Liz Da Costa Inquisition Case Analysis

In the time period of the Inquisition, a great deal of restriction was imposed on its subjects. The Inquisition was established during a time in which many people were emigrating – for various different reasons – to European and South American countries, bringing their values and cultures with them. This naturally brought about a multitude of conflicts between existing citizens and immigrants. Some pose the argument that due to this more prevalent blend of cultures across the world, the Inquisition led to more legal action and punishments for – what some argue to be – trivial and petty crimes, such as witchcraft and sodomy. However, we, as readers, understand these cases in different manners, based on the sources that we derive information
from. The case of the trial of Luiz da Costa is an example of a scenario in which we yield a different set of information from primary and secondary sources. Through this re-visitation of Luiz da Costa’s sodomy allegations, I first very briefly provide basic background information on Luiz da Costa’s experiences through my own research. I then examine two sources; a primary source and a secondary source, which both pertain to da Costa’s experiences. The first source examined, an excerpt from Afro Latino Voices, Shorter Edition (edited by Kathryn Joy McKnight and Leo J. Garofalo), contains background information on the trials, followed by the actual transcripts of the trials themselves. On the contrary, the second source, written by Julie E. Redekopp, investigates the process and decision of da Costa’s trials, followed some of the author’s theories. I conclude by arriving at my own notions regarding what each source specifically has to offer to the understanding of Luiz da Costa’s experiences, and the Inquisition at large.
Luiz da Costa was an African man who was enslaved in his early twenties as a part of the Inquisition by his master, Manoel Alves Cabral, who lived in Pernambuco, Brazil.
According to his confessions, da Costa and Alves Cabral were on a hunting trip when Alves Cabral sodomized da Costa, a manner in which Richard Gordon describes as “under the threat of death.” This case takes a keen similarity to many other instances of the time period, in the respect that although a slave was victimized, he or she was to stand trial for the actual act of the crime. Even though da Costa was the sodomite and the recipient of the crime, he was tried in Lisbon due to his role in the sodomizing. Da Costa was able to prove that he did not initiate the actions, and subsequently received a very light penalty; in the time period, a customary penalty for sodomy was a death sentence consisting of being burned at the stake. We are able to make our own conclusions and develop our own thought processes about the trials in many ways. Investigating the case mainly leads readers to a primary source and a secondary
source. Richard A.
Gordon provides a detailed account of da Costa’s life before and during the trials in his investigation, “Confessing Sodomy…Luiz da Costa.” Gordon not only elaborates on his analysis of the trials and da Costa’s life, but includes the actual, translated transcripts of the trials of Luiz da Costa. Gordon, who is an accomplished author, historian, and journalist, is very-well versed in Latin American studies, and begins the account by providing a detailed account of who da Costa was, and what he might have encountered during the trials. Gordon’s commentary and analysis is an excellent way to provide background information for the next segment of the chapter, the transcript of the trials. The transcripts are the materials that were taken directly from the time period of the Inquisition, and translated into English, defining them as a primary source. We can come to the understanding that a primary source is any piece of material that comes directly from the time period of the material of interest. Some may argue that since the material was translated, it is therefore not authentic by definition. However, many prominent sources, including the University of Maryland Libraries, agree that it still maintains its status as a primary source since it is an original material deriving from the time period at
hand. In contrast, Julie E. Redekopp, from the University of New Mexico, provides a much more in-depth analysis of da Costa’s trials. While Redekopp unquestionably poses theories and conclusions that are valid and hold a great deal of merit behind them, her material is still not considered a primary source, but is rather classified as a secondary source. Redekopp does not actually conduct her own original research, but devises theories based on the research carried out by others. For example, throughout her examination, she cites material from Afro-Latino Voices…Ibero-Atlantic Narratives – notably, the work of Richard Gordon, who carried out his own research and analysis of the da Costa trials. However, using the pre-researched information from Gordon and other sources, Redekopp is able to make her own educated and thorough suggestions and conclusions regarding da Costa’s sodomy trials. In both the beginning and the conclusion of her analysis, Redekopp portrays that her research arrives at the notion that da Costa was “generally aware” that sodomy, at the time, was a “nefarious sin” and an action that the Inquisition prohibited. She also presents her hypothesis with the assumption that since da Costa had taken part in the actions against his will, he should not be punished. Redekopp does, in fact, understand that his punishments (or lack thereof) were simply based on Inquisitional process, but poses the argument that the system may have been flawed, since in practice, da Costa should have been punished more significantly for something that he was found to have not partaken in willingly. As readers learn through examining the two sources, both the primary and secondary sources provide different perspectives to understanding the debacle of Luiz da Costa. To arrive at the conclusion that one particular source is more effective than the other at conveying information and engaging one’s critical thinking is, in essence, not useful for the situation. Rather, each source simply yields a different kind of information, and the conclusions that one can draw from each source are, to an extent, subjective. The primary source of interest, the transcript of the Trials of Luiz da Costa, presents the raw material that was taken directly from the time period. In general, a primary source offers a first-hand account of a particular event that is not filtered through evaluation or interpretation, as the University of Maryland suggests. This particular primary source includes the actual verbatim testimony from inquisitor Manoel Afonso Rebelo, who presided over the trial of da Costa. Rebelo provided his first-hand account of the confession that he heard from da Costa, who had confessed to engaging in sodomy, but against his will. From this specific primary source, we also are introduced to the accurateness of the testimonies; immediately following the introductions and confessions, readers can notice the many certifications that the trial transcripts include, such as the Register of Secrecy and the Certification of Evidence. The trial transcripts serve as a testament to the accuracy of the information, and are utilized as a very effective primary source for understanding Inquisitional process and how each individual case is so painstakingly carried out. Secondary sources can also be utilized as beneficial fountains of knowledge to understand both the Inquisition and history at large. Generally speaking, secondary sources are accounts written after the original time period has passed. Many make the claim that secondary sources benefit from hindsight; authors of secondary sources have the capability to analyze the event in question, identify problems or mishaps in the processes, and pose solutions on what would have been the most appropriate course of action. In the case of the Inquisition and the trials of Luiz da Costa, Redekopp’s secondary source showcases the aforementioned hindsight effect. Redekopp takes readers through an investigative journey through the process of Luiz da Costa’s accusation, trial, and verdict due to a sodomy charge. Her findings indicate that da Costa was let off due to the notion that he invoked a sense of “moral superiority” over his master, thus making him free of guilt in the process. However, one can easily make the argument that she is questioning the practice of the Inquisition itself with these claims. Redekopp presents her material in the way that readers can draw conclusions that the Inquisitional process is flawed; if the inquisitors devise a law, then it should be enforced in all circumstances. Of course, da Costa was not indeed given the customary death sentence. Both primary and secondary sources are integral to understanding historical events and ideologies. In the setting of the Inquisition, primary and secondary sources help society not only understand history, but encourages society to draw its own conclusions based on the information presented. Through these sources, we not only come to an understanding of what exactly the situation of Luiz da Costa entailed, but are able to arrive at our own thoughts and notions about the Inquisitional process and its effectiveness.