem. When the everyday person could not find the peace they craved because they couldn’t afford the price of salvation, they were the ones who were hurt. While definitely a horrible period and a great story to tell, I hope the developers also remember there were a lot of good Catholics too. As an institution, the Church has weathered many bad times and deservedly has a certain reputation among other religions or non-believers, but it has also done a lot of good that shouldn’t be forgotten either.
6 Likes
I really, really hope the stereotypical witchcraft schlock gets left out. Whatever one thinks of the Inquisition, the popular notion of them being involved in witch hunts is without historical basis; their prerogative was against heresy, and charges of witchcraft were commonly viewed by Inquisitors as being little more than absurd peasant superstition. Indeed, as the historian Henry Kamen noted in his excellent study of the Spanish Inquisition, the punishment of witchcraft was almost exclusively enacted by secular authorities and in cases where the Inquisition was involved the death sentence was rare.
The inquisition is more known for their overly zealous persecution of “heritics” than witch hunts.
Joan d’arc was considered a heretic working for the devil and even some accused her of being a witch.
Joan d’arc was considered a heretic working for the devil and even some accused her of being a witch.
Joan of Arc was not tried by the Inquisition. The University of Paris (an institution that, it must be noted, was strongly pro-English in its sentiments) did request that she be tried by Jean Graverent, the Inquisitor of France, but the Burgundians preferred the more lucrative, politically advantageous and more reliable English offer of 10,000 livres in exchange for her. The subsequent trial was understood by just about everyone to be a politically expedient means of saving face after the embarrassing defeats Joan had inflicted on the English. Indeed, the presiding judge, the bishop Pierre Cauchon, was appointed solely because he was an English partisan and in fact had no legal jurisdiction to take the trial. She was most certainly not charged with witchcraft; rather, the prosecution focused on asking her obscure theological questions she would have no hope of answering in the hopes of easily finding her guilty of heresy as a flimsy pretext for executing her. Her trial and execution had nothing to do with witchcraft, very little to do with religion and everything to do with political expediency.
The simple fact is this: the belief in witchcraft that is commonly associated with the medieval period has been vastly exaggerated. In fact, at the Council of Frankfurt in 794 it was decreed that burning people as witches was a crime because witches did not exist, and as such killing them constituted nothing less than murder and those found guilty would be punished by death. This was fully in keeping with older Burgundian and Lombardic law codes that likewise condemned killing suspected “witches” as murder. This understanding of witchcraft as being a superstition remained the norm for both legal and ecclesiastical authorities until the 14th century, at which point we find secular authorities began taking a far more active interest in prosecuting such cases; the Catholic Church didn’t begin taking serious action until 1484 when Pope Innovent VIII released his bull Summis desiderantes (which is arguably closer to the Renaissance than it is to the medieval era), yet even with this act most Inquisitors (especially in Spain and Italy) were extremely skeptical, being convinced it was all popular hysteria with no bearing on reality. Such was the verdict of the Spanish Inquisitor Alonso de Salazar Frias at a trial for witchcraft in 1612 at Navarre. In his own words:
“I have not found the slightest evidence from which to infer that a single act of witchcraft has really occurred… in the diseased state of the public mind every agitation of the matter is harmful and increases the evil [witch-hunting hysteria]. I deduce the importance of silence and reserve from the experience that there were neither witches nor bewitched until they were talked and written about.”
7 Likes
Here in Denmark the first known case of a witch getting burned was in 1540, just after the reformation.
The last official one was in 1693. But there where cases of lynching later.
Burning witches have nothing to do with the medieval period.
5 Likes
He downgraded to Peasant because he is dissatisfied with how nudity will be presented in the game
I would really love to see implemented religious features, like the mentioned two popes, excommunications and indulgences. Perhaps even featuring a college of cardinals, because the game is settled in Holy Roman Empire? Religion was a very important factors for rulers, because being disfavored by the clergy and the pope (who had enormous worldly influence) could lead to a loss of power really quick.
As a Christian (not a Catholic though) I also hope they don’t sink into this anti-religious tone that modern society seems to love and mock people of faith.
However, I don 't want them to sugar coat it either. The Inquisition and whatnot, corruption should be there but it shouldn’t be like every priest or cardinal is some scheming douchebag. You should come across all types of people. People who don’t believe but pretend they do, people who use the Bible or the Church to further their own ends, AND people who actively practice the teachings of Christianity and are good people who help others.
That would be unbiased and it would be accurate.
10 Likes
I’m concerned about how they’ll show Hussites.
In Czech Republic most people buy into communist propaganda that idelised Hus and his movement.
Fact is that things were not so black and white. For example Hus made Vaclav IV pass Kutná Hora decree which basicly ruined Charles University and caused mass exodus of foreign students and professors.
This caused extreme stagnation in following century and together with Hussite movement prevented renessaince from coming to bohemia.
Hussites themselves burned hundreds of churces, monasteries and villages mostly with people inside. This ruined the country for centuries to come. Hussites also turned on each other and pesecuted various sects that emerged during the war. And I’m not even going to say what they did to Vaclav IVs corpse.
1 Like
But at the same time they complained about many of the same things Luther complained about.
And they (rightfully) didn’t think it fair that the church should own so much land.
And it also had elements of a czech proto nationalism against the “Germans”
My point is, you can easily go the other way and only show the Hussite as only evil heretics.
As FrontlinerDelta wrote, lets hope for a balanced version that both show all the good things about the church, but also the darker side.
But the fist act is in 1403… a bit early for the Hussite
It’s interesting to read all the history some of the other posters are sharing. As a Lutheran I obviously don’t want to see the church demonized; I think plenty of people have already shared that sentiment in this thread. I’d just like to see things portrayed as they were. The church was a keystone of society and influenced almost everyone to some degree. That influence wasn’t for the bad either although wrongs were committed by some men. Just write the game to present things as they were without judging and I’ll be happy.
2 Likes
Yes, especially the serious taxes on peasants beside the one imposed by landlord, the political intrigues, keeping people in the dark and preaching them they should just take the suffering and starving as their due, while the clergy and the nobles were gorging themselves on food and drinks. Torture, executions of heretics, crusades. It is very offensive from anyone to just say “meh, yeah, everyone did that, but still the Church and religion is holy and kind and peaceful…” Its VERY offensive, like if someone said the holocaust did not happen. And I’m very glad that they do not have the power anymore to physically harm someone just because that person thinks differently, I’m glad it does not have the legal power to force itself on people. I bet religious people would like to bring that back…
Hello, friend, you seem frustrated?
Excellent! The rainbow flag will become the standard to which all of the pink knights rally and a new age will dawn ushered in by men with hairless chests and women with hairy legs!
They have this big octopuses in river Vltava??? Omg I’m cancelling my beer trip to Prague this minute! XD /just kidding
Hillarious. xD But I very much hope not…
Fear not my friend. Warhorse has made their position quite clear on that subject. ^_-
I’m sure this is unintentional, but statement appears to be asserting something it really shouldn’t… 
Religion has always been divisive/contentious. I see much arguing for kid gloves, but in the interests of accuracy, organised religion was rife with corruption at the time… why should this not be faithfully presented?
Care to provide some examples of the Church keeping people in the dark? I keep seeing this sort of thing asserted across the internet (including this forum), and I still have not yet seen any good evidence for these claims. On the subject of starvation, medieval western Europe had been experiencing an agricultural boom stimulated by a period of global warming and technological innovation (the horse collar, the heavy plow, the improved construction of wind and water mills, etc) before the 14th century that stimulated a massive population explosion. Instances of mass starvation more often than not were irregularities rather than the norm, a side effect of special circumstances (such as war or the Black Death) that brought on periodic times of scarcity in which everyone (not just the peasantry) suffered, and it would be a mistake to assume that this was the norm.
I take it you have surely heard of Francis of Assisi and the Franciscans? Bernard of Clairvaux? Dominic de Guzman and the Dominicans? Please, please don’t reduce medieval clergymen to cartoonish stereotypes, because they weren’t. Some were rich, some poor; some fat, some thin; some good, some corrupt, and I for one hope the finished game will accurately reflect this.
Torture was common practice in legal trials dating back to the Roman empire as a means of procuring evidence, and its usage in medieval Europe was part of its inheritance of Greek and Roman intellectual and legal thought. Its usage in the Inquisition was in imitation of the secular courts of law, which in their turn were imitating the aforementioned Roman precedent. While torture is unjustifiable, it must be noted that the Inquisition used it far less often than the secular courts; indeed, the historian Henry Kamen notes in his “The Spanish Inquisition” that “In statistical terms, it would be correct to say that torture was used infrequently.” He cites the trials of some 400 conversos (that is, Jewish converts to Catholicism) in Ciudad Real in the period of 1483 to 1485, in which only two out of the four hundred were subjected to torture. Periodic escalations in the usage of torture occurred throughout the 16th and 17th centuries, but even then the Inquisition’s activity was far less brutal than that of the prosecutors of secular courts.
He concludes:
Unfortunately I don’t have any books or sources on the Inquisition’s activities in Bohemia (I’m more familiar with its operations in Spain, France and Italy), so I don’t have much to extrapolate on the specific conditions of 15th century Bohemia beyond the generally consistent practices of the Inquisition in the rest of Europe.
A practice inherited again from Roman law, specifically the Codex Iustinianus, which saw heresy as a threat to the ruler’s authority because it brought into question the source of his power (that is, God); as such, monarchs would often prosecute heresy ruthlessly. The creation and formulation of the Inquisition owed a great deal to ecclesiastical frustration with theologically ill-trained secular authorities trying and executing people on the flimsiest of grounds. Thomas Madden, one of the leading medieval scholars over here in the United States, has summed up the issue thusly:
[quote]From the perspective of secular authorities, heretics were traitors to God and king and therefore deserved death. From the perspective of the Church, however, heretics were lost sheep that had strayed from the flock. As shepherds, the pope and bishops had a duty to bring those sheep back into the fold, just as the Good Shepherd had commanded them. So, while medieval secular leaders were trying to safeguard their kingdoms, the Church was trying to save souls. The Inquisition provided a means for heretics to escape death and return to the community.
Most people accused of heresy by the medieval Inquisition were either acquitted or their sentence suspended. Those found guilty of grave error were allowed to confess their sin, do penance, and be restored to the Body of Christ. The underlying assumption of the Inquisition was that, like lost sheep, heretics had simply strayed. If, however, an inquisitor determined that a particular sheep had purposely departed out of hostility to the flock, there was nothing more that could be done. Unrepentant or obstinate heretics were excommunicated and given over to the secular authorities. Despite popular myth, the Church did not burn heretics. It was the secular authorities that held heresy to be a capital offense.[/quote]
No one is saying that injustices did not happen, or that torture or killing heretics was justified - although I most certainly will protest that your comparison to Holocaust denial is downright absurd and speaks of a poor knowledge of the time period. Speaking for myself, what I’m asking for is an accurate treatment of the time period that will hopefully help people understand why and how people behaved the way they did rather than engage in the anachronistic, cartoonish and condescending pandering typical of medieval-themed literature. I have no interest in yet another game that furthers the ridiculous stereotypes of the time period popularized in works like Kingdom of Heaven or Assassins Creed.
6 Likes