2. The investigation that caught up Guilhem de Rodes was initially
prompted by Geraud de Rodes, another brother of Guilhem’s,
who came spontaneously to the inquisitor and named many
people for their involvement in Catharism. His confession,
Guilhem’s confession, and those of at least fifteen others, were
recorded in the inquisitorial registers. The witnesses responded
to set questions asked by d’Ablis,and supplied some material of
their own; their answers were recorded by the inquisitor’s
scribes, and stored for safe keeping and further use.
將吉揚牽連進本起調 的主因是他的弟弟哲羅，他主動地查
向宗教法官告發與純潔派有關係的人。他的供詞、吉揚的
供詞、以及其他至少 15 人的供詞都被記錄在宗教審判簿當
中，證人們與法官的問答皆被記錄在登記簿中，以便以後
使用。
3. Some of these registers have survived, so their fourteenth-
century speech is still with us. This particular register has been
edited and printed by a modern historian. I have used some of
the material to bring you the story of Guilhem Déjean. The
questions, however, do not end there. In a later chapter I shall
say more about evidence, its uses, and its problems. For now,
look back at the story. I hope that it engaged your attention; I
chose it because it certainly engaged mine.
有些紀錄流傳至今，所以我們才能知道 14 世紀的對話。這
特別的登記簿由一個現代歷史學家編輯並印刷出來，所以
現在的我們才能使用這些資料，並了解吉揚的故事。不過
，問題並未解決，下一章將討論這些證據的使用與相關問
題。現在，我們來回頭看看這個故事吧，我希望這個故事
可以引起你們的關注，因為我也被這個故事所吸引。
4. It grabs us, perhaps, because it is a murder, and we are familiar
with the guilty pleasure of sharing horror stories. It is also
clearly a ‘story’ in that it has a beginning, middle, and end,
which might make it more ‘satisfying’. It may interest and
surprise us, if we were not previously aware that medieval
people got up to such activities. The people in the story were
not kings or princes or saints or famous writers, they were
everyday people. We may therefore simply be diverted to
discover that we know anything about them at all!
這個故事吸引著我們，因為他是一起謀殺案，而我們會享
受分享恐怖故事的喜悅。他其實還是一個“故事”，因為有起
承轉合。故事裡敘述的並非皇室、聖徒或是著名作家，而
是尋常百姓，而我們會因了解尋常百姓的生活而感到欣喜
。
5. Perhaps the story also interests us because of what is strange
about it. It has been suggested(by the writer L.P.Hartley) that
‘the past is a foreign country; they do things differently there’.
Douglas Adams, the science-fiction author, posits an opposite
case: the past is truly a foreign country, they do things just like
us. Somewhere between these two propositions is the elusive
element that attracts us to the past, and prompts us to study
history.
這個故事還有一個吸引我們的地方─他所記述的奇特之事。
曾有作家提出”過去”是一個異邦，而在那裏的生活方式與現
今截然不同。科幻作家亞當斯持有反對意見，他認為過去
的確是一個異邦，但是生活方式與現今相同。因此，在這
兩種看法之間有著模糊地帶，這就是我們研究歷史的動力
。
6. The story told above speaks to both statements. We
understand and relate to sending letters, visiting relatives,
journeys from our hometown. We know about fear of
persecution and we know about murder, even if we have not
experienced them at first hand. If I had translated the
participants’ names into your vernacular language (‘Guilhem’
would become ‘William’ in English) then they might seem even
closer to us. The names I have used are from Occitan, the
language of that time and period.
上述的故事證明了兩種觀點。即使我們沒有親身經歷送信
件、拜訪親戚、出外旅行，甚至謀殺、迫害等事件，我們
都能了解其感受並產生共鳴。
如果我把故事翻成你們的語言，會令你們感覺更親近，而
我所用的語言來自當時的語言 - 奧西坦語
7. Here in fact I have cheated slightly; the records are in Latin, so
perhaps I should have employed that tongue, which uses the
version Guillelmus. But the names are strange to us in a
different way. It seems odd to find so many people all called
Guilhem; and we do not often use our place of birth to render
our surnames (‘de Rodes’ meaning ‘of the place called Rodes’).
We know about religion, but we are probably unfamiliar with
the concept of heresy, the workings of inquisition, and the
belief in two Gods.
但是這裡我有些誤導，這些紀錄是用拉丁文寫的，我應該
採用拉丁文，把吉揚翻譯成吉爾莫斯。
大家都取名為吉揚有些奇怪，我們通常不會以地區來作為
自己的姓氏 ( 德 . 羅茲意思是”羅茲”這個地方 ) 。
我們了解宗教，但是我們可能不清楚什麼是異端、什麼是
宗教審判以及兩個上帝的信仰。
8. Do we see this as a bizarre ‘superstition’? Or as no stranger an
idea than the Son of God descending to Earth, dying on the
cross and then being resurrected? ‘Heresy’ can only exist
where there is an ‘orthodoxy’ to define it: both medieval
Catholics and medieval Cathars laid claim to being ‘true’
Christians. Whatever our current philosophies and religious
beliefs, can we lay claim to a real connection with either
group? If we read more of the records, other elements of
difference would strike us too.
我們是否該把這些視為稀奇古怪的“迷信”? 或者他不比上帝
之子降世、死在十字架上又復活的想法更奇怪。異端存在
於有著”正統”定義的地方。中世紀的天主教徒以及純潔派教
徒都自認為是真正的基督徒。不管我們現在的哲學和宗教
信仰是什麼，我們能否聲稱我們與這兩個團體有聯繫 ?
如果閱讀更多紀錄，我們還會找到一些不同的線索。
9. Although Guilhem de Rodes and his brother were clearly able
to read and write (they communicated by letter) they are quite
unusual in this: most people at that time would not have had as
much access to literacy. Indeed, the concept of ‘literacy’ was
rather different in the fourteenth century: if you were
described as litteratus (‘literate’) this meant that you could
read and write Latin and knew how to interpret scripture.
Facility in vernacular languages did not count as ‘literacy’, no
matter how useful that ability was.
雖然吉揚與他的兄弟能讀能寫 ( 他們透過書信交流 ) ，但是
他們在當時實屬特例，畢竟當時不是每個人都能識字。
事實上”識字”的概念古今不同，在 14 世紀， Litteratus( 識
字 ) 意思是能 讀寫拉丁文並能解釋經文。能使用本國語言夠
不能稱為”識字的”人，無論讀寫能力多麼有用。
10. Although Guilhem de Rodes and his brother were clearly able
to read and write (they communicated by letter) they are quite
unusual in this: most people at that time would not have had as
much access to literacy. Indeed, the concept of ‘literacy’ was
rather different in the fourteenth century: if you were
described as litteratus (‘literate’) this meant that you could
read and write Latin and knew how to interpret scripture.
Facility in vernacular languages did not count as ‘literacy’, no
matter how useful that ability was.
雖然吉揚與他的兄弟能讀能寫 ( 他們透過書信交流 ) ，但是
他們在當時實屬特例，畢竟當時不是每個人都能識字。
事實上”識字”的概念古今不同，在 14 世紀， Litteratus( 識
字 ) 意思是能 讀寫拉丁文並能解釋經文。能使用本國語言夠
不能稱為”識字的”人，無論讀寫能力多麼有用。
