Diaconescu, Marius (szerk.): Mediaevalia Transilvanica 1999 (3. évfolyam, 1-2. szám)
Mentalităţi
22 Mária Makó Lupescu 9. The bishop aspersed the hot iron with holy water invoking the name of the Holy Trinity in order to show its justice.* 131 10. A prayer followed the aspersion in which God was invoked to declare his judgment through the healed or not healed hand.132 11. The prayer-moment was followed by a verbal act when a priest had interrogated the accused about his/her guilt.133 During this question-answer dialog between the ecclesiastical representative and the accused, the latter had to swear again that he was innocent. 12. Finally, the accused picked up the hot iron, walked three or nine paces, and put the iron down. When he picked up the hot iron the accused had to swear that he did not “prepare’ in any kind his hand for the trial.134 His hand was bandaged and sealed. A three-day waiting period before the hand was unbound followed this act. It seems that the judge indicated the person who had to bear the iron when the number of the accused was more then one.135 13. The solutio manus act represents in fact the inspection of the accused’s hand made in the hall of the church.136 If at the inspection made by the canons of the Oradean chapter137, the hand was clean - that is, healing without suppuration or discoloration - he was innocent or vindicated; if the wound was unclean, he was guilty. The moment of the sealing of the bandaged hand was very important because - as in the cases of the charters - a broken seal could annul the results of the ordeal. The register of Oradea numbered only four such cases: when the canons inspected the accuseds’ hands (solutio manus) they stated the seals had been unsealed earlier, and had been replaced with a false one to cover their intervention.138 In all these cases the accused was found guilty. Borovszky, Regestrum Varadinense, 149-50. 131 “Benedictio Dei, Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus sancti, descendat super hoc ferrum ad manifestandum verum iudicium...” Ibid., 150 cp. Kandra, A väradi regestrum, 29-30; Bálint, Ünnepi kalendárium, vol. 2, 520. 132 Two prayers, a short one and a long one, were enumareted for this act. Karácsonyi, and Borovszky, Regestrum Varadinense, 150-51. 133 It is important to notice that this was the moment when the bishop allowed the priest to take over the ceremony. Ibid., 151. 134 This is the last moment described in the appendix. So, in the following I continue the reconstruction procedure of the judicial process of the trial by hot iron based on the evidence provided by the records of the Oradean register cp. Bálint, Ünnepi kalendárium, voi. 2, 520; Kandra, A vâradi regestrum, 30. 135 “Quibus [Tum, Pousam, Forkos, Manciam, Forcos et Moynolt de villa Tord, item, Sixtus et Hunda de villa Tauornuk] a comite Gyula per pristaldum, nomine Cristophorum, ad iudicium ferri candentis Varadinum destinatis, praenominatus Moynolth, secundum sententiam iudicis portato ferro, combustus est.” Karácsonyi, and Borovszky, Regestrum Varadinense, no. 272, pp. 254-55. 136 Solymosi, “Guden magánoklevele,” 103, 105. 137 “Hegun itaque cum, portato Varadini ferro, solvi deberet, canonici manum eius non inspexerunt, quia sigillum non sanum invenerunt.” Karácsonyi, and Borovszky, Regestrum Varadinense, no. 50, p. 172. 138 In three cases the seal was damaged, in one case the seal was a false one. See, for instance, John's case from 1214: “Joannes, portato ferro, incombustam habuit manum, sed sigillum fractum.” Ibid., no. 85, p. 183. Finally, see those three men’s cases from 1221, who replaced the chapter seal with a false one: “Praedicti fures [homines Athile, scilicet: Georgium, Visam, Vyrsint et Milum], cum in die Dominico, portato ferro, solvi deberent, unus eorum nomine Georgius combustus est, manus vero
