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
Trial of Gilles De Rais (24 page)
September 18 Lamentations of the victims’ parents
Pierre de L’Hôpital, the President of Brittany,
45
has the upper hand on the secular proceedings in the action brought against Lord de Rais. A cleric, Jean de Touscheronde, charged with the inquest, begins by hearing testimonies concerning the murders of Peronne Loessart’s son, of La Roche-Bernard, and Jamet Brice, of Port-Launay (pp. 253-256).
45
has the upper hand on the secular proceedings in the action brought against Lord de Rais. A cleric, Jean de Touscheronde, charged with the inquest, begins by hearing testimonies concerning the murders of Peronne Loessart’s son, of La Roche-Bernard, and Jamet Brice, of Port-Launay (pp. 253-256).
September 19
Trial proceedings against Gilles de Rais open at Nantes in the great upper hall of the castle of La Tour Neuve (p. 159). Gilles de Rais, the accused, appears before Jean de Malestroit, Bishop of Nantes. He hears the charges read by the “prosecutor” (charged with petitioning against him), Guillaume Chapeillon. He accuses him of having admitted to “doctrinal heresy.” For this reason he is ordered to appear, at the same time as before the Bishop, before the Vicar of the Inquisitor, Jean Blouyn, who is charged with the Inquisition in the city and diocese of Nantes. He will appear September 28th before these two judges, whose jurisdiction he at first acknowledges. It then seems to him perhaps relatively easy to respond to the sole accusation of heresy.
September 27
Jean de Touscheronde prosecutes the civil inquest; he hears witnesses on the subject of the disappearance of Jean Bernard, of Port-Launay (p. 256).
September 28
The Bishop, Jean de Malestroit, and the Vicar of the Inquisitor, Jean Blouyn, a Dominican, are present in the chapel of the episcopal manor for the appearance of ten plaintiffs accusing Lord de Rais of having shamefully abused and massacred either their son or their nephew (pp. 159-163). They complain “grievously and tearfully.” However, Gilles de Rais, whose presence was anticipated, does not show this day.
September 28, 29, and 30
Jean de Touscheronde prosecutes his inquest; he hears witnesses concerning the disappearance of: the children of Georget Le Barbier, Jean (or Guillaume) Jeudon, Jeannot Roussin, Alexandre Chastelier, Guillaume Sergent, Mathelin Thouars, Jeanne Édelin, Mace Sorin, one named Oran, Thomas Aisé, Guillaume Hamelin and Micheau Bouer; Bernard Le Camus; and the child of Jeannette Drouet. Furthermore, he listens to the personal complaint made by Perrine, Clement Rondeau’s wife, on the subject of Prelati (pp. 257-262).
October 2
Continuation of Jean de Touscheronde’s inquest; in question are the disappearances of: a child of Regnaud Donete; Jean Hubert; a son of Jean Jenvret; a son of Colin Avril; a child of Guibelet Delit; a pupil of Jean Toutblanc; a son of Jean Fougère; and a son of Éonnet de Villeblanche (pp. 269-270).
October 6
Continuation of the same inquest concerning the disappearance of Perrot Dagaye (p. 270).
(1440)October 8
Continuation of the same inquest; concerning the disappearance of: the two sons of Robin Pavot; Olivier Darel; Jean Hubert; the son of Regnaud and L. Donete (pp. 270-274).
In the lower hall of the castle of La Tour Neuve, the ten plaintiffs of the earlier hearing return for the accusation brought “clamorously, grievously, and tearfully” before the Bishop and the Vicar of the Inquisitor (pp. 162-163). Besides murder and sodomy, it is a question of the “invocation of evil spirits” and “many other crimes concerning ecclesiastical jurisdiction.”
The same day, but this time “in a great upper hall” of the castle of La Tour Neuve, Gilles de Rais and the “prosecutor” appear together before the Bishop and the Vicar of the Inquisitor. On that day the prosecutor’s accusation, delivered verbally, cites the totality of crimes and offenses brought against the criminal, such as they are found in the forty-nine articles of the “bill of indictment” presented later. Gilles reacts immediately and appeals to his judges, but his appeal is rejected at once as frivolous. He thereupon objects to his judges with a savage denial. In spite of four demands and the threat of lawful excommunication, he refuses to take an oath.
That day then is the true beginning of the trial; the entire accusation on this day is announced. Pierre de l’Hôpital, in charge of the secular court’s action, is for the first time admitted to the ecclesiastical court proceedings (pp. 162-165). From then on, he (as well as the Bishop of Saint-Brieuc, Jean Prégent, who will participate with him in the examination of the “out-of-court” confession of October 21st) is present at all the proceedings, except on October 20th, when the application of torture is decided upon, and the morning of the 21st, when it is supposed to be applied. It is remarkable how, on October 15th, Gilles de Rais addresses him as if he understands his indignation and, on October 20th, asks to be heard by him (and Jean Prégent) in the absence of the ecclesiastical judges.
October 1 1
The Bishop and the Vicar of the Inquisitor adjourn the session slated for the prosecutor and the accused until the following day. They are satisfied with hearing for a third time, in the lower hall, the complaints and tears of the unfortunate people imploring them to attend to the “necessary justice” (pp. 164-165).
October 13 The bill of indictment in 49 articles
At nine o’clock in the morning, in the great upper hall of La Tour Neuve castle, before the Bishop and the Vice-Inquisitor, and before numerous Nantes officials, the prosecutor formulates the charge as it is written in the forty-nine articles of the bill of indictment; it is then read aloud to the judges.
The first fourteen articles (the entire bill of indictment is provided on pp. 169-179) are nothing but preliminary: they are meant to demonstrate, in these circumstances, the Bishop’s, the Vice-Inquisitor’s, and the ecclesiastical court of Nantes’ qualifications. But Articles 15 through 49 finally explain the various crimes of which Gilles de Rais is accused. The statement is disordered and confused, but it is complete enough. Indeed it agrees — on the whole at least — with other facts provided elsewhere in the documents. (Nevertheless, the year of 1426 as given for the beginning of the child murders is contradicted by the accused’s confession; we should add that generally the
dates
given in the bill of indictment are hardly convincing: thus the Saint-Etienne-de-Mermorte affair, whose date, May 15, 1440 is established with as convincing a precision as can be, is attributed to 1438.) This bill of indictment considers three principal points actually: first, the crimes against children; second, heresy, or essentially the invocation of demons, combined with the practice of the magical arts and more or less dogmatic statements by the conjurors and other practitioners; third, the violation of ecclesiastical immunity.
dates
given in the bill of indictment are hardly convincing: thus the Saint-Etienne-de-Mermorte affair, whose date, May 15, 1440 is established with as convincing a precision as can be, is attributed to 1438.) This bill of indictment considers three principal points actually: first, the crimes against children; second, heresy, or essentially the invocation of demons, combined with the practice of the magical arts and more or less dogmatic statements by the conjurors and other practitioners; third, the violation of ecclesiastical immunity.
The indictment affirms that for about fourteen years (that is, since 1426) one hundred and forty children, girls and boys, had been the victims of Gilles de Rais and his accomplices. They had been led away, either by his principal accomplices assisting in his murders, or by procurers or procuresses. Various services to be rendered to Gilles de Rais served as pretexts, and the benefits that the children themselves — or their parents — derived from these services were emphasized. In fact, the children had their throats cut, were killed, and “shamefully tortured.” What is more, the accused practiced the sin of sodomy on them while they were alive, when they were dead, or when they were dying. Gilles de Rais disdained the “natural vessel” of the girls. In the end, the victims were dismembered and burned.
The indictment fails to precisely designate all but two victims, a child who was living in Bourgneuf-en-Rais with a fellow named Rodigo, and the son of a certain Jean Lavary of Vannes.
It takes into account the conveyance of forty-five skeletons from Champtocé to Machecoul, where they were burned.
The use of fine wines, hippocras, and claret, not to mention gluttony, are linked to the sin of sodomy insofar as they served the accused as stimulants with a view to practicing that sin “with greater abundance, ease, and pleasure.”
(1440)
The indictment records fleeting periods of remorse and whims of conversion by the criminal who wanted to change his life and make a pilgrimage to the Holy Sepulcher, but did not know how to carry out his resolution and returned to his criminal deviations, as “a dog returns to its vomit.”
It names the places of the crimes: the Champtocé castle; the house of La Suze at Nantes; the Machecoul and Tiffauges castles; the house of the Frères Mineurs at Bourgneuf-en-Rais; a certain Lemoine’s house at Vannes.
Moreover, the indictment dates Gilles de Rais’ condemnable heretical activity from 1426, for which he is answerable to the Inquisition. He is accused of associating with the heretics who indoctrinated him; moreover, he is supposed to have read and studied heretical books. In particular, he is accused of having made for himself a dogma of the conclusions and mistakes of diviners and conjurors. He is equally supposed to have practiced and held as dogma the magical, prohibited arts of geomancy and necromancy. Finally, he did not forget to affirm his criminal principles publicly, principles considered as so much dogma.
But the bill of indictment enumerates much more than thoughts or words; it lists condemnable acts. Essentially, the invocation of demons. In various places Gilles de Rais invoked, and caused to be invoked, various demons: at Orléans (under the sign of the Croix d’Or); at the Machecoul and Tiffauges castles; at the Freres Mineurs house in Bourgneuf-en-Rais; and at Josselin, close by the Duke of Brittany’s castle. Gilles de Rais is equally reproached for the child sacrifices at Tiffauges, offering the hands, heart, and eyes of a child in a glass. The accused hoped to bind himself to the Devil by a pact, to which end he prepared a note or letter of commitment binding himself, but with the exception of his soul and the curtailment of his life. As well the indictment mentions certain rites celebrated for five years, on All Saints’ Day in particular; in the course of which alms were distributed to the poor.
Violation of the Church’s immunity is the third grievance justifying his appearance before the ecclesiastical tribunal. This is connected to the Saint-Étienne-de-Mermorte affair. The indictment specifies how Gilles de Rais entered the church “furiously and recklessly” waving his offensive arms, threatening the cleric Jean Le Ferron with death; the latter he subsequently keeps bound hand and foot in irons, holding him hostage first in the castle of Saint-Étienne-de-Mermorte, then in that of Tiffauges. This is how the accused “gravely and shamefully violated the jurisdiction of said Reverend Father, Lord Bishop of Nantes.”
In the conclusion of these forty-nine articles, the prosecutor asks that the accused be recognized by the Bishop and the Vicar of the Inquisitor as guilty of the various crimes reported in the indictment; thus he must incur “excommunication and other lawful punishments”; thus he must be “punished and salubriously corrected, as the law and canonical sanctions demand.”
Interrogated, Gilles refuses to respond, and insults his judges
At the prosecutor’s request, Gilles is interrogated by the Bishop and the Vicar of the Inquisitor on the topic of the forty-nine articles of the bill of indictment (pp. 165-166); he denies their authority and refuses to recognize them as judges, then he treats them like so many “simoniacs” and “ribalds”: “he would much prefer,” he says, “to be hanged by a rope around his neck than respond to such ecclesiastics and judges.” After several demands, his excommunication is pronounced. Gilles appeals, but his appeal is immediately denied in view of “the nature of the case and the cases of this order, and also on account of the monstrous and enormous crimes” brought against him.
Thereupon a reading is given of the letters of authority accorded in 1426 by Guillaume Mérici, the Inquisitor of Heresy in the French realm, to his Vice-Inquisitor, Jean Blouyn.
October 15 Beginning of the confessions
With the same faces reunited in the same hall, there is a decisive turn of events (pp. 180-181): Gilles de Rais recognizes the Bishop and the Vicar of the Inquisitor as competent judges, he owns up to having “maliciously committed and perpetrated” the crimes charged, and “solicited humbly, devoutly, and tearfully” his judges to pardon him for the “insults” and “offensive things” addressed to them. For the love of God, the judges immediately acquiesce. The accused acknowledges the content of Articles 1 through 4 and 8 through 14 (Articles 5 through 7 excepted, they concern Jean Blouyn; but Article 8, which is acknowledged, accepts his authority).
Gilles de Rais, on the same day, continues to deny one of the chief points of the accusation, the invocation of demons; he only confesses to insignificant facts, for which he even volunteers to undergo a “test of fire.”
The prosecutor and the accused swear on the Holy Gospels, whereupon the prosecutor produces, by way of witnesses in view of their examinations, the valets Henriet and Poitou, the alchemist Prelati, the priest Blanchet, a certain Tiphaine (Robin Branchu’s widow), and the procuress Perrine Martin, all of whom are admitted to take oaths. (The testimonies of Henriet, Poitou, and Prelati, heard on the following days, were preserved; not so those of Tiphaine and Perrine Martin, which are missing in the documents handed down to us (p. 183).)
Other books
Earth Angel by Siri Caldwell
Zeus (Frozen Origin) by Dawn, Crystal
Ceremony by Leslie Marmon Silko
Blondetourage by Allison Rushby
Moore Than Forever by Julie A. Richman
The Ultimate Seduction by Dani Collins
Stolen by Rebecca Muddiman
Engineering Infinity by Jonathan Strahan
The Stillburrow Crush by Linda Kage
The Maestro by Leo Barton