Trial of Gilles De Rais (44 page)
Read Trial of Gilles De Rais Online
Authors: George Bataille
Tags: #Non-Fiction, #Cultural Anthropology, #Psychology, #True Crime, #European History, #France, #Social History, #v.5, #Literary Studies, #Medieval History, #Amazon.com, #Criminology, #Retail, #History
Interrogated to know whether the said Corrillaut, also known as Poitou, had heard anything of the preceding events gathered by the witness and Milord Eustache, as reported, he responded that he thought not; moreover, the witness believed that the same Corrillaut, also known as Poitou, was asleep by this time.
Interrogated as to the season or date, he responded that about a year had passed since these effects had been produced.
Interrogated as to the hour, he responded that the aforementioned things happened during the night, before midnight, and ended an hour later.
Interrogated as to the month and day, he responded that he did not know precisely anymore, but is certain that it was during the summer.
Item, the same witness, deposing in the case, added that the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, and Master François were alone at Machecoul for a period of five weeks, in a room of that same castle, a room whose key the said Gilles, the accused, always held; and the witness heard it said, he does not know by whom, that the figure or image of a hand, in a kind of wrought iron, had been discovered in the said room.
Item, he added and deposed, however, that the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, carried into his room in the castle at Tiffauges, a room that the same witness and Corrillaut, also known as Poitou, guarded, the hand and heart of a young boy who had been killed in the said place of Tiffauges by order of the said Gilles, the accused, perhaps by Gilles himself, and that the latter deposited them in a glass covered with a piece of linen, near the fireplace of the said room, namely on the upper part of the fireplace known in French as the
cyma;
120
and he enjoined the witness and the said Corrillaut, also known as Poitou, to bolt the door of the said room.
cyma;
120
and he enjoined the witness and the said Corrillaut, also known as Poitou, to bolt the door of the said room.
Interrogated as to what was done with that hand and heart, he responded that he did not really know, but he thought Master François must have used them, and that the said accused Gilles must have entrusted them to him to perform his invocations, so that he might offer that heart and hand to the conjured demons.
And the witness was enjoined in the usual form to reveal nothing of his deposition to anyone, etc.
II. Depositions concerning the violation of Church privileges.JEAN ROUSSEAU, man-at-arms of the Duke of Brittany, parishioner of Saint-Nicolas of Nantes, aged forty or thereabouts to the best of his belief, a witness, produced, received, and having sworn to bear witness to the truth, in the cases of this order, examined this October 19, 1440, in the year of the aforesaid pontificate and general council, submitted to inquiry and interrogated as to the content of Article XLII, beginning with: “Item, that two years ago, etc.,” which mentions the violation of ecclesiastical immunity, deposed and stated that on the Monday following the past Pentecost, while this witness, as well as Jean Le Ferron and a certain Guillaume Hautreys, and several others, were in the parochial church of Saint-Étienne-de-Mermorte, in the diocese of Nantes, which parochial church was and is located near the castle of the said place; to which place the witness had gone on behalf of the Lord Duke in order to place a restraining order on the debtors of the royal treasury against discharging or paying over to Gilles, the accused, the rents, poll taxes, or other taxes of the place. And while the witness and the aforesaid others were there at the close of High Mass in the aforesaid parochial church, the witness saw the aforenamed Gilles, the accused, with a kind of sword, called in French a
gisarme,
121
in his hand, followed by certain others of his men, enter the said church boisterously, and, addressing himself menacingly to the aforesaid Le Ferron and others then in the said church, but particularly to the aforesaid Ferron, cry out in a terrible voice, in French: “Outside! Outside!”
122
Then the witness saw a certain Lenano, Marquis de Ceva, an intimate of the said Gilles, the accused, who was also there, lead the aforesaid Le Ferron outside the said church behind the said Gilles, the accused, and his other men; and he believes that the said Le Ferron exited the said church then because he was terrified by the said accused’s threats more than anything else. The witness intended to leave the said church then and would have done so had not someone in the retinue of the said Gilles, the accused, made a sign to the witness with his finger (and in making the said sign, he brought his finger to his nose and eyes similar to how one crosses oneself), and for this reason he remained in the aforesaid church.
gisarme,
121
in his hand, followed by certain others of his men, enter the said church boisterously, and, addressing himself menacingly to the aforesaid Le Ferron and others then in the said church, but particularly to the aforesaid Ferron, cry out in a terrible voice, in French: “Outside! Outside!”
122
Then the witness saw a certain Lenano, Marquis de Ceva, an intimate of the said Gilles, the accused, who was also there, lead the aforesaid Le Ferron outside the said church behind the said Gilles, the accused, and his other men; and he believes that the said Le Ferron exited the said church then because he was terrified by the said accused’s threats more than anything else. The witness intended to leave the said church then and would have done so had not someone in the retinue of the said Gilles, the accused, made a sign to the witness with his finger (and in making the said sign, he brought his finger to his nose and eyes similar to how one crosses oneself), and for this reason he remained in the aforesaid church.
He stated that he had heard several people say as well that at that very moment in a wood near the said place a company of men-at-arms, about sixty in all, were waiting for the said Gilles, who had them stationed there laying in ambush. He also stated that while he was in the said church, he caught sight of three or four men-at-arms, wearing capelines or wallets
123
on their heads, and other arms, going in front of the said church, and that he heard it said later that the said Le Ferron was brought to the aforesaid castle by the same Gilles, the accused, and his intimates, which castle the said Le Ferron restored or returned to the aforesaid Gilles, the accused, who incarcerated the said Le Ferron in the same place.
123
on their heads, and other arms, going in front of the said church, and that he heard it said later that the said Le Ferron was brought to the aforesaid castle by the same Gilles, the accused, and his intimates, which castle the said Le Ferron restored or returned to the aforesaid Gilles, the accused, who incarcerated the said Le Ferron in the same place.
Interrogated as to whether, when the same Le Ferron left the said church, some other violence was perpetrated by the same Gilles, the accused, and his men, he responded that he neither saw nor knew anything else besides what was above noted. And the witness added that he had known the said Jean Le Ferron since his youth, and that, several years before he was thus conveyed and incarcerated, he had seen him in a cleric’s habit, having received the clerical tonsure, and that he was commonly reputed to be a cleric.
And he was enjoined in the usual manner to reveal nothing of his deposition to anyone.
2. Lenano, Marquis de Ceva, captain in the service of Gilles de Rais. October 19, 1440.LENANO DE CEVA, marquis, of the diocese of Alba,
124
forty or more to the best of his belief, a witness produced, examined the aforementioned day and year, submitted to inquiry and interrogated on the content of the article mentioning the violation of Church immunity, stated and deposed that the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, accompanied by Gilles de Sillé and Bertrand Poulein, arrived at the parochial and vicarial church of Sainte-Étienne-de-Mermorte during High Mass, after the elevation of the host and Communion; he did not remember the day, but he believed that it was on the solemnity of the previous Pentecost or the day following the feast; that the said Gilles, the accused, held a kind of sword, in French called a
gisarme;
125
and that he said to the aforenamed Jean Le Ferron: “Ha, ribald, you beat my men, and extorted from them; come outside the church or I’ll kill you on the spot!”
126
Whereupon the said Le Ferron, on his knees and pleading, indicated to him that he would do what he wanted. And, frightened by the said Giles, the accused, he requested the witness to assist him and intercede for him, for fear of ill-treatment by the said accused. The witness made Le Ferron understand that if any harm should befall him, he would suffer it himself in like manner; and after a heated exchange of words, the said Le Ferron left the said church of his own volition, with the witness, following the same Gilles, the accused, toward the castle of Mermorte, which the said Gilles had previously sold to Geoffroy Le Ferron, and which the aforesaid Jean Le Ferron thereupon returned to the said accused; and the same Le Ferron remained a prisoner of the said Gilles, the accused.
124
forty or more to the best of his belief, a witness produced, examined the aforementioned day and year, submitted to inquiry and interrogated on the content of the article mentioning the violation of Church immunity, stated and deposed that the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, accompanied by Gilles de Sillé and Bertrand Poulein, arrived at the parochial and vicarial church of Sainte-Étienne-de-Mermorte during High Mass, after the elevation of the host and Communion; he did not remember the day, but he believed that it was on the solemnity of the previous Pentecost or the day following the feast; that the said Gilles, the accused, held a kind of sword, in French called a
gisarme;
125
and that he said to the aforenamed Jean Le Ferron: “Ha, ribald, you beat my men, and extorted from them; come outside the church or I’ll kill you on the spot!”
126
Whereupon the said Le Ferron, on his knees and pleading, indicated to him that he would do what he wanted. And, frightened by the said Giles, the accused, he requested the witness to assist him and intercede for him, for fear of ill-treatment by the said accused. The witness made Le Ferron understand that if any harm should befall him, he would suffer it himself in like manner; and after a heated exchange of words, the said Le Ferron left the said church of his own volition, with the witness, following the same Gilles, the accused, toward the castle of Mermorte, which the said Gilles had previously sold to Geoffroy Le Ferron, and which the aforesaid Jean Le Ferron thereupon returned to the said accused; and the same Le Ferron remained a prisoner of the said Gilles, the accused.
Moreover, he said that the fifty or sixty men that the said Gilles, the accused, had assembled in a neighboring wood, laying in ambush, were to be charged with assaulting and invading the said castle if the said Le Ferron did not turn it over to the said Gilles, the accused. They were wearing mantles, which in French are called
paletots,
127
capelines,
128
visored helmets, sallets
129
and other arms. But in fact, he said, none of those who entered the said church wore a capeline, a sallet, or a visored helmet.
paletots,
127
capelines,
128
visored helmets, sallets
129
and other arms. But in fact, he said, none of those who entered the said church wore a capeline, a sallet, or a visored helmet.
And he added that he had seen the said Jean Le Ferron in a cleric’s habit and tonsured, and that he was commonly held and well-known as a cleric.
And such was his deposition and he knew no more, except as public uproar would have it, which he said agreed with the facts deposed by him.
And he was enjoined in the usual manner to reveal nothing of his deposition to anyone.
3. Bertrand Poulein, mati-at-arms in the service of Gilles de Rais. October 19, 1440.BERTRAND POULEIN, of the diocese of Bayeux, originally from Cantelou, near Caen, in Normandy, about forty-five to the best of his belief, a witness produced and sworn in, examined this day in the aforementioned year, submitted to inquiry and interrogated on the content of Article XLII, which mentions the violation of Church immunity, said and deposed that he, the witness, in the company of the aforenamed Gilles de Rais, the accused, Gilles de Sillé, as well as many others, on the day of the solemnity of the previous Pentecost, or the day following that same feast, but he believed it was the day of the said solemnity, entered the parochial and vicarial church of Saint-Étienne-de-Mermorte, in the diocese of Nantes, in which church they found the aforenamed Jean Le Ferron hearing Mass: to which Jean Le Ferron the same Gilles, the accused, holding a kind of sword called a
gisarme
130
in French, said in a rage, bursting with terrible threats upon the said Le Ferron, cried out in French: “Ha ribald, you beat my men, and extorted from them; come, come, outside the church, or I’ll kill you on the spot!”
131
Whereupon the said Ferron, on his knees, said humbly to Gilles, the accused: “Do what you want.”
132
And frightened by the said accused, the same Ferron asked the preceding witness to assist him and intercede for him with the said accused, fearing ill-treatment by the latter. To whom the preceding witness said that there was nothing to fear from this same Gillies, the accused, and that if he had to suffer some harm, he himself, namely the preceding witness, would have to suffer as well. Then, after the preceding witness and Jean Le Ferron had exchanged heated words, the latter left voluntarily with the preceding witness; who, at the same time as he, the present witness, headed toward the said castle of Mermorte behind the said accused. Which castle the aforesaid Ferron restored or returned that same day to the said accused, as the preceding witness attested. And the same Jean Le Ferron was detained there by the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, who kept him incarcerated for some time, there and elsewhere. And he said that the ambush laid by fifty or sixty men-at-arms was prepared in the name of the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, in order to assail and invade the said castle, which the same Gilles would have invaded had the said Le Ferron not restored it to him. However, not one of those who were with the said Gilles, the accused, in the said church when the same Le Ferron left it was armed with a sallet, a visored helmet, or any other offensive arm, save swords and the aforesaid
gisarme
borne by the aforenamed Gilles, the accused.
gisarme
130
in French, said in a rage, bursting with terrible threats upon the said Le Ferron, cried out in French: “Ha ribald, you beat my men, and extorted from them; come, come, outside the church, or I’ll kill you on the spot!”
131
Whereupon the said Ferron, on his knees, said humbly to Gilles, the accused: “Do what you want.”
132
And frightened by the said accused, the same Ferron asked the preceding witness to assist him and intercede for him with the said accused, fearing ill-treatment by the latter. To whom the preceding witness said that there was nothing to fear from this same Gillies, the accused, and that if he had to suffer some harm, he himself, namely the preceding witness, would have to suffer as well. Then, after the preceding witness and Jean Le Ferron had exchanged heated words, the latter left voluntarily with the preceding witness; who, at the same time as he, the present witness, headed toward the said castle of Mermorte behind the said accused. Which castle the aforesaid Ferron restored or returned that same day to the said accused, as the preceding witness attested. And the same Jean Le Ferron was detained there by the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, who kept him incarcerated for some time, there and elsewhere. And he said that the ambush laid by fifty or sixty men-at-arms was prepared in the name of the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, in order to assail and invade the said castle, which the same Gilles would have invaded had the said Le Ferron not restored it to him. However, not one of those who were with the said Gilles, the accused, in the said church when the same Le Ferron left it was armed with a sallet, a visored helmet, or any other offensive arm, save swords and the aforesaid
gisarme
borne by the aforenamed Gilles, the accused.
He stated, besides, that he had seen the said Jean Le Ferron in a cleric’s habit and tonsured, and had known him to be commonly reputed to be a cleric.
And such was his deposition and he knew no more, except as rumor would have it, which he said agreed with the facts deposed by him.
And he was enjoined under oath to reveal nothing of his deposition to anyone.
III. Depositions of fifteen witnesses on the subject of the public outcry. October 21, 1440.Venerable and circumspect Milord JACQUE DE PENCOETDIC,professor in both courts of law, aged forty; ANDRÉ SEGUIN, attorney of the ecclesiastical court of Nantes, aged forty; JEAN LORIENT, forty, attorney of the secular court; ROBIN RIOU, attorney of the secular court; Master JEAN BRIAND, fifty; JACQUES THOMICI, merchant of Lucanie, citizen of Nantes, forty-five; JEAN LE VEILL, merchant, forty; PIERRE PLACARD, merchant, forty; GUILLAUME MICHEL, apothecary, aged forty; PIERRE DROUET, merchant, forty; EUTROPE CHARDAVOINE, apothecary, forty; JEAN LE TOURNOURS, apothecary, forty; PIERRE VIVIANI JUNIOR, notary public of the ecclesiastical court of Nantes, thirty-five; ROBIN GUILLEMET, surgeon, aged sixty; and JEAN AUDILAURECH, barber, all citizens of Nantes, witnesses produced, as above, admitted to take an oath to bear witness to the truth, and excused upon surety to depose in this affair or in the cases of this order, examined this October 21st in the aforesaid year, submitted to inquiry, at first separately and then together, and diligently interrogated on the content of the Fortieth and Forty-first Articles mentioning the public rumor; have said and deposed without discord or difference what public rumblings and clamor have spread and still spread in the city and diocese of Nantes, in the region of Machecoul and adjoining regions, namely that the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, had taken away many children, boys and girls, under false pretences, and caused others to do so, and regularly practiced with them the abominable sin of sodomy, in a vile, shameful, and dishonorable fashion, indulging in unnatural lust with them; that he had cut their throats, and had their throats cut, and that he had had their bodies and cadavers burned by his intimates Roger de Briqueville, knight, Gilles de Sillé, Étienne Corrillaut, also known as Poitou, and Henriet Griart, and by several others of his accomplices, abettors and assistants associated with him in this affair; and that, performing the dreadful invocations of demons, he had conjured evil spirits, and, contrary to our faith, had rendered the demons homage, offering them the members of children whom he had butchered, and had others make such offerings; and that he had regularly perpetrated other crimes and other villainies iniquitously and perversely; and that, for this, the same Gilles de Rais, the accused, was and is notoriously defamed among honest men.
Other books
The Murdstone Trilogy by Mal Peet
First Take (Star-Taken) by Lai, Emma
Stand Close 3 (Stand Close New Adult Romance Series) by Lacey, Sabrina
IMMORTAL MATCHMAKERS, INC. by Mimi Jean Pamfiloff
On by Adam Roberts
Steering the Stars by Doughton, Autumn, Cope, Erica
The Recruit: A Jack Noble Short Story by L.T. Ryan
Internal Threat by Sussman, Ben
Lucky in Love by Karina Gioertz
To Claim the Elvin Princess: Apprentice by Jack Bessie
