Trial of Gilles De Rais (45 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
And such was their deposition, and they knew no more, as they asserted, so far as these articles are concerned; and these same witnesses were enjoined, in the usual manner, to reveal nothing of their depositions.
« PART TWO »
The Secular Court
Trial
133
Trial
133
What follows is the trial brought against Gilles de Rais and those of his men and servants, named below, before the exalted and prudent Pierre de L’Hôpital, President of Brittany, appointed to this by the Duke our Sovereign Lord and other men in the council of my said Lord, and thus appointed by him, on the complaint lodged by Jean Jenvret and his wife, Jeanne Degrépie, the widow of Regnaut Donete, Jean Hubert and his wife, Jeanne, the wife of Guibelet Delit, Agathe, the wife of Denis de Lemion,
134
Jeanne, the wife of Jean Darel, the wife of Perrot Couperie, Tiphaine, the wife of Éonnet Le Charpentier, Jean Magnet, Pierre Degrépie, and Jean Rouillé, living in the suburbs of Nantes or neighboring villages, and in several other places in the same diocese or elsewhere, declaring that they have lost their children and that they suppose that the said Lord and his men snatched them, or caused them to be taken, and put them to death; they say that the said Lord and his men are suspected of these crimes.
134
Jeanne, the wife of Jean Darel, the wife of Perrot Couperie, Tiphaine, the wife of Éonnet Le Charpentier, Jean Magnet, Pierre Degrépie, and Jean Rouillé, living in the suburbs of Nantes or neighboring villages, and in several other places in the same diocese or elsewhere, declaring that they have lost their children and that they suppose that the said Lord and his men snatched them, or caused them to be taken, and put them to death; they say that the said Lord and his men are suspected of these crimes.
On this score, regarding the said complaint, an investigation and inquiry into the said complaint were made by the authority of my said Lord Duke and of Milord the aforesaid President, the tenor of which is provided below. The said plaintiffs requesting sorrowfully, with tears and loud cries, that justice be done, according to the necessity of the case, and the said inquiries having proven the guilt of Gilles de Rais, the latter being charged with the death of these small children and many others, authority was given to Jean Labbé and other subjects of our Sovereign Lord, if they could find the said Gilles de Rais, to seize him bodily. At which opportunity Jean Labbé and other subjects of my said Lord arrested Gilles de Rais in the province of Brittany, in the month of September, and previous to the present date, brought him to Nantes into the prisons of my said Lord. And it was stated and propounded to Gilles de Rais, on trial before the commissioners delegated by the prosecutor of Nantes, and by his lieutenant, that Cod’s commandments and civil law forbade a person to kill his neighbor and, on the contrary, commanded him to love him as himself. However, the said Lord took many young children, and had them taken, not merely ten, nor twenty, but thirty, forty, fifty, sixty, one hundred, two hundred and more, such that the exact number can not be certified; he had sexual intercourse with them, taking his pleasure unnaturally and committing the detestable sin of sodomy, the horror and abomination of every good Catholic; not satisfied with that, he killed them or caused them to be killed and, upon their deaths, had their bodies burned and reduced to ashes. Moreover, the said Lord persevered in this evil, and considering that all power proceeds from God and every subject owes obedience to his prince, who is prince by the power of God, and that he was vassal and subject of our said Sovereign Lord and swore fidelity to the same, as other barons did; by virtue of this, he did not have the right to undertake anything by his own authority, by assault, in the province of my said Lord, without obtaining leave and permission from him; notwithstanding this, the said Gilles de Rais, deceiving my said Lord and taking no notice of his will, had men assembled and assaulted with offensive arms the aforenamed Jean Le Ferron, subject of my said Lord, guardian of the place and fortress of Saint-Étienne-de-Mermorte in the name of Geoffroy Le Ferron, his brother, to whom he had sold that place and his title of lordship by transference, and to whom he had given its possession; and he had the said Jean Le Ferron led before the said place, threatening him with decapitation on the spot, which obliged the said Jean Le Ferron to surrender the fortress to him. The said Lord took and held that place for a certain period of time, although he was ordered by my said Lord, and by his court, to abandon the premises and said place, and return it to the said Le Ferron with the goods he had taken, under pain of a penalty of fifty thousand gold crowns, which would be imposed by my said Lord in case of disobedience, refusal, or delay.
Which order the said Lord nowise obeyed, laying hands on the said Le Ferron and Guillaume Hauteris, a duty collector
135
for my said Lord, who was of his company, and he had them imprisoned, then conducted to Tiffauges, outside the duchy, where they were detained for a long time. And, since the imprisonment of the said Le Ferron, the said Lord had laid hands on Jean Rousseau, the sergeant-general of my said Lord, and had others do so, having removed his dagger and committed other outrages. After which, at Machecoul he had other sergeants beaten, in his hatred of my said Lord, in proportion to his scorn for the restraining order brought by the latter on pain of a penalty of fifty thousand crowns, in reparation for the said outrages. The goods and possessions designated above being in the safekeeping of my said Lord, the said Lord transgressed that safekeeping and violated his oath of fidelity, showing himself rebellious and disobedient to my said Lord and his court.
135
for my said Lord, who was of his company, and he had them imprisoned, then conducted to Tiffauges, outside the duchy, where they were detained for a long time. And, since the imprisonment of the said Le Ferron, the said Lord had laid hands on Jean Rousseau, the sergeant-general of my said Lord, and had others do so, having removed his dagger and committed other outrages. After which, at Machecoul he had other sergeants beaten, in his hatred of my said Lord, in proportion to his scorn for the restraining order brought by the latter on pain of a penalty of fifty thousand crowns, in reparation for the said outrages. The goods and possessions designated above being in the safekeeping of my said Lord, the said Lord transgressed that safekeeping and violated his oath of fidelity, showing himself rebellious and disobedient to my said Lord and his court.
And the said prosecutor presented his conclusions, according to which, in view of the said inquiries and said charge brought against him, he ought to be condemned to suffer corporal punishment with regard to justice. Furthermore, the possessions and lands he was holding from my said Lord Duke were to be confiscated; and the said penalties on his possessions were to be executed.
The said Lord de Rais acknowledged having assembled men to take the said place of Saint-Étienne-de-Mermorte by his own authority; and resorting to violence, having laid hands on the said Jean Le Ferron to deprive him of the said place; he acknowledged that the latter had given it to him for fear of having his head cut off on the spot; that he had held the place thereafter until my said Lord Duke had his men-at-arms recapture it; similarly, he acknowledged having had the said Jean Le Ferron brought to Tiffauges, where he was detained until his liberation through the Constable’s intervention; he acknowledged further that my said Lord Duke had laid a restraining order on him, under the said penalty of fifty thousand crowns, to return the said place to Jean Le Ferron, which he had nowise obeyed. In view of which he would gladly conform to the will and order of my said Lord Duke, but he did not acknowledge having committed outrages upon the said sergeants, nor having had others commit them. Moreover, he disavowed the statements of the said prosecutor, who wanted evidence, which he was allowed to offer. Whereupon they had to ask the said Lord whether he would believe his servants, Henriet and Poitou, and whether he accepted them as witnesses. Which Lord responded that he would only tolerate honest men in his retinue and that, if he knew otherwise of them, he would be the first to see to their punishment. And he neither contested the witnesses nor gave his assent …
136
II136
From September 18 to October 8, 1440.
September 18, 1440.
Inquiry
137
and inquest with a view to proving, if possible, that the said Lord de Rais and his followers, his accomplices, conveyed away a certain number of small children, or other persons, and had them snatched, whom they struck down and killed, to have their blood, heart, liver, or other such parts, to make of them a sacrifice to the Devil, or to do other sorceries with, on which subject there are numerous complaints. This investigation was made by jean de Touscheronde, appointed by the Duke, our Sovereign Lord.
137
and inquest with a view to proving, if possible, that the said Lord de Rais and his followers, his accomplices, conveyed away a certain number of small children, or other persons, and had them snatched, whom they struck down and killed, to have their blood, heart, liver, or other such parts, to make of them a sacrifice to the Devil, or to do other sorceries with, on which subject there are numerous complaints. This investigation was made by jean de Touscheronde, appointed by the Duke, our Sovereign Lord.
Jean Colin (sic) is the first witness named that the Inquisitor received, September 18, 1440.
PERONNE LOESSART, living in La Roche-Bernard, deposes under oath that two years ago this September the said Lord de Rais, returning from Vannes, came to lodge in the said place of La Roche-Bernard at the house of the said Jean Colin, and spent the night there. The witness was then living directly opposite the inn of the said Jean Colin. She had a ten-year-old child attending school, who attracted one of the servants of the said Lord de Rais, named Poitou. This Poitou came to speak with the said Peronne, requesting that she let the child live with him; he would clothe him very well and provide him with many advantages, while the child, for his part, would be the source of numerous benefits for Poitou as well. Whereupon the said Peronne told him that she had time to wait to benefit from her son, and that she was not going to take him out of school. The said Poitou assured her on this point and solemnly promised that he would take her son and send him to school, and that he would give a hundred sous to this Peronne for a dress. Confident of his promise, she permitted him to take the child away.
Not long afterwards, Poitou brought her four pounds for the dress. She told him that twenty sous were missing; he denied this, saying that he had promised her only four pounds. She told him then that she knew by this that he would have difficulty keeping his other promises because he was already short twenty sous. He told her to stop worrying so much, that he would give her and her child plenty of other gifts. Then he led the said child away, conducting him to Jean Colin’s, the innkeeper of the said Lord. And so, on the following day, as Gilles de Rais was leaving the said inn, this Peronne asked him for her said child, who was with him; but Lord de Rais did not respond at all. But he turned to the said Poitou, who was there, and said that the child had been well chosen, and that he was as beautiful as an angel. The said Poitou then responded that there had been no one but himself to make the choice, and the said Lord told him that he had not failed to choose well. Not long after this, the child left with the said Poitou in the company of the said Lord, riding on a pony that the said Poitou had bought from Jean Colin. Since then, this woman has had no more news of him; she has heard no word of where her said child might be, and she did not see him in the company of the said Lord who had since come through the said place of La Roche-Bernard. And she has not seen the said Poitou in the retinue of the said Lord since then. Those of the said Lord’s men whom she asked where her son was told her that he was at Tiffauges or Pouzauges.
[Signed:]
De Touscheronde.
De Touscheronde.
JEAN COLIN and his wife,
138
and OLIVE, mother of the said Colin’s wife, living at La Roche-Bernard, depose under oath that two years ago this September the said Lord de Rais, coming from Vannes, lodged at their inn and spent the night there. And that a fellow named Poitou, a servant of the said Lord, did so much for Peronne Loessart, who was living opposite their house then, that she entrusted him with her son, who was going to school, and who was one of the most beautiful children in the region, so that he might live with him; and the said Colin sold the said Poitou a pony he had for the sum of sixty sous, in order to take the said child away. And the said women said that, on the evening when the mother entrusted this Poitou with her son, he led him to the inn belonging to the witnesses, telling the other servants of the said Lord that this was his page; whereas these latter told him that he would not be there for him but that the said Lord, their master, would keep him for himself. And on the following day, when the said Lord came out of the said inn to get going, these women heard the mother of the child ask for him of the said Lord, in the presence of the child and Poitou; whereupon the said Lord told Poitou that the child was well chosen; Poitou responded that there had been no one but himself to choose, and the said Lord told him that he had not been mistaken and that the child was as beautiful as an angel. Not long afterwards, the latter left, riding on the said pony with the said Poitou in the company of the said Lord. And the said Colin declares that two or three months later in Nantes, he saw someone other than the said child mount the said pony, which shocked him. And the aforenamed witnesses say that since then, they have not seen the said child nor heard where he was, save what the said women say, that when they had inquired of the Lord’s men, some of them responded that he was at Tiffauges, others that he was dead: that while he was crossing over the bridges in Nantes, the wind had blown him into the river. Since then, she had not seen the said Poitou come through the said place of La Roche-Bernard in the retinue of the said Lord, although he had himself come through. And the last time he had come through, six weeks before, returning from Vannes, they heard it said by the said Lord’s servants, whom they asked where the said Poitou was, in order to find out where the said child was, that Poitou had taken off in the direction of Redon; and they imagined that this was because of the shocking complaints that the said Perrone had made on the subject of her child; which complaints the said Poitou could have learned of through the said Lord’s men.
138
and OLIVE, mother of the said Colin’s wife, living at La Roche-Bernard, depose under oath that two years ago this September the said Lord de Rais, coming from Vannes, lodged at their inn and spent the night there. And that a fellow named Poitou, a servant of the said Lord, did so much for Peronne Loessart, who was living opposite their house then, that she entrusted him with her son, who was going to school, and who was one of the most beautiful children in the region, so that he might live with him; and the said Colin sold the said Poitou a pony he had for the sum of sixty sous, in order to take the said child away. And the said women said that, on the evening when the mother entrusted this Poitou with her son, he led him to the inn belonging to the witnesses, telling the other servants of the said Lord that this was his page; whereas these latter told him that he would not be there for him but that the said Lord, their master, would keep him for himself. And on the following day, when the said Lord came out of the said inn to get going, these women heard the mother of the child ask for him of the said Lord, in the presence of the child and Poitou; whereupon the said Lord told Poitou that the child was well chosen; Poitou responded that there had been no one but himself to choose, and the said Lord told him that he had not been mistaken and that the child was as beautiful as an angel. Not long afterwards, the latter left, riding on the said pony with the said Poitou in the company of the said Lord. And the said Colin declares that two or three months later in Nantes, he saw someone other than the said child mount the said pony, which shocked him. And the aforenamed witnesses say that since then, they have not seen the said child nor heard where he was, save what the said women say, that when they had inquired of the Lord’s men, some of them responded that he was at Tiffauges, others that he was dead: that while he was crossing over the bridges in Nantes, the wind had blown him into the river. Since then, she had not seen the said Poitou come through the said place of La Roche-Bernard in the retinue of the said Lord, although he had himself come through. And the last time he had come through, six weeks before, returning from Vannes, they heard it said by the said Lord’s servants, whom they asked where the said Poitou was, in order to find out where the said child was, that Poitou had taken off in the direction of Redon; and they imagined that this was because of the shocking complaints that the said Perrone had made on the subject of her child; which complaints the said Poitou could have learned of through the said Lord’s men.
[Signed:]
De Touscheronde.
De Touscheronde.
JEAN LEMEIGNEN and his wife, ALLAIN DULIS, PERROT DUPOUEZ, GUILLAUME GENTON, GUILLAUML PORTUYS, JEAN LEFEVRE, cleric, of Saint-Étienne-de-Montluc, depose under oath that about three years before, they saw a young child, the son of Guillaume Brice, a poor man of the said parish, frequent the borough of Saint-Étienne-de-Montluc, where his father lived, to ask for alms. This child was then about eight or nine years old; his father died over a year before around the beginning of Lent: this child was very beautiful and was called Jamet. The witnesses declare that, since last Saint John’s Day, they have not seen him again or heard anything about where he might be found or what has become of him. Besides, this Dupouez says that some time around last Saint John’s Day he ran into an old woman with a rosy face, fifty to sixty years old: she was coming from the direction of Coueron and he ran into her rather near the presbytery of Saint-Étienne; she was wearing a short linen tunic over her dress. And, on a previous occasion, he had seen her coming from Savenay and through the said (sic) wood of Saint-Étienne, working her way toward Coueron or Nantes. And on the day she was coming from the direction of Coueron, the witness saw the said child near the road where he had run into the said old woman, an arrow’s flight above the said presbytery, so to speak, near which presbytery a man named Simon Lebreton lived. And the witness declares that since then, he has not seen the said child again nor heard anything said about where he might be. What is more, because he was friendless, there was no one in the region who might complain of his disappearance; and his mother, for her own part, was a beggar, daily begging for alms.
Other books
Scar Flowers by O'Donnell, Maureen
Wolf Hunt by Jeff Strand
The Rich Are Different by Susan Howatch
The Unnatural Inquirer by Simon R. Green
Bridgehead by David Drake
Wicked Solutions by Havan Fellows
The Viking's Pursuit by Winter, Nikki
The Analyst by John Katzenbach
Trinity - The Prophecy by Kylie Price
Four Play: A Collection of Novellas by Silver, Amalie
