Offering clearly incorrect numbers from Rummel as a “middle ground” is nonsensical.
Also, I can see you know nothing about history with this astonishingly erroneous comment:
“Would anyone seriously trust an accused regime’s records as “the” authentic original source document?”
With the inquisition and in regard to the number of people questioned, tried and executed later by the state, the answer according to all modern, reputable historians is yes. You make the mistake of comparing the inquisition to a “regime”. It wasn’t, not anywhere. It did not have the modern regime’s need to create or hide statistics. Also, in regard to those questioned, the records are almost verbatim records. Again, they are always trustworthy in regard to numbers.
“If this were the holocaust instead of the inquisition, wouldn’t we raise an eyebrow if someone claimed that the only deaths that should count are the ones where a Jew was executed after a trial according to German law at the time?”
Your comparison is nonsensical. The Nazis had a deliberate program of extermination. Thus, those they exterminated through murder or horrendous treatment in camps would naturally count toward the total number of Jews murdered by the Nazis. The inquisitional was not multi-national, but usually local. It was not commissioned or empowered to kill anyone ever under any circumstances. The numbers Rummel puts forward are bogus.
“Were Jews even considered German or human for that matter during the holocaust?”
No. But the inquisition never lost sight of the humanity of those it investigated. The goal was always to reconcile heretics to God, the Church and society.
You wrote:
“Remember that Rummel’s PhD is in Political Science.”
Right, he’s not an historian.
“Rummel considers all such things and lays the blame on the government authorizing the death whether directly, indirectly. In the case of the inquisition, he includes both Catholic and Protestant inquisitions (inquisition in Spain, Portugal, Netherlands and New World) from the 16th to 18th centuries. And Rummel puts the deaths of Aztecs, American Indians et al in separate categories on the same table even though many would reasonably argue that it was part of “winning” the world for Christ, i.e. forced conversions.”
Sorry, it makes no sense in any case.
“I have no idea at all what if anything Rummel thinks of the findings of these newer studies – or how he would weight the documents offered by the Vatican. But I’m fairly confident, if he believed the numbers to be better than his own, he would want to update his own statistics as he has done before. If nothing else, it could affect the “minimum” on the table.”
The truth has been known for years. Since he is not a historian, and seems to only be acquainted with decades old books, I have no reason to believe he cared much about accurate numbers from the start. His thesis is about the dangers of governmental power. It is not about numbers in themselves.
“As his website says, contact him at Hawaii.edu. His eaddy is at the bottom of his C.V.”
Again, if he honestly cared about accuracy he would have simply gone to the library or contacted a specialist.
“Natural Law and vladimir998, I am pinging you only as a courtesy. I choose not to reply to ad hominems whether directed at Rummel or me.”
Thanks for the ping. I made no ad hominem attacks. Everything I said was true.
When Jewish scholars get in the fray, I'll probably become more curious. Their ancestors were involved in the matter and, AFAIK, mine weren't.
For now, in my eyes it is simply that, revisionism.