{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_59955/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_59955","id":"gutenberg_59955","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/59955","summary":null,"tags":["Bluebeard (Legendary character)","Category: Biographies","Category: French Literature","Category: History - European","Category: History - Medieval/Middle Ages","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Criminals -- France -- Biography","France -- History -- Charles VII, 1422-1461 -- Biography","Marshals -- France -- Biography","Rais, Gilles de, 1404-1440"],"text":"Produced by Chris Curnow, Charlie Howard, and the Online\nDistributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This\nfile was produced from images generously made available\nby The Internet Archive)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration: Ch\u00e2teau (Castle) of Nantes, where Gilles was\ntried.--From the river Loire.]\n\n\n\n\n  BLUE-BEARD\n\n  A CONTRIBUTION TO HISTORY AND\n  FOLK-LORE\n\n  BEING THE HISTORY OF GILLES DE RETZ OF BRITTANY,\n  FRANCE, WHO WAS EXECUTED AT NANTES IN 1440 A.D.\n  AND WHO WAS THE ORIGINAL OF BLUE-BEARD IN THE\n  TALES OF MOTHER GOOSE\n\n  BY\n  THOMAS WILSON, LL.D.\n\n  CURATOR, DIVISION OF PREHISTORIC ARCH\u00c6OLOGY, U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM\n  COUNSELLOR OF THE BAR OF THE SUPREME COURTS, COURT OF\n  CLAIMS AND OF APPEALS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA\n\n  FORMERLY U.S. CONSUL AT GHENT, BELGIUM; AT NANTES AND NICE, FRANCE\n\n\n  _ILLUSTRATED_\n\n\n  G. P. PUTNAM\u2019S SONS\n  NEW YORK & LONDON\n  The Knickerbocker Press\n  1899\n\n\n\n\n  COPYRIGHT, 1899\n  BY\n  THOMAS WILSON\n\n  Entered at Stationers\u2019 Hall, London\n\n  The Knickerbocker Press, New York\n\n\n\n\n  TO\n  MY DEAR WIFE\n  THE COMPANION OF MY TRAVELS\n  WHILE THE MATERIAL FOR THIS VOLUME WAS GATHERED\n  THE PARTNER OF MY MANY JOYS\n  THE SHARER OF MY FEW SORROWS\n  THIS VOLUME IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED\n\n                        T. W.\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nCONTENTS\n\n                                                                    PAGE\n  INTRODUCTION                                                        ix\n\n\n  CHAPTER I\n\n  GILLES DE RETZ. 1404\u20131420\n\n  His Name, Family, Marriage, and Education                            1\n\n\n  CHAPTER II\n\n  GILLES AS A SOLDIER. 1420\u20131429\n\n  First for John V., Duke of Brittany, against the House of\n      Blois. He Joins the Army of France and is Assigned to\n      Duty with Joan of Arc. Crowning of the King, and Gilles\n      made Marshal of France                                           9\n\n\n  CHAPTER III\n\n  GILLES\u2019S LIFE AT HOME IN BRITTANY 1430\u20131439\n\n  The Personal Appearance of Gilles de Retz. An Epitome of his\n      Life. His Extravagance and Ruinous Expenditures. His\n      Inheritance. His Sales and Transfers of Property. His\n      Love for the Theatre. Mysteries. That of the Siege of\n      Orleans. Mysteries at Nantes. The Cathedral. Expensive\n      Visit to Orleans. Maison de la Suze. The Decree of the\n      King Interdicting his Sale or Incumbrance of Property. An\n      Increasing Demand for Money Drives him to Magic in Search\n      for the Philosopher\u2019s Stone and the Transmutation of Base\n      Metals into Gold. Magic                                         24\n\n\n  CHAPTER IV\n\n  GILLES\u2019S CRIMES\n\n  Gilles\u2019s Abduction of Children. His Familiars. Ch\u00e2teau de\n      Tiffauges. First Process against Gilles. Warrant. Arrest\n      and Imprisonment. Ch\u00e2teau de Nantes                             64\n\n\n  CHAPTER V\n\n  GILLES\u2019S TRIAL BEFORE THE ECCLESIASTICAL TRIBUNAL\n\n  The Ecclesiastical Tribunal. Record in the Archives of\n      Loire-Inf\u00e9rieure. The Trial. His Confession. Judgment and\n      Sentence                                                        93\n\n\n  CHAPTER VI\n\n  THE TRIAL BEFORE THE CIVIL COURT\n\n  Trial before the Civil Court. Depositions. Conviction and\n      Sentence                                                       167\n\n\n  CHAPTER VII\n\n  THE EXECUTION                                                      177\n\n\n  APPENDIX A\n\n  MOTHER GOOSE PUBLICATIONS                                          183\n\n\n  APPENDIX B\n\n  BLUEBEARD STORIES                                                  186\n\n\n  APPENDIX C\n\n  MYSTERY OF THE SIEGE OF ORLEANS                                    189\n\n\n  APPENDIX D\n\n  DEPOSITIONS IN CIVIL COURT AGAINST GILLES                          195\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nILLUSTRATIONS\n\n                                                                    PAGE\n  CH\u00c2TEAU (CASTLE) OF NANTES, WHERE GILLES WAS TRIED.--FROM THE\n      RIVER LOIRE                                         _Frontispiece_\n\n  GILLE\u2019S SIGNATURE AND RUBRIC                                        22\n\n  A STREET IN NANTES--ANCIENT HOUSES                                  47\n\n  FACSIMILE OF FOLIO PAGE FROM ARCHIVES OF TRIAL AT NANTES.\n      CONFESSION OF GILLE DE RETZ                                    138\n\n  GROTTO OF BONNE VIERGE DE CR\u00c9\u00c9-LAIT. EXPIATORY ALTAR OF\n      GILLES ERECTED BY HIS DAUGHTER                                 179\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\n\nThe story of Bluebeard has become a classic in infantile mythical\n(folk-lore) literature wherever the English and French languages are\nspoken. Rev. Dr. Shahan suggests its possible existence in earlier\nlanguages and more distant countries (see p. xiv.). The story is more\nor less mythical. While it does not follow history with any pretence of\nfidelity, it has come to be recognised by the historians and literati\nof France as representing the life of Gilles de Retz (or Rais), a\nsoldier of Brittany in the first half of the fifteenth century. He was\nof noble birth, was possessed of much riches, was the lord of many\nmanors, had a certain genius and ability, made some reputation as a\nsoldier at an extremely early age, fought with Joan of Arc, and was\nMarshal of France. At the close of these wars he retired to his estates\nin Brittany, and, in connection with an Italian magician, he entered\nupon a search for the Elixir of Youth and the Philosopher\u2019s Stone.\nTogether they became possessed by the idea that the foundation of this\nelixir should be the blood of infants or maidens, and, using the almost\nunbridled power incident to a great man (at that early date) in that\nwild country, they abducted many maidens and children, who were carried\nto some one of his castles and slain. Suspicion was finally directed\ntoward him; he was arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced to death, and\nexecuted at the city of Nantes, October 27, 1440, at the early age of\nthirty-six years.\n\nThe author of this volume was sent, in 1882, to the good city of Nantes\nas United States Consul. While resident there he entered upon the\ninvestigation which resulted in this volume. He obtained access to the\noriginal records of the trial in the archives of the department, and\nmade a photographic copy of one of its manuscript Latin pages which is\nshown in its proper place. The trial of Gilles de Retz took place in\nthe ch\u00e2teau of Nantes, sentence was pronounced at the Place Bouffay,\nand he was executed on the Prairie de la Madeleine, the exact locality\nbeing now occupied by the Hospital of St. Anne. The author procured\nphotographs and drawings of some of these localities, which will appear\nin this volume.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nMonsieur Charles Perrault was the author of the story of\n_Bluebeard_. He was born at Paris, January 12, 1628. His father was\nan advocate, originally from Tours. He was the youngest of four\nbrothers: the oldest, Peter, was destined for the Bar, but became\nthe Receiver-General of Finances under Louis XIV. and his Prime\nMinister Colbert, though he afterwards fell out of favour and died\nin poverty; Claude studied medicine; and Nicholas, theology. Charles\nwas taken up by Colbert and made Superintendent of Public Buildings\nthroughout the kingdom. While in this position, the erection of the\nObservatory and the reconstruction and completion of the Palais du\nLouvre were determined upon. Plans for these buildings were to be\ndecided by competition, and the renown of the name of Perrault is\ngreatly increased by the fact that Charles\u2019s brother Claude, although\neducated as a doctor of medicine and not as an architect, designed\nplans which, after much discussion and investigation, extending even\nto Rome, were finally adopted by the King and his Minister. Charles\nPerrault became a member of the Academy--one of the \u201cImmortal Forty.\u201d\nHe introduced many improvements into their methods, the principal of\nwhich was for securing the attendance of members, and a continuance of,\nand devotion to, the work of preparing the great French Dictionary.\nAn episode in his life, covering several years, was his poem of _Le\nSi\u00e8cle de Louis le Grand_ and the parallel between the ancients and\nmoderns, which produced a discussion among the most brilliant writers\nof France. Boileau, Racine, La Fontaine, Longpierre, Buet, Arnauld, and\nother illustrious champions took up the cudgels against Perrault and\nFontanelle, and in favour of the ancient classic heroes.\n\nIn 1662, Perrault retired from his office in the Public Buildings,\nselling his right therein to Monsieur de Blainville, a son-in-law\nof Colbert. Until his death, May, 16, 1703, he devoted himself to\nliterature and to the education of his children, and this was probably\nthe happiest portion of his life, for he loved to be in the bosom of\nhis family. He wrote for the amusement of his children that which has\nnow become the most celebrated of his writings, which has done more to\nperpetuate his name and fame, and by which he is better known than by\nthe more pretentious and serious papers and poems,--the _Contes de M\u00e8re\nl\u2019Oye_ (Stories of Mother Goose). The first edition was published in\n1697 under the name of his son, Perrault d\u2019Armancourt, and dedicated\nto Mademoiselle Elizabeth Charlotte d\u2019Orl\u00e9ans, the sister of the Duke\nof Chartres and the niece of Louis XIV. These Mother Goose stories\nwere as follows: _Little Red Riding-Hood_, _The Fairies_, _Bluebeard_,\n_The Sleeping Beauty_, _Puss in Boots_, _Cinderella_, _Requet \u00e0 la\nHouppe_, to which _Le Petit Poucet_, _The Adroit Princess_, and _The\nAss\u2019s Skin_ were afterwards added. There were still others in verse and\nfable translated. Perrault was more poet than prose writer--his serious\nworks were in poetry: _Painting_, _The Apology for Women_, _The Century\nof Louis the Grand_, _Genius_ (to Fontanelle), and _A Portrait of the\nVoice of Iris_. We, however, are interested alone in _Bluebeard_.[1]\n\n    [1] See Appendix A.\n\nStudious historians or astute critics may dispute Perrault\u2019s history\nof Bluebeard having been founded upon the life of Gilles de Retz, but\nthe country people (the folk) of Brittany will simply smile at such\nerudition and continue in their former belief that Bluebeard represents\na cruel, wicked man who lived here hundreds of years ago and who was\nexecuted for his many crimes against humanity; and the old men and\nwomen and the nurses will repeat the story of Gilles de Retz under\nthe name of Bluebeard,--sometimes how he abducted and murdered the\nchildren, and other times how he murdered his wives. In that country\nGilles de Retz will always be known as Bluebeard, and we must accept\ntheir verdict as final.[2]\n\nRev. Dr. Shahan writes:\n\n    DEAR PROFESSOR WILSON:\n\n    I have looked through your interesting work with the greatest\n    pleasure. It is just such a tale as I would delight in tracing\n    through its strange genesis and stranger propaganda....\n\n    I wonder if the actual facts were not soon plaited back into\n    ancient nursery tales of a kindred tone, and a fresh lease of\n    life thus given to mythical narratives that would otherwise not\n    have had strength enough to perpetuate themselves to our time,\n    at least in such intensity and vitality.\n\n    I would suggest as complete a literature of the _Bluebeard_\n    subject as possible[2] and think perhaps it would be well to\n    see what roots it had struck in German, Spanish, and Welsh\n    soil,--fields always susceptible at that time to anything odd\n    or romantic.\n\n    When I was a child how often I cried with Sister Anne on the\n    high tower, and looked for the three specks out on the ocean\n    \u201cno bigger than the head of a pin.\u201d Thank God! their steeds\n    always breasted the flood bravely and _arrived in time to save\n    injured innocence_. Is not that the true origin of _Bluebeard_,\n    in an age of chivalrous ideal, of strict theologico-popular\n    views of justice and of feudal individualism?\n\n    The box of Pandora and the key of Bluebeard may have some\n    relationship--CURIOSITY, irrepressible though dangerous,\n    is its keynote, and I wonder if it does not all come from\n    India, like those medi\u00e6val tales that Gaston Paris tells\n    about, or if it is not an old Gaelic myth, like that of\n    _Balor-of-the-Mighty-Blows_ so well translated by Standish\n    O\u2019Grady in his _Silva Gadelica_....\n\n                        Yours very truly,\n                                   (Signed)\u00a0\u00a0THOMAS J. SHAHAN.\n\n    [2] See Appendix B.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nBLUEBEARD\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nGILLES DE RETZ\n\n_His Name, Family, Marriage, and Education_\n\n\nThe original of Bluebeard in the Mother Goose story was Gilles de Rais\n(changed in 1581 to Retz), though he is sometimes called _Gilles de\nLaval_ in history. Neither the date nor place of his birth is known\nwith precision, but it took place in the autumn of 1404, probably at\nMachecoul, one of the family ch\u00e2teaux in the southern part of Brittany.\n\nThe ancestors of Gilles de Retz belonged to four noble and illustrious\nfamilies in Brittany: 1. Laval, sometimes called Montmorency-Laval;\n2. Rais (changed to Retz in 1581); 3. Machecoul; and 4. Craon.\nThese families could trace their ancestry to the eleventh or twelfth\ncenturies. Gilles\u2019s father was a Laval or Montmorency-Laval, named Guy;\nhis grandfather was also Guy, and many of his ancestry bore the same\nsurname. His grandmother was a sister of the great Du Guesclin; his\ngreat-grandmother was Joan, called _la Folle_, or \u201cthe Crazy.\u201d\n\nThe House of Rais in that day was represented by Joan la Sage (the\nWise), 1371\u20131406. Being without heirs she, in 1400, by solemn act,\nadopted Guy de Laval, the father of Gilles, as her heir and successor.\nA legal impediment existed in an act of disinheritance which had been\npassed against Joan la Folle, the grandmother of Guy de Laval, and it\nrequired a special decree to enable Guy to accept the inheritance. This\nwas finally done under the condition that he should abandon the name,\narms, and escutcheon of the family of Laval, and bear those of Rais.\nBut Joan la Sage afterwards repented of her choice and attempted, by\nact of May 14, 1402, to change her succession in favour of Catherine\nde Machecoul. This begat a suit-at-law, which was taken by appeal to\nthe Parliament at Paris. By this time Jean de Craon had come to be the\nheir of his mother, Catherine de Machecoul. He had a daughter named\nMarie, and for the settlement of a contest which, it was feared with\nreason, might be interminable, it was agreed between the families, as\nit was between York and Lancaster, that the representatives of the\ntwo respective houses should be intermarried, and accordingly, in the\nspring of 1404, Guy de Laval (changed to be Guy de Rais) was married\nto Marie de Craon, and thus it was that Guy de Laval, the father of\nGilles, became the heir and successor of Joan la Sage (of Rais),\nreceived her property, and took her name.\n\nThere has been some dispute among the historians of Brittany as to\ndates, but it is agreed that the contest at law between the two\nfamilies was begun in 1402, was still found on the parliamentary\nrecords in 1403, and was settled by the marriage, which the best\nauthorities agree took place February 5, 1404.\n\nGuy de Laval (Rais) and Marie de Craon were the parents of Gilles de\nRais, who was their first-born. His birth is believed to have taken\nplace at the ch\u00e2teau of Machecoul during the last months of the year\n1404. A doubt has been thrown over these dates, especially that of\nhis birth, because of his extreme youth when he made his appearance\nin public affairs. If born at that time, he would appear to have been\na Marshal of France at twenty-five years of age; but this was not\nimpossible, and the weight of the evidence seems to favour the dates as\ngiven.\n\nThe parents of Gilles had another son, Ren\u00e9 de la Suze, but he seems\nto have made but little figure compared with his redoubtable brother.\nGuy de Laval, the father, died on the last day of October, 1415, and\nthe records show his last will and testament dated on the 28th and 29th\nof that month. He gave the tutelage of his sons to a distant cousin,\nJohn de Tournemine; but by some means not appearing, the maternal\ngrandfather, Jean de Craon, took upon himself their guardianship. The\nmother, Marie, was remarried soon after the death of her husband, to\nCharles Desouville, the Lord of Villebon. The grandfather of Gilles\nand Ren\u00e9 seems to have been excessively indulgent and devoted to the\nchildren, and if he was old, he was of strong will, fiery temper,\nstaunch patriotism, and obstinate disposition.\n\nIn 1417, when Gilles was but thirteen years old, he was engaged by\nhis grandfather to Joan Peynel, the daughter of Foulques Peynel,\nthe Lord of Hambuie and Briquebec; but the contract was voided by\nher death. In November, 1418, the grandfather made for him a second\ncontract of marriage, this time with Beatrice de Rohan, the eldest\ndaughter of Alain de Porhoet. The contract was signed at Vannes with\ngreat ceremony in the presence of an illustrious throng of Breton\nnobles. But this contract came to an end, as did the former, by the\nunfortunate death of the young lady. This double failure did not,\nhowever, discourage the doting grandfather. He immediately proceeded\nwith his arrangements for a third contract, this time with Catherine\nde Thouars, the daughter of Miles de Thouars and Beatrice de Morgan,\nand this marriage was celebrated on the last day of November, 1420. The\nyoung wife, Catherine, brought to her husband, Gilles, the property\nof Tiffauges, Pouzauges, Savenay, Confolons, Chabenais, and others\nof minor importance. The first two mentioned were well provided with\nch\u00e2teaux. The property and ch\u00e2teau of Machecoul came to Gilles through\nhis mother\u2019s family, and the ch\u00e2teau and property of Champtoc\u00e9 came to\nhim upon the death of his grandfather. This, with the fortune of his\nfather, Guy de Laval, to which must be added that of the family of Rais\nleft by Joan la Sage, made Gilles de Rais one of the richest barons of\nthe province.\n\nUnder the conditions of the adolescence of Gilles de Retz, his\neducation may be better imagined than described. Left at the age of\neleven an orphan or a half-orphan, by the death of his father; the\nremarriage of his mother within a year thereafter; the contest of\ngreater or less gravity over his guardianship, which ended in the\nsuccess of his maternal grandfather, whose best recommendation for the\nposition seems to have been his love for his grandchildren and his\nsubsequent willingness to indulge them, and also his great desire to\nget them (especially the elder) married and off his hands, a proceeding\nwhich he conducted with such celerity that the young man was engaged\nthree times with all pomp and formality, and finally married by the\ntime he was sixteen years old: this would seem to afford but little\ntime or opportunity to obtain an education, even under the best\nfacilities, however studious and seriously inclined he might have been.\n\nEducation did not stand very high in the province of Brittany at this\nera. There was much excuse, especially for the nobles and barons of\nBrittany, for their lack of education. The profession of war seems to\nhave been the highest recommendation, and the shortest, as well as\nthe easiest and most agreeable, road to preferment. There is much to\nbe said on the score of patriotism and the needs of the country, for,\nas will be seen farther on, it was an era of war, and Brittany was in\nthe midst of it. The education in arms was almost inevitable; it had\ngreater attraction for Gilles than books, arts, or sciences; and it\nappears that his grandfather allowed him to pursue his own wishes and\ndesires without even an attempt at control. Gilles, during his trial,\nsaid: \u201cIn my youth I was allowed to go always according to my own sweet\nwill.\u201d Nevertheless, he spoke three languages, Latin, French, and\nBreton, had some knowledge of chemistry, and it seems to be without\nquestion that he had a library, so well chosen as to be an object\nof commendation and attraction to highly educated persons. In the\ninventory of his effects, taken in 1436 and found among his records, is\na receipt of Jean Montclair given to Jean Bouray, for a book a copy\nof Ovid\u2019s _Metamorphoses_, described to have been in parchment covered\nwith leather-gilt, with copper clasps and locks of silver-gilt, with a\ncrucifix of white silver on the back.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nGILLES AS A SOLDIER. 1420\u20131429\n\n  _First for John V., Duke of Brittany, against the House of Blois. He\n      Joins the Army of France and is Assigned to Duty with Joan of\n      Arc. Crowning of the King, and Gilles Made Marshal of France._\n\n\nIn the condition of his country at that time, it was but natural that\nthis handsome, impetuous, rich, and powerful baron should take up arms\nas his profession. France and England were in the midst of the Hundred\nYears\u2019 War. Brittany, Gilles\u2019s own duchy, had been since the death\nof John IV. engaged in a civil war over the succession. The family\nof Montforts (son of a younger son) had gained the victory over the\nPenthi\u00e8vres and Blois (daughter of an elder son). Gilles\u2019s father and\nhis family had fought on the side of Blois, but on his defeat they had\nmade their peace with the victorious Duke.\n\nWhen Gilles was about sixteen years old an incident occurred which\nrenewed the civil war and swept him into its midst. The head of the\nBlois family, with his mother, the daughter of De Clisson, set a trap\nfor John V. (De Montfort), Duke of Brittany, inviting him, under a\nflag of truce, to a friendly conference to be held at the castle of\nChamptoceaux. This conference was only a pretence, the flag of truce\nwas violated, and John V. was entrapped and held prisoner. He was\ntreated with great severity, bound in chains, and cast into a dungeon.\nThis inhuman treatment on the part of the Blois and Penthi\u00e8vres, being\nin violation of every principle held sacred by men and soldiers,\naroused the indignation of the Bretons to a pitch beyond control. The\npeculiar interest of this to the present memoir is that, while the\nancestral families of Gilles de Rais had always theretofore fought on\nthe side of the Penthi\u00e8vres and Blois, they now turned to the other\nside and took up for John V. of Montfort.\n\nDu Guesclin, the uncle, and Brumor, the grandfather, of Gilles de Rais\non his father\u2019s side, were now dead; but Jean de Craon, his grandfather\non his mother\u2019s side, he who had been so indulgent a guardian, still\nlived, and on the 23d of February, 1420, a few months before the\nmarriage of Gilles, they repaired to the town of Vannes, attending upon\na session of the States-General, convoked in the absence of the Duke\nby his wife. Part of the ceremony of Gilles and his grandfather was\nthe oath of allegiance for the deliverance of their prince: \u201cWe swear\nupon the cross to employ our bodies and our goods, and to enter into\nthis quarrel for life and for death,\u201d--and they signed it with their\nproper hands and sealed it with their seals. The war broke out anew.\nAlain de Rohan was made Lieutenant-General. An army of fifty thousand\nmen volunteered and took the field under him. In the front rank, by the\nside of his grandfather, at the head of all the vassals of their united\nbaronies, was Gilles de Retz. This army marched against Lamballe which\ncapitulated, Guingamp, the same, and successively Jugon, Chateaulan,\nBroon, and finally against the ch\u00e2teau of Champtoceaux in which the\nDuke was incarcerated. This resisted the assault but was besieged and\nfinally taken, the fortress demolished, and John V. was released and\nreturned to Nantes where he was given a triumphal entry.\n\nThe Ch\u00e2teau de Clisson, the headquarters of the Penthi\u00e8vre faction, was\nsouth of Nantes twenty kilometres, and in the immediate neighbourhood\nof the most extensive property of Gilles de Retz. In revenge for his\nadhesion to the Duke of Brittany, which Margaret de Clisson was pleased\nto call his treason to her side, she found it most convenient to raid\nand destroy the adjacent properties of Gilles de Retz. In reprisal, the\nDuchess of Brittany confiscated certain rights which Olivier, Count\nde Blois, had in or about the Ch\u00e2teau de Clisson, and transferred\nthem to the family of Gilles, and this was ratified by the Duke after\nhis release. Then, as he says, \u201cIn recognition of the good and loyal\nservices of his cousins, of Suze and Rais,\u201d he gives to them all\nthe lands of Olivier de Blois, formerly Count de Penthi\u00e8vre, and of\nCharles his brother. This was afterwards compromised by the payment of\na certain sum of money. Penthi\u00e8vres, Blois, and Clisson were cited to\nappear before the States-General, at which Gilles and his grandfather\nassisted as counsellors; and, as an end of all things, the Parliament\nof Brittany declared the Penthi\u00e8vres guilty of felony, treason,\nand _l\u00e8se-majest\u00e9_, condemned them to death, and deprived them in\nperpetuity of their name, arms, and all honour in Brittany; but they\nescaped to France.\n\nThis was the introduction of Gilles de Retz to the profession of arms\nand his first appearance as one of the lords of the country. He was at\nthat time only sixteen years old, and immediately upon the conclusion\nof this campaign he was married to Catherine de Thouars.\n\nFrance, at that epoch, was in danger of the fate which afterwards\nbefell Poland. The duchy of Aquitaine, which comprised nearly all\nsouth-western France, had for its duke Edward III., King of England.\nThe duchy of Burgundy had for its head Philip the Good, who was Count\nof Flanders and was stronger in his duchy than was the King of France\nin his kingdom. These two were banded together by a treaty, offensive\nand defensive, and they and their countries were then, and had been\nfor nigh sixty years, carrying on war against France with the avowed\ndetermination of establishing the King of England on her throne. The\nDuke of Bedford, son-in-law of the Duke of Burgundy, was the English\ngeneral commanding in France. The Count of Richemont, the second son of\nthe Duke of Brittany, was also the son-in-law of the Duke of Burgundy.\nThus these strong nobles, princes, and kings were allied against\nFrance. In the dukedom of Brittany the contending houses of Blois and\nMontfort had been aided, respectively, by the King of France and the\nKing of England, and had accepted and supported an English army on\nBreton soil. We all know of the condition of the dukedom of Normandy;\nhow, only a few hundred years earlier, William captured England at the\nbattle of Hastings and established himself as her king. This process\nwas now in danger of repetition, only with the conditions reversed, and\nFrance had then in prospect a worse fate than she ever had before or\nsince.\n\nSuch was the condition of France at the time of the death of Charles\nVI., on October 21, 1422, when his son, Charles VII., came to the\nthrone. Charles VII., was married to Mary of Anjou, the daughter of\nYolande of Aragon, Queen of Sicily, the widow of Louis of Anjou; a\nwoman of noble heart, great spirit and patriotism, and devoted to\nFrance. Yolande set herself, with all her beauty and diplomacy, to\ndivide and break up this coterie of great noblemen who had organised\nthemselves against the King, and to induce some of them to become\nsupporters of France. On March 24, 1425, Yolande started for Brittany\naccompanied by sundry powerful seigneurs. Jean de Craon, grandfather of\nGilles de Retz, was one of those approached, and his valiant services\nrendered to John V. of Brittany, in releasing him from the dungeon at\nChamptoceaux, gave him great and deserved influence.\n\nGilles de Retz had returned to his home after the defeat of the\nBlois party, and was residing there in the quiet and peace of his\nnewly married life, when this new turn was made in the political\nkaleidoscope. A council of the States-General of Brittany was\nassembled at the city of Nantes, and Gilles was one of the seigneurs\nin attendance. Naturally, he would be one of the lieutenants of his\ngrandfather, Jean de Craon, who had openly espoused the cause of the\nKing of France, and who went into the council with the expressed desire\nto win the Duke of Brittany in that direction. The Assembly pronounced\nstrongly in favour of the alliance with the King of France, and the\nmonth of September was fixed as the time, and the town of Saumur,\nmidway between Nantes and Angers, was appointed as the place, for a\nconference between the Duke of Brittany and the King of France. The\nterms fixed by the Duke were the same as those laid down by the Duke of\nBurgundy--that was, the expulsion of the Penthi\u00e8vre and Blois families\nfrom the Court of France. The King consented, and thus gained the\nactive aid of the Duke of Brittany and the moral support of the Duke of\nBurgundy.\n\nThe peace between the Duke of Brittany and the King of France brought\nits first great fruits in the offer to the King by the Count of\nRichemont, the brother of the Duke of Brittany, of his services\nagainst England, which was accepted, and he, the Count of Richmont,\nwas made Constable of France. To him, probably more than to any other\nman, was France indebted for the final victory over England, and the\nestablishment of France in her place among the nations of the world.\nGilles de Retz, still with his grandfather, Jean de Craon, embraced\nthe side of the King with ardour. He was rich and Charles was poor. He\nentered with spirit into all the pleasure and gayety of the Court. He\nbecame a pronounced favourite, and despite the subsequent defection or\nopposition of the Duke of Brittany, and the renunciation or withdrawal\nof favour from the Count of Richemont, Gilles de Retz and his\ngrandfather remained indissolubly bound to Charles VII. and to France.\n\nThe first appearance of Gilles de Retz in the service of the King of\nFrance, or as a member of his Court, was September 8, 1425. He took\nservice with the Breton troops and made his first essay as a soldier on\nthe side of the King of France in the siege of Saint-Jean-de-Beuvron.\n\nGilles de Retz associated himself with Ambroise de Lor\u00e9 and the Baron\nBeaumanoir (the son or grandson of him who led the fight for Brittany\nin the _Combat de Trente_). These three attacked and captured the\nfortress of Rainefort in Anjou, which capitulated with terms that\nspared the English soldiers, but left to be punished the Frenchmen who\nhad committed treason against their country. Ambroise de Lor\u00e9 sought to\nsave them, but Gilles was firm in his decision that they should hang\nas traitors, and such was their fate. The ch\u00e2teau of Malicorne was\nattacked by the same three, and captured, or surrendered, on the same\nterms. The two friends, Beaumanoir and Gilles, held together in their\nundertakings; they were together at the siege of Montargis, which was\nconducted by Constable Richemont and La Hire.\n\nIt was at this siege that La Hire, about to make the assault, was\nasked to join with the rest in prayer to God for aid and safety in the\ncoming fight; he had not much experience in religious vernacular, but\nhe joined hands, and with the fervour of a bigot and the faith of a\ndevotee said: \u201cO God, I pray Thee to do for me to-day what Thou wouldst\nthat I should do for Thee, were I God and Thou La Hire.\u201d In the assault\nwhich immediately followed, Gilles de Retz arrived at the top of the\nwall in advance of his soldiers. The first Englishman encountered was\nCaptain Blackburn, the commander of the English forces, whom Gilles\nengaged in a hand-to-hand combat, killing him outright. On seeing their\nchief slain, the English soldiers threw down their arms and capitulated\non the usual terms. This exploit was recognised by all his superiors,\nand covered the young soldier with glory. But the victories of the\nFrench in the north were not equal to those gained by the English in\nthe south, who, having captured nearly all France, Paris included,\nadvanced into the interior, until at last they appeared before Orleans\nand commenced its memorable siege.\n\nThen, in 1429, came the brilliant meteor across the sky of France, Joan\nof Arc, the Maid of Orleans. Her visions at Domremy, her travels across\nFrance, passing safely through the lines of the enemy, her arrival at\nthe castle of Chinon, her presentation to the King, her assault and\ncapture of Orleans, are all matters of history. The theatre of her\nexploits in western France was not far distant from the barony and\nresidence of Gilles de Retz. He was the kind of man to be captivated by\nthe Maid of Orleans, and he became one of her most devoted followers.\nIt is said that he received from the King orders to be captain in her\nescort, whether as its commander does not appear, but he was with her\nat Chinon, Poitiers, Blois, Orleans, Jargeau, Meung, Beaugency, and\nPatay.\n\nOn the occasion of the King\u2019s coronation at Rheims, Gilles de Retz\nreceived the baton of Marshal of France. There is a question as to\nthe date, but none as to the fact. Some authorities give the date as\nJune 21, 1429; others, again, say that with other peers of France he\nwas promoted on the day of the coronation of the King, July 17, 1429;\nstill others assert it to have been in the month of September. It is\nexplainable that all three of these dates are correct, for the King\nmight well have announced, on the earliest date, that he was to be\npromoted to the rank of Marshal of France; the ceremony of installation\nmay have taken place upon the occasion of the King\u2019s coronation, and\nyet the commission not have been signed, or recorded, until September.\nThat he was an officer in high command upon that occasion, and in\nfavour with the King, cannot be doubted.\n\nThe Kings of France, from Clovis, the first convert to Christianity,\ndown to Louis XIV., were crowned in the cathedral at Rheims. There\nis a tradition that upon the crowning of King Clovis a white dove\nmiraculously descended from Heaven and hovered over, if it did not\nalight upon, the King\u2019s head, bearing in its beak the _ampulla_\ncontaining the consecrated oil for his coronation. The latter was\nretained and became a holy emblem under the name of Sainte Ampoule, and\nwas preserved in the Abbey of Saint Remy, near the cathedral at Rheims,\nuntil it was destroyed during the French Revolution. From Clovis to\nLouis XIV. it figured in the coronation of every king of France. At\nthe coronation of Charles VII., Gilles de Retz as Marshal of France,\nMarshal Boussac, Admiral de Culan, and Lord Graville were the four\nnobles of France chosen as its escort and guard of honour. After the\ncoronation, Gilles remained in the service in his former position of\nguard, or captain of the guard, of Joan of Arc. He accompanied her to\nParis, which the English evacuated and left to the care of the Duke of\nBurgundy.\n\nThe capture of Joan at Compi\u00e8gne took place May 20, 1430, and her\nexecution May 30, 1431. There is no evidence reported of Gilles\u2019s\npresence during any of this time. There has been found among the\nrecords of the barony of Rais, a paper wherein he acknowledged a debt\nto \u201cRoland Mauvoisin, Captain of Prin\u00e7ay, the sum of _huitvingtes_\n[twenty-eight] crowns of gold, for the purchase of a horse, saddle, and\nbridle, promised to his dear and well beloved Michel Machafer, captain\nof a certain company, as soon as they arrived at Louviers, in order to\nengage said captain to come with him on this voyage.\u201d This paper was\ndated December 26, 1431, at Rouen, and is signed with his own proper\nhand.\n\n[Illustration: Gilles\u2019s signature and rubric.]\n\n    NOTE.--The army service of the Baron de Retz, his relation to\n    Joan of Arc, and his investiture as Marshal of France, are\n    authenticated in sundry histories of France.\n\n    Monstrelet (vol. ii., p. 96) mentions him as a Marshal of\n    France.\n\n    Michelet (vol. v., p. 71) mentions the Marshal de Retz as one\n    of the Bretons who went to the aid of the city of Orleans.\n\n    Sismondi (_Histoire des Fran\u00e7ais_, vol. xiii., p. 124),\n    speaking of the advent of Joan of Arc, says:\n\n    \u201cLe Roi l\u2019envoya \u00e0 Blois, apr\u00e8s de la petite arm\u00e9e qu\u2019y\n    rassemblaient les Mar\u00e9cheaux de Rais et de Saint Sevire,\n    Ambroise de Lor\u00e9 et le sire de Goncourt.\u201d\n\n    In _Jeanne d\u2019Arc_, by H. Wallon (Paris, 1860), the author says:\n\n    \u201cLe Mar\u00e9chall de Boussac et le seignieur de Rais, invest\u00e9s du\n    Commandement y rentrent Ares--peu apr\u00e9s, avec La Hire, Polon de\n    Xaintrailles et tous ceux que devaient faire l\u2019escort, 10 ou\n    12000 x hommes.\u201d\n\n    And again in _Jeanne d\u2019Arc_, by Harriet Parr (London: 1866,\n    vol. i. p. 91). \u201cThe captains appointed to command the\n    exploration (to Orleans) were the Marshal de Boussac, the\n    Marshal de Retz, and Louis de Culant, Admiral of France.\u201d\n\n    The extent of the relation of Gilles with the incident of Joan\n    of Arc may be obtained by taking Quicherat\u2019s history of the\n    _Process for the Condemnation and Rehabilitation of Joan of\n    Arc_ (5 vols., Paris, 1849) the references in the index under\n    the title of \u201cGilles de Rais\u201d:\n\n    Rais (Gilles de Laval, sire de) present at the arrival of Joan\n    before the King at the castle of Chinon, iv., 363, 407.\n\n    He accompanies her to Orleans, iii., 4; iv., 5, 41, 53, 213,\n    491; v., 290; vi., 12, 20.\n\n    His return to Blois, iv., 54, 56, 152, 155, 221, 222; v., 290.\n\n    He assists at the Council with Jacques Boucher, iv., 57,\n    158. Combat at the capture of St. Loup, iv., 6, 43; at the\n    capture of St. Augustine, iv., 61, 158, 226; at the capture of\n    Tourelles, iv., 44; v., 261.\n\n    His departure from Orleans with Joan, iv., 165.\n\n    Took part in the expedition of Jargeau, iv., 12; v., 108, 261.\n\n    Combat at Patay, iv., 238, 239, 319, 371, 419.\n\n    He goes to Rheims, vi., 69, 180, 248, 378.\n\n    He is escort of the Sainte Ampoule on the occasion of the\n    coronation of the King, iv., 77, 185; v., 129.\n\n    Made Marshal of France, v., 129.\n\n    In command at Montepilloy, iv., 83, 193.\n\n    Is sent to Senlis, iv., 24.\n\n    Figures in the attack on Paris, iv., 26, 86, 87, 197, 199.\n\n    Opposes (makes war on) the false Jeanne d\u2019Arc, v., 333.\n\n\n    The _Livres de Comptes_, the official accounts of the Royal\n    Exchequer, mention Gilles de Retz in connection with Joan of\n    Arc on sundry occasions.\n\n    The eighth account of Guillaume Chartiers, receiver-general of\n    finance, published by Godfrey in _Histoire de Charles VII_. (p.\n    89).\n\n    To Messire Gilles de Rais, Councillor and Chamberlain of the\n    king, Sire and Marshal of France, the sum of one thousand\n    pounds that our lord the king by his letters patent of xxi\n    juin (M) CCCCXX at-arms in the Company of Joan of Arc and the\n    employment in her service preparing for the siege of Tarjean.\n\n    Paid by the city of Tours to John Colez _10 livres tournois_\n    for having brought the good news of the capture of Orleans by\n    _la pucelle_ [Joan of Arc], _Mgr. de Rais et les gens de leur\n    compagnie_.\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nGILLE\u2019S LIFE AT HOME IN BRITANNY\n\n1430\u20131439\n\n  _The personal Appearance of Gilles de Retz. An Epitome of his Life.\n      His Extravagance and ruinous Expenditures. His Inheritance.\n      His Sales and Transfers of Property. His Love for the Theatre.\n      Mysteries. That of the Siege of Orleans. Mysteries at Nantes.\n      The Cathedral. Expensive Visit to Orleans. Maison de la Suze.\n      The Decree of the King interdicting his Sale or Incumbrance of\n      Property. The increasing Demand for Money drives him to Magic in\n      Search for the Philosopher\u2019s Stone and the Transmutation of base\n      Metals into Gold. Magic._\n\n\nThere are but two known portraits of Gilles de Retz. That in the palace\nat Versailles is purely imaginative, and was only made to complete the\nseries of the Marshals of France. It is not known by whom or at what\ntime the other was made. In 1438, Gilles was thirty-five years old,\ntall, handsome, and well formed. He showed in his face, figure, and in\nevery movement, his pride and spirit. He had a high, rather than broad,\nforehead; his nose was prominent and slightly aquiline; the nostrils\nwere large and thin, and, on occasions of anger, spread and quivered in\nan interesting and threatening manner. His lips were rather thin but\nwell coloured, and had a tinge of delicate and refined sensuality.\n\nLike many of the Breton race, his complexion was fair, his eyes large\nand blue, and his eyebrows and lashes long and black. His hair was also\nlong and black, and beard the same. It was soft and silky, and with its\nraven blackness became shiny, giving it a tinge of blue-black, which\nmay have served as a foundation for his pseudonym in that country. His\nneck was neither too short, too long, nor yet too large, but seemed a\ncolumn full of nervous strength, calculated to support solidly and well\nhis head and brain, with whatever of pride, audacity, and confidence it\nmight have. His shoulders were square, his body long, his waist small,\nwhile the bust and hips were large and fairly placed upon the muscular\nlegs, which stood straight under him, giving his body firm support.\nHis fingers were long and tapering, his hands small, and their fair\ncomplexion, when brought in contact with his velvet costume and lace\nruffles, showed them to good advantage. Thus, he had the physical\nappearance of an athlete trained in all the exercises of the body; of\nmuch strength, a good walker, a good rider, and capable of any feat at\narms.\n\nMichelet (_Hist. de France_, vol. v., pp. 208\u2013213) describes Gilles as\nof \u201c_bon entendment, belle personne et bonne fa\u00e7on, lettr\u00e9 de plus, et\nappr\u00e9ciant fort ce qui parlaient avec \u00e9l\u00e9gance la langue latine_.\u201d\n\nLemire says (p. 39) that Gilles, when he appeared before the Court, was\ndressed in pantaloons, skin-tight, after the fashion of the day, and\nshirt and vest, all of white wool, with boots also white. Over this\nwas a doublet of pearl-grey silk embroidered with gold, with a hood of\nermine; a sash of scarlet about his waist which supported a poniard\nwith red velvet scabbard. He wore his military and seigniorial medals\nand orders, and about his neck a chain of gold with a reliquary. From\nthe latter he never parted.\n\nHow much of this description is actual and how much imaginary will\nprobably never be known; but in the attractiveness of his person\nand manner, Gilles de Retz compared with the best of his race in\nthat country, and the foregoing might have been a fairly truthful\nrepresentation. He seems the model of a gentleman of his time; his\nlife being divided between the chase, war, and his adventures. He had\nbeauty, force, riches, and occupied the highest rank among the nobility\nof his province. To him, nature and fortune had been blindly prodigal\nin their gifts.\n\nOn Gilles\u2019s return from service in the army of France, after the\nmurder of Joan of Arc, he retired to his ch\u00e2teau, dwelling alternately\nat Machecoul and Tiffauges, with an occasional visit to his H\u00f4tel de\nla Suze in Nantes. He engaged in no serious business, but apparently\nresigned himself to domestic pleasures and happiness. He established\nhimself in a princely fashion. The interiors of his ch\u00e2teaux were\ndecorated in the most magnificent and luxurious manner possible. He\nmaintained a small army, the members of which were in his own pay. He\nwas passionately fond of music; he purchased instruments and organised\nall sorts of musical competitions and displays. He established a\nreligious hierarchy, having as a member of his own household a pseudo\nbishop with a large retinue, and all the necessary paraphernalia,\nincluding rich vestments for his servants and expensive decorations for\nhis chapels.\n\nThis luxurious, magnificent, expensive mode of living was carried\non for so long a time, increasing to such an alarming extent, that\nhis brother Ren\u00e9 presented a memoir or petition to the King, called\nin history _M\u00e9moires des H\u00e9ritiers_, wherein these expenditures and\nextravagances were set forth at as great length and with as much detail\nand redundant phrase as though it were a bill in equity. This memoir\nended with the prayer that the King should pass a decree against\nGilles, interdicting him from making sale, transfer, or alienation, or\nmortgaging or pledging any of his property. This process is not unknown\nto French law. Without having the law of primogeniture as in England,\nthe heirs yet had certain rights which, consequent upon the death of\nGilles, would accrue to them under the law of France, and thus it was\nthat the King was prayed to take the necessary steps for the protection\nof the rights of the heirs. In this proceeding his brother, Ren\u00e9 de la\nSuze, seems to have been the principal and moving spirit, although he\nwas afterwards aided and abetted by his cousin, Guy de Laval.\n\nFrom the _M\u00e9moires des H\u00e9ritiers_ we get a knowledge of the property of\nGilles de Retz. The list of his lands, possessions, and income, with\nhis family ancestry, through which he received them, was as follows:\n\nFrom the house of Rais, left by Joan la Sage, first the title of Baron\nand then the rank of Dean of Barons in the duchy of Brittany, with its\nch\u00e2teaux and dependencies in great number, of which the principal only\nare named--Machecoul, Saint-\u00c9tienne-de-Mer-Morte, Pornic, Prin\u00e7ay (or\nPrinc\u00e9), Vue, Ile de Bouin, etc.\n\nFrom the house of Montmorency-Laval, the original ancestry of his\nfather,--independent of his adoption by Joan la Sage,--the seigniories\nof Blaison, of Chemill\u00e9, of Fontaine-Milon, and of Grattecuisse in\nAnjou; of Ambri\u00e8res, Saint-Aubin-de-Fosse-Louvain, province of Maine;\nand others in Brittany.\n\nFrom the house of Craon, through his grandfather and his mother,\nthe H\u00f4tel de la Suze at Nantes; the seigniories and ch\u00e2teaux of\nBriollay, Champtoc\u00e9, and Ingrandes, province of Anjou; of S\u00e9n\u00e9ch\u00e9,\nLoroux-Botereau, B\u00e9nate, Bourgneuf-en-Rais, Voulte, and others.\n\nFrom his wife, on their marriage, Tiffauges, Pouzauges, Chabanais,\nConfolens, Ch\u00e2teaumorant, Savenay, Lombert, Grez-sur-Maine, with\n\u201c_plusiers autres terres fort belles, et leurs d\u00e9pendencies_.\u201d\n\nThe value of this immense property has been estimated at four and a\nhalf millions of francs, though this may be exaggerated. His personal\nproperty was valued at one time at a hundred thousand golden crowns,\nand his income was variously estimated from thirty to sixty thousand\npounds per annum.\n\nIt was alleged that he had made sales and transfers of property in an\nimprovident manner and to an unjustifiable extent, dissipating to that\nextent his patrimony, to the damage of his estate and the detriment of\nhis heirs. These were given somewhat in detail in the _M\u00e9moires_, etc.,\nviz.:\n\n    To Gauthier de Brussac, Captain-at-arms, the towns and\n    seigniories of Confolens, Chabanais, Ch\u00e2teaumorant, and Lombert;\n\n    To Jean de Marsille, the ch\u00e2tellenie, land, and seigniorie of\n    Fontaine-Milon in Anjou;\n\n    To Messire William de la Jumeli\u00e8re, the ch\u00e2teau and lands of\n    Blaison, of Chemill\u00e9, in Anjou;\n\n    To Hardouin de Bueil, Bishop of Angers, the land and seigniory\n    of Grattecuisse, the ch\u00e2tellenie and ch\u00e2teau of Saveny, half\n    the forest of Brecilien;\n\n    To Messire Guy de la Roche-Guyon, the ch\u00e2teau and lands of\n    Motte-Achard, and of Mauri\u00e8re, in Poitou;\n\n    To Jean Malestroit, Bishop of Nantes (who was soon to\n    be his judge), the ch\u00e2teau and lands of Prign\u00e9, of Vue,\n    Bois-aux-Treaux in the parish of Saint-Michel-S\u00e9n\u00e9ch\u00e9, and _un\n    grand nombre de terres situ\u00e9s dans le clos du pays de Rais pour\n    une somme \u00e9norme_;\n\n    To William de Fresni\u00e8re and Guillemot le Cesne, merchants\n    of Angers, the lands and seigniories of Ambri\u00e8res,\n    Saint-Aubin-de-Fosse-Louvain in the province of Maine;\n\n    To Jean de Montecler, one of his men-at-arms, and to Guillemot\n    le Cesne, aforesaid, the lands and seigniories of Voulte and\n    S\u00e9n\u00e9ch\u00e9;\n\n    To Jean Rabateau, president of the parliament, the lands and\n    seigniories of d\u2019Auzence, de Clou\u00e9, and de Lignon;\n\n    To William (apothecary at Poitiers), Jean Ambert, and Jacques\n    de l\u2019Epine, the lands Brueil-Mangon-lez-Poitiers;\n\n    To Georges Tremoille, late favourite of the king, now in\n    retirement, twelve hundred \u201creaux\u201d of gold on the rents of\n    Champtoc\u00e9, to pay interest money on twelve thousand \u201creaux\u201d of\n    gold formerly borrowed from him;\n\n    To Perrinet Pain, bourgeois and merchant of Angers, much\n    interest money on loans secured on his lands and seigniories;\n\n    To the Chapter of Notre Dame, Nantes, his superb H\u00f4tel de la\n    Suze;\n\n    To Jean le Ferron, Saint \u00c9tienne-de-Mer-Morte, etc., etc., etc.\n\nDuring some period, most likely in his younger days and before his\nservices in the army, Gilles de Retz became enamoured of the theatre.\nHis taste in this luxury was in the same extravagant style as the\nchapels, the bishop, and his religious secretaries.\n\nThere have been many histories of the theatre and the drama in France\nwritten by French historians. _Histoire du Th\u00e9\u00e2tre en France_, Paris,\n1881, two volumes, Monsieur Petit de Julleville; _Histoire de la\nSoci\u00e9t\u00e9 Fran\u00e7aise au Moyen \u00c2ge_, Paris, 1880, by Monsieur Rosi\u00e8res;\n_Mise en Sc\u00e8ne des Myst\u00e8res_, Paris, 1885, by M. Paulin, Paris; _Le\nDrame Chr\u00e9tien_, by M. Marius Sepet; _Tableau de la Litt\u00e9rature au\nMoyen \u00c2ge_, by M. Villemain; _Histoire du Th\u00e9\u00e2tre Fran\u00e7ais_, Paris,\n1745 to 1749, fifteen volumes, by les Fr\u00e8res Parfaict; _Dictionnaire\ndu XIX^{me} Si\u00e8cle_, by La Rousse; and there may be many others, but\nwith them all, our understanding of the extravagance and expenditure,\nand the consequent elegance and richness attained by theatres in France\nduring the period in which we are now interested, would be incomplete\nwithout a study of the life of Gilles de Retz. His love for the theatre\nmanifested itself not simply in looking at the spectacle and hearing\nthe play, but in organising, arranging, and presenting the plays of the\ntime in theatres established and conducted by himself. Some of these\npresentations were in his own ch\u00e2teaux, but others were given in the\nneighbouring cities--Nantes, Angers, Blois, Orleans, and minor places\nin the provinces of Brittany, Maine, Anjou, Touraine, and Poitou.\n\nOne cause of his indulgence in theatrical display appears to have been\nthe desire to make himself popular with the people. That he loved the\ntheatre and its plays, and that they gave him pleasure, is not to be\ndoubted, but after all, it is supposed that his ambition to shine among\nthe people formed the real foundation.\n\nThe theatre had always been intended as a means of amusement. An\nattempt was made in France and the Latin countries during the fifteenth\ncentury, to combine in the theatre instruction of a religious kind with\npleasure and amusement. This attempt was fostered by the clergy, and,\nin its execution, theatrical plays were performed in sundry chapels\nand sanctuaries. Whether the Passion Play at Oberammergau is a revival\nor continuation of this custom, is suggested but not decided. But such\nplays were common enough in the fifteenth century and met with favour\nin the Church. In its origin, this departure was exclusively religious,\nand was adopted by the Church as an ingenious and original continuation\nof the education of the people in the mysteries of the Christian\nreligion. Originally, it employed only sacred topics, and used only\nterms taken from the ritual, or from the Bible, and was altogether in\nprose Latin.\n\nWith the lapse of time, the imagination of authors, and the progress of\npopular language, theatrical representations passed from the chapels\nand holy places to the public places, and the Latin language was\nsuperseded by the vulgar. The priests who had conducted the play gave\nway to laymen, and the liturgy of the drama was superseded by other\ncompositions. While religious scenes were continued and religious\nthoughts were the principal inspiration, yet there came interruptions\nand lapses. Secular and historic pieces were put upon the boards.\nThese were occasionally fixed together and played, first one and\nthen another, without attempt at regularity or continuation, as we in\nthe present day may have everything from tragedy to farce in the same\nseason at the same theatre. In the fifteenth century the favourite\nrepresentations were the \u201cMysteries\u201d and next the \u201cMoralities,\u201d and\nafter these, dramas and farces. The former were religious or historic\ndramas, calculated as much for religious or historical instruction\nand entertainment as for pleasure and amusement. The Last Judgment,\nthe Birth of Christ, the Baptism in Jordan, the Marriage in Cana, and\nother Mysteries in the life of Christ were presented, usually on holy\ndays, at Christmas, Easter, Ascension Day, and Pentecost. In not a few\ncases the theatre was in the open air, and this custom has been kept\nup in Brittany and certain provinces in France to the present day.\nWhile there are regular theatre halls in the cities, yet throughout the\ncountry are travelling troupes of mountebanks, jugglers, conjurers,\netc., with trained dogs and other animals, who, arriving at a small\ntown in the afternoon, pitch their tents upon the market-place or any\nother open square which can be secured, advertise the play by beating\nof drums or ringing of bells, charge one sou for a stand-up admission,\nand two sous for admission and a seat. The stage is made by unrolling a\nstrip of carpet upon the ground or pavement. And here will be performed\nthe sublime tragedy, the touching drama, and the roaring farce.\n\nIn the fifteenth century the plays, especially the Mysteries, whether\nreligious or historic, were elaborate and extensive. The scene of the\nplay varied according to its necessity and so was changed from town\nto country, from open street to walled town, the audience and actors\nbeing moved with it, as in certain ancient Greek theatres. An immense\namount of decoration was required, which, however, was not usually a\npainted canvas stretched upon a frame, representing the desired object;\nbut these scenes were made of the real thing, and the decoration,\nespecially of the streets and walls about, were of hangings, usually\nof tapestry, though in cases of need any gaily coloured stuffs, like\ncoverlets, bed-spreads, table-cloths, or carpets would be pressed\ninto service. This custom exists in Brittany to the present day. The\nauthor well remembers one of the holy days in August, 1882, when,\nvisiting the village of Savenay near Nantes, which by chance was one\nof the seigniories of Gilles de Retz, he witnessed the decoration of\nthe village. The well-to-do residents brought out their tapestries and\nhung them along the fronts of their houses and garden walls; the poorer\npeople, their carpets and coverlets, or anything which helped to make\na gay appearance; while in one particular residence a bolt of white\ncotton cloth was brought out and stretched along the wall, covering it\nfor a distance of fifty or sixty yards. This kind of decoration is not\nuncommon, and even in Nantes and Angers a greater amount of tapestry\nmay be seen on a single holy day than otherwise during a year\u2019s\nresidence.\n\nWhere required by the action of the drama, the scenes were built in\nthe fashion of scaffolds. In the Mystery of the Creation the lower\nscaffold represented the earth, while the second or upper represented\nthe heavens. In the Last Judgment and the Resurrection it consisted\nof two great scaffolds, making three stones one above another, the\nupper one of which represented Paradise, with God upon His throne, the\nVirgin, the Christ, the angels; all the holy things. The middle stage\nrepresented the earth with the mortals engaged in their everyday\nduties; while the lower one represented Sheol with the Prince of\nDarkness in command, and the demons, small and great, engaged in their\nsupposed task of keeping up the fires and of stirring up the spirits of\nthe damned. The description of all this interests us in its relation to\nGilles de Retz only because of its extravagance and immense expenditure.\n\nThe historic Mystery was also a favourite. The Mystery of the Siege of\nOrleans appears to have been the most popular and the most frequently\nplayed. But there were others: the Passion of Metz, the Mystery of\nParis, that of Saint Michel of Angers, of Saint Barbe. Gilles de Retz\norganised, equipped, and presented no less than ten of these Mysteries.\nThey were long, too; the Moralities contained about twelve hundred\nverses; while the Mysteries had many thousand verses, that of the Siege\nof Orleans having twenty thousand five hundred and twenty-nine lines;\nand they not infrequently required an entire day in the performance.\nThe presence and aid of five hundred persons were required on some of\nthese grand occasions.\n\nOne of the first paragraphs in the chapter on the extravagant and\nruinous folly of Gilles in the _M\u00e9moire des H\u00e9ritiers_, tells that the\nestablishment, organisation, and equipment of these theatres and the\nperformance of the plays was at the expense of Gilles. The succeeding\nparagraphs enlarge upon his immense and ruinous expenditures in this\nregard. The decoration, apparel, apparatus, the costumes of all the\nactors, were ordered by him. He required the best of everything, while\nthe question of expense or even of value seemed as nothing. When he\nwanted them, he wanted them, and they were purchased at the asking\nprice. Each person had his special costume according to his r\u00f4le and\ndignity; the beggar, the varlet, the huntsman, as well as the soldier,\nknight, and noble, the fair ladies, the saints in heaven, were all\naccoutred and equipped with stuffs of such richness as would magnify\nthe greatness and power of the author and owner of it all, and gratify\nhis inordinate ambition. Gold, silver, velvet, precious stones, rich\narmour, luxurious harness, fine embroidery, silken stuff, satin, and\nall the marvels of art in profusion. When the ornaments of the Church\nwere required in any scene or play, there were copes, chasubles,\ndalmatics, albs, and all the ecclesiastical robes so rich and\nsumptuous. His ecclesiastical paraphernalia was at the command of the\ntheatre.\n\nThe follies and ambition of Gilles not only required his theatrical\ncostumes and property to be of the richest and most expensive stuffs,\nbut in his maladministration they were bought at highest prices,\npayment frequently made with promises greatly increasing their cost.\nWith all this, his pride was such that he never permitted the same\ndress to be worn twice; everything was required to be made anew for\neach representation, or for each series of representations. New\ncostumes seem to have been his particular fad in that day, so that\nhe could use the same terms which now appear in the playbills of the\ncity--\u201centirely new and elegant costumes.\u201d Having been once used, they\nwere thrown aside or sold at whatever could be gotten for them. This\nmeant to buy at the highest price and sell at the lowest, a system\nwhich we well know produces financial ruin. His ambition and desire to\nplease led him into foolish and useless expenditures. All his theatres\nand the plays rendered by him were free; the people who attended\npaid nothing. Gilles paid the expenses of the entire entertainment.\nConsequently, one can easily understand the statements made in the\n_M\u00e9moirs_ of the ruin wrought by these representations, the cost of\neach one being thirty, forty, and fifty thousand francs (six, eight,\nand ten thousand dollars).\n\nGilles\u2019s favourite play was the Mystery of the Siege of Orleans. Here\nhe was not only actor but principal. It was a drama in verse though\nnot in rhyme. It was based upon the events of that memorable siege.\nQuicherat says of it that its historic value is _nil_, not because the\nauthor has removed it from the domain of history, but for the contrary\nreason, that he was quite too near, both in space and time, to the\nevents as they happened, and was, therefore, unable to take the r\u00f4le\nof historian, and make deductions. He could not form conclusions,\nnor announce principles: all that he did was to recount the actions\nand events as they happened day by day. He was a recorder, not an\nhistorian. The drama or poem was largely romance; while recounting the\ndaily progress of the siege, it was not a veritable or trustworthy\njournal thereof. The words put into the mouths of the various actors\nwere probably never spoken by them, certainly never were heard by the\nauthor. But they were the speech of the day; they were news gathered at\nthe time and which might have appeared in the daily newspapers, if such\nthings had then existed. It is because of their nearness to the events\nthat they are not history. How long the Mystery of the Siege of Orleans\ncontinued to be represented in the theatre as a drama is immaterial.\n\nOne hundred and forty personages have been introduced upon the stage,\nnot counting the groups of soldiers, peasants, citizens, musicians,\netc. The Marshal de Retz figured in it as one of the prominent actors,\nin close relation to the King and to Joan of Arc. Not only is his\nname mentioned, but he himself had a speaking part and was present on\nthe stage. Naturally he would take his own part and appear under his\nown name in the play; and this was both a compliment to his courage\nand ability as a soldier, and his versatility as an artist. While it\nkept him constantly before the people, it gave him an opportunity to\ngratify his ambition. It is useless to give any description of it, for\nit is simply the representation of the siege of Orleans written by one\nwho, while he did not copy the journal, had it under his hand while\nwriting the drama. Because it is in verse, it will not be practicable\nto translate much or any of it, but a few paragraphs will be given in\nwhich Gilles de Retz figured, and will be inserted (Appendix C) for the\npurpose of bringing out his part.\n\nA description of one of these Mysteries has been given us by Monsieur\nPaul Sauni\u00e8re. Its presentation took place in the Place Notre Dame\nbefore the Cathedral at Nantes, on May 21, 1439, under the direction,\nand at the expense, of Gilles de Retz. It was the Mystery of the Lord\nJesus Christ and of the Virgin Mary. It was written by a young poet,\nJean Lano\u00eb, and Gilles de Retz is reported to have paid him the sum\nof ten golden crowns. Whether the story told by Sauni\u00e8re is absolute\nverity, is of slight consequence. There can be little doubt that\nit represents truthfully the custom of the period relating to such\nspectacles, and is a fair description thereof. Much of it is recognised\nas in accordance with habits and customs of that country in the present\nday.\n\nAll public proclamations and announcements by official authority in the\nprovinces are made through the aid of either trumpet or drum, but in\nBrittany with the trumpet. The herald or other officer, when making\nan official sale, begins generally at the City Hall, makes the round\nof the city, sounding his trumpet at prominent places, calling the\npeople together to hear his announcement, which he makes _viva voce_,\nand so passes on to the next place, repeating the performance. Lost\nchildren are cried in the same way, except that when done by a private\nindividual a bell is used.\n\nIn the present case, the herald-at-arms was richly dressed in the\nlivery of his master, the Baron de Retz, accompanied by a guard of\nfour soldiers, or men-at-arms, who escorted him and kept the crowd at\na distance while he blew a call on his trumpet; and then he made his\nannouncement, which is given as follows:\n\n    \u201cWe, noble and powerful Baron, Gilles de Retz, Marshal of\n    France, Lord of Champtoc\u00e9, Tiffauges, Machecoul, Saint\n    \u00c9tienne-de-Mer-Morte, Pornic, and other places, do by these\n    presents make known, that by the express permission of the\n    high and powerful Lord Seignieur, Jean de Malestroit, by the\n    Grace of God and the Holy Father, the Bishop of Nantes, there\n    will be given on the 21st day of the present month, at two\n    o\u2019clock afternoon, at the Place of Notre Dame, a presentation\n    of a Mystery concerning the life of our Lord and Saviour Jesus\n    Christ, and of Madam, the Holy Virgin, His Mother.\u201d\n\nWhen the herald ceased, the soldiers closed up the circle that had\nbeen made around him and prepared to escort him to another place,\nwhile the crowd cried, \u201cLiesse, Liesse, to the Marshal--Liesse to our\nLord Bishop!\u201d The herald and his men-at-arms departed and the crowd\ndispersed.\n\nThe locality of the presentation of this spectacle adjoined the\ncathedral on its right as one stands facing it. This Mystery had but\na single scene, and required but a single stage. This stage, intended\nfor the use of the actors, was flanked on either side by an alcove or\nbalcony; that on the left, intended for the high dignitaries of the\nChurch and the city, the nobles, and other persons of distinction was\ndecorated with long and heavy curtains of blue velvet bordered with\ngold, the upper portion thereof being provided with rings to slide upon\na curtain rod, by which means the occupants of the alcove could be cut\noff from the view of the multitude. This balcony bore the arms of the\narchbishop and those of the city of Nantes. The balcony on the opposite\nside of the alcove was arranged with curtains in the same way, but it\nwas draped with red velvet decorated with a border of white velvet and\ngold braid and tassels. This balcony bore two coats of arms, both\nbelonging to the Baron de Retz--one was the house of Retz itself, gold\nwith _croix de sable_; the other, that of Machecoul, _trois chevrons\nde gueules sur le champ d\u2019argent_. The stage for the actors formed\nthe centre of the alcove, but was brought to the front to enable the\npopulace to see it, and was decorated with red velvet bearing the coat\nof arms of the city of Nantes.\n\nAs the hour for the spectacle approaches, the crowd gathers in the\nplace, and soon it is a mass of people, bourgeoisie and peasantry, most\nof them wearing the peculiar costumes of the country.\n\n[Illustration: A street in Nantes--Ancient houses.]\n\nThe archbishop with his suite could reach his balcony by a private\nway. The Baron de Retz occupied his hotel called Maison de la Suze in\nthe Rue Notre Dame. This Maison de la Suze has been destroyed, and no\nrepresentation of it is in existence. There are, however, many other of\nthe ancient streets lined on either side with houses belonging, if not\nto that precise epoch, to the one immediately following, and as such\nmay here be given with propriety as presenting a reasonably faithful\nidea of the city. Many of these houses are historic and have been\noccupied by persons of renown and distinction. Similar houses are to be\nseen in other towns of Brittany--Vannes, Quimper, Angers, Laval, Dinan.\nThese houses are usually built of frames of wood with great beams and\nposts as shown, and not infrequently the principal beams across the\nfront of the house bear a carved inscription. The author has seen these\nin Vannes and Auray, of which the following are samples:\n\n    PAX HVNC DOMVN ET OMNIBUS HABITAN IRVS IN EA ICI JAN FOLLIART\n    MA FAICT FAIRE LAN 1560.\n\n    AV NOM DE DIEV, DIEV SOICT EN MES AFFAIRES. YVES LEKME ET\n    PERRINE LEBAR SA COMPAGNE ONT FAICT FAIRE SE LOGIS EN IVING\n    1565.\n\nReturning to the spectacle of the Mystery: The Baron de Retz passes\nout from his great double gates or doors which form the entrance to\nhis Maison de la Suze, accompanied by his guards of honour, whose\nglittering armour reflects brilliantly the rays of the sun. With\ntheir halberts, they press back the crowd to make way for the Baron\nand his suite. By his side, and within easy reach, walks one of his\nmen-at-arms, holding a casque upturned, more or less filled with\ncoined money, of which the Baron occasionally takes a handful and\nscatters among the crowd, first on one side and then on the other.\nArrived at the balcony intended for him, the guards of honour open\ntheir ranks, press back the crowd, take their station at the foot\nof the steps and along the front of the balcony, while the Baron,\naccompanied by his suite, among which were his chapel, as it is called,\ncomprising his bishop and some thirty ecclesiastics of divers names\nand functions, mount the balcony and take their places, the Baron, of\ncourse, at the front and centre. It is said that his display of church\nand ecclesiastical dignitaries was unwarranted, that it had never\nbeen authorised by the Pope, that his Bishop had no ecclesiastical\njurisdiction, nor was he lawfully entitled to perform the functions\nor support the dignity, and it was also said that his appearance in\nthis character had always irritated, if it did not anger the Bishop of\nNantes.\n\nThe description of this spectacle has not been preserved to us, though,\nas with the Mystery of Orleans, of which a few copies of the libretto\nhave been preserved, this spectacle at Nantes excited the populace\nand aroused their enthusiasm, to which they gave vent with cries of\njoy and great huzzas. The dignitaries were present with many of their\nsuite, in gorgeous dress and costumes, their men-at-arms with casque\nand cuirass, Damascene steel and shining halbert and scabbard. Their\ncoats-of-mail were fire-gilt, and covered them from waist to knees;\ngloves and boots of red leather completed a brilliant and striking\ncostume. The prelates, on the other hand, with their magnificent\nofficial robes of scarlet and gold and silver, with the curtains and\nhangings of such royal magnificence, all served as a background for the\nplay of the Mystery which, being of the Infant Jesus and the Virgin\nMary, excited the deep-seated religious fervour and enthusiasm of the\npeople. They manifested their joy and enthusiasm in the usual way of\ncrowds, but the principal share was devoted to the Baron de Retz. This\nwas the pleasure reserved for him; this was the compensation for his\ngreat expenditure. It gratified his ambition, tickled his vanity, gave\nhim pleasure, justified his expenditure, confirmed his extravagant\nhabits, and led him farther in the course which ended in his ruin.\n\nIt would scarcely be possible at this late date, to obtain a more\ncomplete report of the prodigalities of Gilles de Retz than is\nfurnished by the _M\u00e9moires des H\u00e9ritiers_, which, as it was sufficient\nfor the King, should be sufficient for us; but there will occasionally\ncrop out of the historical desert of this ancient time a record which,\nby giving information on a particular subject, lifts the veil from\nhis life and gives us glimpses into certain extravagances, whereby we\nmay imagine the result. One of these, lately found among the archives\nat Orleans, and contributed by M. Doinel, is a memorandum of a visit\nof Gilles to that city from September, 1434, to August, 1435. He was\naccompanied by his suite and retinue, military and ecclesiastic. His\nbrother, Ren\u00e9 de la Suze, was with him, which was the only time they\nare shown to have been together, and, curiously enough, it must have\nbeen while the _M\u00e9moires des H\u00e9ritiers_, if not already presented, were\nbeing prepared, or at least contemplated; for the decree of the King\nwas published within the next two years; yet no mention is made therein\nof Ren\u00e9\u2019s presence on this trip.\n\nArrived at Orleans, Gilles de Retz installed himself, with his personal\nadjutants, at the H\u00f4tel Croix d\u2019Or (Golden Cross), while his suite\nand high officers with their respective retinues, were installed at\nthe other hotels, until, as the minute says, there was not a hotel in\nall Orleans but was occupied, if not filled, by him or by the officers\nand men of his suite. His \u201ccollege,\u201d that is, the ecclesiastics,\ntwenty-five or thirty persons, were installed at the _\u00c9cu_ (Crown)\n_de Saint Georges_; the choir and their leader at the _Enseigne de\nl\u2019\u00c9p\u00e9e_ (Sign of the Sword); his armourer, Hector Broisset, at the\n_Coupe_; his brother, Ren\u00e9 de la Suze, at the _Petit Saumon_ (Little\nSalmon); his councillors, Gilles de Sill\u00e9, Guy de Bonni\u00e8re, Guyot de\nChambrays, Guillaume Tardif, and Guy de Blanchfort, with his captain\nof the guard, Loys l\u2019Angevin, at the _Grand Saumon_ (Great Salmon);\nhis chevaliers, Monseignieurs de Martign\u00e9, Foulques Blasmes, Jean de\nRains, and Bauleis, at the _Image de Sainte Marie Madeleine_; Jean de\nMontecler, with Colin le Godelier; his _Rais le herault_ (herald) and\nsuite, with men-at-arms, at the _T\u00eate Noire_; his chariots and horses,\nwith those of his brother Ren\u00e9, at the _Roche-Boulet_; the vicar of\nthe chapel, the priest Le Blond and his barber, and the horses of\nthe \u201ccollege\u201d at _l\u2019Enseigne du Fourbisseur_; the Seignieur Jean de\nVeille, Bois-Roulier, his provost, George the trumpeter, at the house\nof Jeannette la Pionne; Thomas his _enlumineur_, at _le Dieu d\u2019Amour_\n(God of Love); while men-at-arms, servants, lackeys, and followers,\noccupied the _Cheval Blanc_ (White Horse), _l\u2019Homme Sauvage_ (Savage\nMan), and _l\u2019\u00c9cu d\u2019Orl\u00e9ans_ (the Crown of Orleans).\n\nWhile at Orleans, in 1434, he made thence, during the autumn, a trip to\nthe Bourbonnais country, stopping for a time at Montlucon, at the hotel\n_l\u2019\u00c9cu_ (Crown) _de France_. When his hotel bill for eight hundred\nand ten _reaux d\u2019or_ was presented, he could pay only four hundred\nand ninety-five, and his two servitors, Jean de Sellier and Huet de\nVillarceau, became his guarantors of payment. Everything during the\ntrip was at his expense. They all travelled on horseback, unless it\nwas some high dignitary or _quelque malade_ (sick) who had a chariot.\nHorses and all expenditures were furnished by him, and preparing\nfor such a trip, everybody was provided with new, striking, and,\nconsequently, expensive costumes, suitable for the suite of such a rich\nand puissant Baron.\n\nOn his return to Brittany in August, 1435, it was found that his\ntravels during the year had cost the round sum of eighty thousand\ngolden crowns. The _M\u00e9moires_ say this trip left a train of \u201cdevoured\nrevenues, lands sold, seigniories mortgaged, works of art and\nvaluables hypothecated, with considerable debts and unpaid loans _tr\u00e8s\non\u00e9reux_, which menaced ruin and opened an abyss threatening to engulf\neverything.\u201d\n\nAmong the records found at Orleans was one which, made under the\ncircumstances relating to his expenses and financial condition, throws\na strong side-light on his character, bringing out the recklessly\nspendthrift side of it, and would go a long way towards justifying\nthe King\u2019s decree of the interdiction of the sale and mortgage of any\nproperty, which, it is not to be forgotten, shortly followed this visit\nto Orleans.\n\nThis paper, prepared by Gilles, provided:\n\n    \u201cSaturday, xxvi day of March, MCCCCXXXIIII (1435 N.S.). The\n    noble and puissant lord, Monsieur Gilles, Seignior of Retz,\n    Count of Brienne, Lord of Champtoc\u00e9 and Pouzauges, Marshal of\n    France, has lately, for the good of his soul, and looking to\n    our Lord Jesus Christ, on behalf of himself, his late father,\n    mother, relatives and friends, all sinners, made a foundation\n    _in memory of the Holy Innocents_, at Machecoul in Rais, Duchy\n    of Brittany.\u201d\n\nBy this paper he appoints a full corps of priests, \u201cvicar, dean,\narchdeacon, treasurer, canons, chapter, and college\u201d; for the support\nand maintenance of this establishment he gives in trust, in due and\nformal language, to the King of Sicily and Duke of Anjou his castle and\n_ch\u00e2tellenie_ of Champtoc\u00e9, and to the Duke of Brittany one-half the\nBarony and lands of Rais. He confirmed this gift before notaries named.\nHe declared the two princes named should act as his trustees; and,\nproviding for their possible refusal to act, he names respectively, and\nin succession, as future trustees, the King, the Emperor, the Pope; in\ncase they all refuse, the lands shall be divided between the knights of\nthe Orders of Saint John and of Saint Lazare.\n\nAll the Princes named refused, and each, as far as he could,\ninterdicted and prohibited Gilles from carrying out his project. It\naccordingly fell through. Yet, at the moment of his establishing this\npriestly organisation, he was engaged, as we shall see farther on, in\nthe commission of the most horrible and unnatural of crimes, for which\nhe was, before the end of the decade, to be ignominiously executed.\n\nHis Maison de la Suze has been described, whether actually or only\nfrom similar houses of the epoch, is now impossible to tell; but it is\nsaid to have eclipsed, in its luxury and taste, the palace of the Dukes\nof Brittany. It was ornamented and decorated to a high degree. All\ncountries were laid under tribute to furnish riches for its decoration:\nItaly for its painting and sculpture, Spain for its Cordovan leather,\nFlanders for its tapestry, Venice and Bohemia for their crystals and\nglassware, the Orient for its magnificent stuffs, and Persia for its\ntiles and _faience_; while, without doubt, the ceramics of his own\nand neighbouring provinces, like Tours, Orleans, Gien, Quimper, and\nPoitou (the latter the forerunner of Limoges), were represented in the\nluxurious fittings of the houses and ch\u00e2teaux of Gilles, the Baron de\nRetz.\n\nThe _M\u00e9moire des H\u00e9ritiers_, setting forth the extravagant and ruinous\nexpenditures by which the principal of the estate was being dissipated,\nwas duly presented to the King and the necessary proof offered to\nestablish its allegations. The date is not given, but it should have\nbeen about 1432\u201333. In 1435\u201336, the King, having become satisfied\nof the truth of the matters alleged, through his Council of State\nand by letters patent, issued his decree of prohibition against the\nalienation or incumbrance by Gilles de Retz of any of his lands or\nseigniories. This decree has been preserved to us in Guepin\u2019s _Histoire\nde Nantes_, pp. 131\u2013133.\n\nThe Decree of Interdiction by the King, against the sale and\nincumbrance of his property commences with a description of the\nvarious noble families from which Gilles de Retz had descended; his\ntitles, his property, baronies, ch\u00e2teaux, seigniories, his marriage,\nthe properties of his wife--that is to say, Pouzauges, Tiffauges,\nChabenais, Confolens, Ch\u00e2teau-Morant, Savenay, Lombert, Grez-sur-Maine,\nand other beautiful properties, the rental value of which amounted to\nsix or seven thousand livres (pounds, about three hundred thousand\nfrancs, actual value); that from his said marriage, he derived also\npersonal property of the value of one hundred thousand golden crowns;\nthat he held in Grosses Baronies thirty thousand livres of true\ndomains; that from his office of Marshal of France he received grand\nsalary and pension from the King, with numerous gratuities; so that\nhe had a yearly income of forty or fifty thousand livres or more. The\nsaid Gilles, after the decease of his father, took the administration\nof his estate to himself and used it according to his pleasure; he\nestablished himself in an estate grander than that to which he really\nbelonged; kept two hundred horsemen, maintained a chapel of singers\nin his ch\u00e2teau numbering twenty-five or thirty persons, chaplain,\nclerks, children, and others; these were taken with him when he\ntravelled; and in all things he managed his affairs so as to have in\nhis ch\u00e2teau, because of the said chapel, more than fifty men or persons\nat his expense, and as many horses; he had also in said chapel a great\nquantity or number of ornaments, cloth of gold, silk, chandeliers\nand _censoirs_, crosses, plates, dishes, etc.; these were of such\nsumptuosity that they cost three times more than their value; he had\nseveral organs, one of which, carried by six men, was taken with him\nwherever he went; he often purchased cloth-of-gold at sixty or eighty\ncrowns per _aune_ (ell) when it was not worth more than twenty-five,\nand a pair of \u201corfrays\u201d (embroidered cloth of gold) at three or four\nhundred crowns, when they were not worth more than one hundred; he\nkept in the said chapel a dean, choir-leader, or singing-master, an\narchdeacon, vicar, schoolmaster, etc., as in the cathedral, and one\nof these priests or officers he undertook to establish and treat as a\nbishop; he paid to some of these four hundred crowns, and to others\nthree hundred; he dressed them in robes with scarlet trains trimmed\nwith plush and fur, with fine hats; all were kept and served with the\nmost costly and expensive viands; the service of all these so-called\npriests (holy men) was nothing but vanity, without devotion and in\ndefiance of good order. The said Gilles sent on several occasions to\nthe Pope in the endeavour to obtain permission or authority that his\nchoristers, or leaders, should be mitred as prelates, or like the\ncanons of the church at Lyons. He made excessive gifts in wine, viands,\nand _hypocras_, to all who desired to eat or drink, keeping open house\nfor that purpose, and those who had the government of his affairs lived\nlike great lords; while the commoners frequently had naught, _ni boire\nni manger_, when they came to table.\n\nHe played games, farces, _morisques_, and, on occasion, he performed\nthe Mysteries of Pentecost and Ascension, on high scaffolds under which\nwere _hypocras_ and strong wines, as in a cave.\n\nThe said Gilles constituted one of his familiars, Roger de Briqueville,\nas his procureur, agent, or attorney-in-fact, empowered to marry his\ndaughter, Marie, at a time when she was only four or five years of age,\nto whatever man should seem good to the said de Briqueville, against\nthe custom prevailing in the country to marry the daughters, issue of\nsuch high nobility, only with the assent of their parents and friends.\nHe took it into his head to deal in alchemy, hoping thus to obtain the\nPhilosopher\u2019s Stone; sent to Germany and to different countries in\nsearch of the masters of this art, and brought to his ch\u00e2teau Monsieur\nAnth. of Palermo, making, with him, outrageous expenses from which no\none derived any profit; in all of which things he acted without sense\nor understanding, and in a foolish, if not crazy, manner. It is found\nthat he sold and alienated certain lands (describing them).\n\nFor these reasons, the King, being fully informed and having fully\nascertained of the evil government of the said Sieur de Retz, through\nhis Grand Council, issued his interdiction and prohibition against any\nalienation, transfer, mortgage, or pledge, by the said Gilles de Retz,\nof any of his lands or seigniories.\n\nThe King enjoined upon his Parliament the duty of carrying this decree\nof interdiction into effect; and under severe penalties, he forbade\nany captains, guards, tenants, or persons in charge, from attorning or\ndelivering up to any stranger (to the title) any ch\u00e2teau or fortress of\nGilles de Retz until Parliament should so order.\n\nThis decree was published \u201cat the sound of the trumpet\u201d at the\nprincipal places concerned--Orleans, Tours, Angers, Champtoc\u00e9,\nPouzauges, Tiffauges, Saint-Jean-d\u2019Angely, and other places. The Duke\nof Brittany refused to accept, register, or publish the decree, and\nit was in vain that the \u201c_femme, parents, et les amis_\u201d of Gilles\nsolicited him. It is alleged that this was to enable the Duke to\ntake advantage of the necessities of Gilles, and purchase his lands\nat ruinous prices. He purchased some and took mortgages on others;\nChamptoc\u00e9, Bourgneuf, B\u00e9nate, and Prin\u00e7ay or Princ\u00e9, were mortgaged for\nthe sum of 100,000 crowns of gold, to be repaid within six years. In\nthis way did Gilles, during these eight years of his life, dissipate\nthe sum of _deux cents mille \u00e9cus_ (200,000 crowns) of the heritage.\n\nThe King\u2019s interdiction of the sale or mortgage of any of his property\naggravated Gilles\u2019s situation by increasing his difficulties in\nobtaining money. He had no scruples about borrowing money of whomsoever\nhe could, and if repayment could be put off a sufficient length of\ntime, would promise the return of it doubled or trebled, as the\ncreditor demanded. The situation must have been irritating to Gilles,\nand doubtless proved his incentive to magic, by which he hoped to\ndiscover the Philosopher\u2019s Stone, and, thereby, the means of converting\nthe baser metals into gold. Whatever he may have done, or thought, in\nthis direction prior to the passing of the decree, it seems that later\nhe entered into closer relation with the alchemist and magician, and\nsought to study and practise the \u201cblack art\u201d to a greater degree than\nhe ever had done before.\n\nFrom this on, we have to treat Gilles as a changed man, not only in his\nconduct, but in his character and desires. He separated from his wife,\nbut established her in the ch\u00e2teau of Champtoc\u00e9, while he installed\nhimself with his retinue, including his magician, in the two ch\u00e2teaux,\none at Machecoul, which he had received from his father, Guy de Laval,\nbut principally at Tiffauges, which he had received from his wife.\nHere we have to treat of him no longer as a soldier, or as a noble of\nFrance, but in his character of magician, necromancer, debtor, robber,\nmurderer.\n\nUnder these circumstances what course was Gilles to pursue, and what\ncould he do to retrieve his fallen fortunes? He required money, he\nwas spending more than his income; he was selling off his property\nand reducing his principal in the vain attempt to liquidate his debts\nand provide for his present expenses. He did not have strength of\ncharacter to adopt a rigorous reduction of expenses and live on a\nmoderate and conservative plan; indeed, such would hardly have been\nnatural. The great man of a neighbourhood, who, having been entrusted\nwith large sums of money; or the banker or trader who, being deeply\nindebted, endeavours to restore his broken fortunes by retrenchment of\nexpenditures, only precipitates the catastrophe he seeks to avert. The\nostensibly rich man who proposes to make himself better able to meet\nthe demands of his business by disposing of his horses and carriage,\nclosing up his houses, selling his yacht, giving fewer entertainments\nto his friends, instead of proving himself successful and inviting\nconfidence in his ability to pull through, will prove the architect of\nhis own doom. Therefore, what was Gilles de Retz to do? What he did,\nwas to rely upon the success of his scheme for the discovery of the\nPhilosopher\u2019s Stone, in the hope to thus replenish his empty coffers.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nGILLES\u2019S CRIMES\n\n  _Gilles\u2019s Abduction of Children--His Familiars--Ch\u00e2teau\n      Tiffauges--First Process against Gilles--Warrant--Arrest and\n      Imprisonment--Ch\u00e2teau de Nantes._\n\n\nBeginning in the year 1432, a district comprising a large portion\nof western France, including the southern part of the Province of\nBrittany, the western part of the Province of Maine, and the northern\npart of the Province of Poitou, became excited by an undefined fear\nwhich, increased by its uncertainty and vagueness, produced in the\npeople a feeling akin to terror. It was not the fear of war, for the\npeople had had an intimate acquaintance with war for many years; nor\nwas it the fear of an epidemic nor of sudden death; and it was not easy\nto tell with exactness what it was. It was so indefinite that belief\nin it was at first refused. It was considered by many to be the result\nof superstition; some declared it to be something of the vampire race\nwhich by some sort of resurrection had changed its horrible character\nso that it did not wait to prey upon the dead, but made its attacks\nupon the living, choosing young children and maidens, and timing the\nplace and manner of attack so that not only was there no defence, but\nthere was also no opportunity for pursuit or recovery.\n\nMichelet (_Histoire de France_) describes it as a beast of\nextermination, unseen, unknown, unnatural, indescribable, invisible,\nsupernatural, omnipresent, possessed of powers of disappearance on the\ninstant, and so of escape, dissolving into thin air. It was believed\nby many to be a physical manifestation of the Evil One. It made its\nappearance in one place on one day and at another place the next day,\nand at a distant place the next; it was here to-night and far away in\nthe morning; it ravaged the country, spreading terror, and leaving in\nits track not simply fear and mourning, but the torture of insanity and\ndeath. There was a mixture of enchantment, of impossibility, about the\nperformance which left it to be accounted for only upon the principle\nof legerdemain, magic, the black art, and the presence of the devil. On\nall sides, right and left, east and west, north and south, within this\nterror-stricken district, sometimes each day for a week, sometimes not\nagain for a month, then not for three, and again not for six months or\nmore, but subject to these intervals, came the story from one section\nto the other, of the disappearance, as though by enchantment, of a\nchild or children of tender age. No apparent distinction of sex was\nmade, but the subjects of attack were always young, say from six to\nsixteen years; old enough to go about the farm or from one farm to\nanother, possibly from one village to another, when, without warning,\napparently without cause, without the slightest evidence as to the\nmeans used, and without leaving the slightest trace of the tragedy,\nsuddenly a child was gone. No one knew or could find in what direction\nit had gone, or how it had been taken. All that the terror-stricken\nparents and family knew was that their child was here to-day, and now\nhe or she was not--it was playing about the door only a half-hour\nsince; now it was gone, gone as completely as though swallowed by the\nearth.\n\nNo one knew where the blow would fall next; no one knew whether his\nfamily circle was to be invaded, his house stricken, his child taken.\nEvery care and watchfulness was employed, consultations were had\nbetween the stricken parents, the officers of the law were consulted,\nand all that was known--apparently all that could be discovered--was\nthat their children were here yesterday, engaged in their little plays\nor about their own little duties around the house or on the farm, and\nin a moment, though the most rigorous and extensive search was made,\nthey were gone--gone absolutely, gone beyond possibility of recovery,\ngone in numbers, gone from every part of the district mentioned, and no\nsign or trace left of their fate. Fear, fright, terror, took possession\nof all, and this, mixed with sorrow and grief, broke many a heart, sent\nmany a loving mother in insanity to the grave. The peasants who, by\nreason of their age and strength supposed themselves to be safe, walked\nlightly, as though afraid to put their feet upon the ground; spoke in\nlow voices as if afraid to trust themselves in ordinary tones, and\neverything throughout the country was done with bated breath as if in\nthe presence of the dead.\n\nThe peasants, superstitious at the best of times, were now overcome\nwith fear and gave themselves up a prey to the idea of enchantment and\nmagic, and could only account for the disappearance of their loved ones\nby the presence of the arch-enemy of mankind, against whom they had no\nmeans of fighting, and whose assaults upon their devoted children they\nhad no means of resisting. The frightened parents were tortured by the\nuncertainty of the fate that had overcome their loved ones. \u201cAre they\ndead?\u201d \u201cHave they been taken to the realms above or to the tortures\nbelow?\u201d \u201cAre they in prison?\u201d \u201cAre they still living?\u201d \u201cAre they never\nto be seen again?\u201d \u201cMight they not be in a distant part of the country\nenduring pains and tortures?\u201d \u201cMight they not, even now, be weeping and\nscreaming themselves half mad and demanding the presence and comfort\nof their mother?\u201d \u201cIn what direction should we go?\u201d \u201cHas nobody seen\nthem?\u201d \u201cHas search been made?\u201d \u201cIn what direction have we yet to go?\u201d\nNo answer came to all these questions. The fate of the children was an\nimpenetrable mystery.\n\nDid the parents recover from it? Yes, they became accustomed to it.\nHuman nature can become accustomed to anything. Their fate seemed\nbetter, not because it was better, but because, not getting worse, they\ngot used to it and were able to stand it better. The first theory upon\nwhich the people settled was that the disappearance of their children\nwas due to fairies, to evil genii, to a supernatural and mysterious\nenemy--that this mysterious enemy was supernatural, they did not doubt.\nThis belief served to increase the pangs of their grief and to render\nthe unknown and undiscoverable fate of their beloved ones more horrible\nto contemplate and more difficult for the parents to bear. They felt\nthemselves incapable and incompetent to war against this mysterious,\ndevastating, supernatural force; hence they resigned themselves to the\naffliction, considering it to have been sent upon them by Almighty\nGod as a punishment for their sins. They did not know what sins they\nhad committed, but felt sure that nothing they had done would justify\neven Almighty God in the abduction of the little ones who had not been\nat fault, and the torture of the parents incident thereto; so they\nrebelled against their fate.\n\nThe disappearance of children did not at first create great excitement\namong the people; their disappearance was explained in a natural\nmanner: some accident had happened to them, possibly they had fallen\ninto one of the many rivers and were drowned; the lakes and rivers\nwere plentiful, their waters deep, their currents swift, the banks\nsteep. One child here in one province, another child there in a distant\nprovince--such a disappearance did not count for much and did not\nunduly or wonderfully excite the people; but when it came to spread\nover the entire country and, by the comparison and the overlapping of\nsearches and the employment of officers, it was discovered that this\nbeast of extermination, this great, powerful, mysterious, supernatural\nvisitor or power, was making itself felt throughout the entire country,\nand that no house was safe, that no parent could say with certainty\nthat his own child might not be taken next morning--then the country\nbecame excited, alarmed, and, finally, terror-stricken.\n\nAt last it became apparent that these ravages were confined to a given\ndistrict, a circle of country approximately bounded by the present\ncities of Vannes, Rennes, Angers, La Rochelle, and so opening to the\nocean. Of this circle, Nantes was approximately the centre. This\ncondition continued, growing more acute year by year. Each year new\nfamilies were stricken, and the terror became more widely spread.\n\nA man of the character and ambitions of Gilles de Retz would naturally\nhave about him a corps of men to assist in carrying out his nefarious\ncourses. They would necessarily be without fear and without conscience,\nadepts in secrecy and deceit, with the instincts and abilities of\ndetectives and ready to obey any behest of their master. Gilles had\nsuch a corps of lieutenants; most of them were Bretons as he was,\nthoroughly acquainted with the country, most of them lowly born, many\nof them illegitimate and strongly suspected to have had fathers of\nhigher birth than their mothers. Gilles made choice of these familiars\nfrom among his retinue, selecting those best qualified to carry out his\nprojects and to be his right hand in executing his plans.\n\nThe names of some of these have been preserved to us in the process\nagainst Gilles: Eustache Blanchet, Henriet Griart, Jean Roussignol,\nGilles de Sill\u00e9, Hugues de Bremont, \u00c9tienne Corrillaut (_alias_\nPoitou), Robin Romulart, and one woman, Perrine Martin, _alias_\nLa Meffraye. These performed for Gilles the r\u00f4le of secretary,\naide-de-camp, assistants, guards, spies, or servants, as occasion\ndemanded, and became identified in the minds of the peasants as\nservants and representatives of Gilles de Retz. They spent practically\ntheir lifetime in his service, and toward the end of their career\nthey came to be feared throughout the countryside as much as Gilles\nhimself. Indeed, it was their actions which first attracted public\nattention towards him. It came to be noted that when infant or child\nhad disappeared, some of these had been seen in the neighbourhood; and\nwhen all things pertaining thereto were so mysterious, the people stood\nready to catch at any straw which might serve as a possible solution.\nThe wiser persons, who were not so superstitious and did not attribute\nthis disappearance of children to supernatural causes, but rather to\nthe action of fiends, discovered and remarked the coincidence of the\npresence of some one of these with the disappearance of an infant. The\nattention of the officers was turned in his direction, and certain\nsuggestions or suspicions were given to the Bishop of Nantes, who\nthereupon determined to open a secret inquest for the solution of the\nmystery. By this means the matter was brought to light.\n\nThe most prominent and powerful of these familiars of Gilles de Retz\nwas an Italian priest and alchemist, Fran\u00e7ois Prelati. He occupied\na position different from the others. One of the before-mentioned\nfamiliars, Eustache Blanchet, a _soi-disant_ priest, belonging to his\necclesiastical retinue, appears to have been better acquainted with\nthe private affairs of Gilles de Retz than any other, and to have been\nentrusted with higher powers, and sent oftener on journeys of diplomacy\nand confidential business. For what purpose he should have been sent\nto Italy can now only be surmised; but in the year 1436, while in\nFlorence, he met Fran\u00e7ois Prelati. His history has been given by\nSauni\u00e8re, but no one knows how much of it is fact and how much romance.\nIt appears, however, that Prelati was born in Mont Catane in the Valle\nNero; that he was educated as an ecclesiastic, admitted to orders, and\ngiven the tonsure by the Bishop of Arezzo. He became interested in the\nstudy of the occult sciences, especially chemistry or, as it was then\ncalled, alchemy; and his love for this science overcame his desire for\necclesiastical service.\n\nHe was about forty-five years of age when he became acquainted with\nGilles de Retz; was well bred, highly educated, of elegant manners,\nhandsome in appearance, well kept and cleanly in person, devoting\nmuch care to the welfare of his hair, beard, and hands, all of which\nrepaid and showed the attention bestowed upon them. He was a good\nconversationalist, of smooth, insinuating, and seductive manner. He\nspoke Latin as well as he did Italian; his French was excellent,\nprobably better than that of Gilles or the Bretons with whom he\nassociated, while a slightly broken pronunciation conspired to make\nit more attractive. He had a brilliant and sparkling wit and an\nactive imagination, was well posted in the affairs of the world, and\nattractive to his fellows, whether men of letters, men of affairs, or\n_des hommes de guerre_. The description given of him would indicate his\nappearance to have been that of an elegant gentleman. It goes without\nsaying that he was learned as an alchemist and expert as a necromancer.\nSuch was Fran\u00e7ois Prelati, the man who had been brought by Eustache\nBlanchet from Italy to France to teach Gilles de Retz the black art.\n\nGilles, during this period, occupied alternately, according to his\npleasure, the two ch\u00e2teaux of Machecoul and Tiffauges. The latter is\nsituated to the north of the village of Tiffauges and, according to\ntradition, occupies the site of an ancient Roman camp and is about\n15 kilometres south of Clisson and 40 south of Nantes. The ch\u00e2teau\noccupies an elevated plateau which forms a promontory between the\njunction of the creek Crume with the river S\u00e8vre, both of which\nbathed the foot of the walls on either side. The latter continues its\nway northward and empties into the Loire below Nantes. The ch\u00e2teau\nwas a castle covering space enough for a city. It is now in ruins,\nexcept the grand tower and adjacent halls. The walls may be traced by\nthe d\u00e9bris in rows of stones now covered with sod and grass. It was\nattacked and burned during the religious wars of the sixteenth century,\nbut its present ruinous condition began with the breaking-out of the\nRevolution in 1789. The Vendeans, after gaining the battle of Torfou,\noccupied it, having repaired it sufficiently to afford shelter and to\nmake it a place of defence. It remained in a fairly good condition\nuntil the return of Napoleon from Elba, when it was again occupied as\na recruiting-place, or place of security by the Vendeans. After the\nbattle of Waterloo and the restoration of Louis XVIII., fearing some\nfurther use of it by enemies, the government destroyed it, reducing it\nto its present condition. The lowlands in the neighbourhood are marshy\nand almost become lakes. The lake of Grand Lieu is not far distant, and\nothers are in the vicinity.\n\nThe ruins are interesting and the d\u00e9bris is easily recognised. One\nwith a slight knowledge of the arrangement can trace the walls of\nthe structure, as well as the triple cincture of fortifications\nsurrounding it. These are now covered with sod and green grass and\nused for pasturage, while the level places, like the courts within the\ncastle and the parade-ground within the lines of fortification, are\nsubjected to cultivation. The ch\u00e2teau of Tiffauges was partially built\nin the time of Saint Louis; the grand tower now remaining is said to\nbelong to that epoch; the large tower, the small tower, the chapel,\nthe great hall wherein the Baron presided over his retainers or, if\nneed be, received such lords and seigniors as came to visit him; the\ndining-room, kitchen, scullery, with all their necessary appurtenances\nof cellar, storehouse, warehouses, well-room, were all in evidence;\nbedrooms, halls, parlours, etc., were prepared in abundance for the\nreception of lords, ladies, and all who might attend upon the occasion\nof a ball or f\u00eate. On another side of the courtyard, but adjoining\nthe main building, was a shorter wing, large enough to lodge his\nknights, men-at-arms, soldiers, servants, varlets, etc. It was, in\nthese regards, similar to most other extensive castles or ch\u00e2teaux, and\ncan be compared to the ch\u00e2teau of Nantes where Gilles was tried and\nconvicted. (See frontispiece.)\n\nThe Ch\u00e2teau Tiffauges was a favourite residence of Gilles de Retz; it\nwas a stronghold, in which, if need be, he could have great security\nand, in case of war or attack, could make a good defence. It was large\nand commodious. Here it was that Gilles de Retz and Fran\u00e7ois Prelati,\nthe Italian, had their laboratory in which they endeavoured, first by\nalchemy, then by magic, and lastly by murder, to discover the Elixir\nof Eternal Youth and the transmutation of metals into gold. Here took\nplace the attempt to obtain a conference with the Evil One, with the\nidea of obtaining his supposed influence in their sublunary affairs.\n\nA description of this laboratory has been left us. The chamber was high\nup in the tower, with communicating passages in various directions,--to\nthe large tower and also to the basement and, as is said, to the\n_oubliettes_ and the secret passageway to the Crume and so outside the\nch\u00e2teau. The laboratory occupied the full diameter of the tower; an\nimmense chimney was on one side of the room, in which was placed the\nfurnace where the mutilated bodies of many of the dead infants were\nconsumed. The chamber had but two windows, one to the north the other\nto the south, both high up in the wall, both capable of being closed\nand darkened by solid shutters.\n\nLemire says (p. 27):\n\n    \u201cIn the highest chamber of the small tower, he [Gilles] had\n    installed a chemical [alchemy] laboratory and there employed\n    his three sorcerers, one French, one English or Picardian, and\n    one Italian\u201d;\n\nAnd he describes with minutest detail the apparatus employed (p. 28):\n\n    \u201cWhat Gilles desired was that Prelati should make gold, whether\n    by science, by magic, by the intervention of the devil, or by\n    these means united. He attempted the transmutation of metals\n    into gold. He distilled into retorts different liquids destined\n    to dissolve the mineral substances after certain formulas of\n    magic repeated under the invocation of demons. Prelati declared\n    to Gilles that to make these operations successful required\n    the addition of the hearts, hands, or eyes, but above all the\n    blood, of young children. The blood was to be used in tracing\n    the magic circles and figures.\u201d\n\nLemire believes (p. 30) that Prelati employed the secrets of chemical\nart, sulphur and phosphorus and similar substances, in forming fiery\nserpents to deceive Gilles:\n\n    \u201cFrogs and serpents, inoffensive but frightful in appearance, a\n    leopard which was naught else than a large dog with bristling\n    hair, cries of beasts, groans, sounds of trumpets; these were\n    the apparatus employed in the scenes of invocation.\u201d\n\nThen he tells (p. 31) how, to furnish victims for these magicians,\nGilles carried on his abduction of children, choosing the little\npeasants who would not be missed, or whose parents would not be likely,\nfrom poverty, to pursue the search.\n\nApparently the first step, at least the first step made public, against\nGilles de Retz, charging him with crime, and the first paper forming\npart of the ecclesiastical record in the archives of the Department of\nLoire-Inf\u00e9rieure, is the \u201cDeclaration of Infamy against Gilles de Retz\nby the Bishop of Nantes, July 30, 1440.\u201d It was in Latin:\n\n    \u201cTo all to whom these present letters shall come, Jean, by\n    the permission of the holy apostolic see, Bishop of Nantes,\n    with full assurance of salvation through our Lord and Saviour,\n    salute those present:\n\n    \u201cWe hereby make known by visiting in person the parish of the\n    Holy Mary at Nantes, in which is built the house or ch\u00e2teau\n    vulgarly called \u201cla Suze,\u201d the frequent habitation of Gilles de\n    Retz hereinafter described, a parishioner of this church and\n    of other parish churches designated further on. Upon public\n    rumour and on the numerous reports that have come upon us by\n    the denunciatory clamour of Agatha, wife of Denis de la Mignon;\n    of Don\u00e9t\u00e9, widow of the defunct Regnaud Don\u00e9t\u00e9 of St. Marie; of\n    Jean Guibert and his wife of St. Vincent; of the widow Eonnet\n    Kerguen of St. Croix, Nantes; of Jeanne, wife of Jean Darell\n    of St. Similien near Nantes; of Theophanie, wife of Eonnet le\n    Charpentier of St. Clement outside the walls; fortified by the\n    depositions of the synodical witnesses of these churches and by\n    men who, thanks to their probity and their well known prudence,\n    are above suspicion, and who, in the course of our pastoral\n    visit in the same churches, we ourselves have interrogated\n    with the greatest care upon the facts below indicated, or\n    of still others pertaining to the duty of the bishop in his\n    pastoral visits, we have discovered, and the depositions of\n    the witnesses have proved to us, among other things, that\n    Gilles de Retz, our subject and justiciable, by himself or\n    by certain men his accomplices, has strangled, killed, and\n    inhumanly massacred a very large number of infants; that he has\n    committed upon them crimes against nature; that he has made, or\n    has caused to be made, numerous horrible invocations of demons;\n    he has made to them sacrifices and offerings, and has passed\n    a compact with them, without counting other crimes, numerous\n    and enormous, all of which belong within our jurisdiction;\n    and, finally, by several other visits made by us or by the\n    Commissary acting in our name, we know that Gilles de Retz has\n    perpetrated and committed these crimes and still others, within\n    the limits of our diocese.\n\n    \u201cFor which cause he was, and is now, and publicly for the\n    knowledge of all, rendered infamous towards all grave and\n    honest men. And to the end that no person shall have doubt\n    upon this subject, we have ordained, or fixed, or caused to be\n    fixed, our seal to these present letters.\n\n    \u201cGiven at Nantes, the day before the last of July, in the year\n    of our Lord, 1440.\n\n    \u201cBy the command of Monseignior, Bishop of Nantes.\n\n                        (Signed) \u201cJ. PETIT.\u201d\n\nIt does not appear that this declaration of infamy was ever made known\nto Gilles de Retz. It was made by the Bishop of Nantes in accordance\nwith his ecclesiastical right and duty. It had, from early Christian\ntimes, been the duty of the bishops of the Church to make episcopal\nvisits throughout their respective dioceses. By the capitularies of\nCharlemagne and Carloman, it became the bishop\u2019s right, if not his\nduty, to listen to any complaints of the common people. This was in\nthe nature of an inquest by church authority into the crimes of high\nor powerful persons, or into public scandals which were without other\nrectification. The proceeding might be likened to an ecclesiastical\ngrand jury. It was, like that of the grand jury, a secret inquest,\n_inquisitio fam\u00e6_, and in this particular instance, establishing the\ninfamy of Gilles, it opened against him the inquisitory proceeding\naccording to the rule: _Inquisitionem debet clamosa insinuatio\npr\u00e6venire_. This declaration of infamy, made by the bishop and based\nupon the complaints he had received and scandals he had heard during\nhis episcopal visit, was the beginning of the prosecution against\nGilles.\n\nThe secret investigation doubtless continued and culminated in the\ncitation of the Bishop to Gilles de Retz, September 13th, to appear\non September 19th, and answer the charges. After the preamble and\ndeclarations of the requisite power and authority, and his knowledge of\nthe crimes of Gilles and of the public clamour, called in the official\ndocument _hurlements ululantium_, the bishop proceeds:\n\n    \u201cFor these causes we will no longer hide the monstrous things,\n    nor will we allow heresy to develop itself, that heresy which,\n    like a cancer, devours everything if it is not promptly\n    extirpated even to the last root. Farther than that, we would\n    apply a remedy as prompt as it is efficacious. Therefore we\n    enjoin you, all and singular, and to those of you in particular\n    to whom the present letter shall come, immediately and in a\n    definite manner, each for himself and without counting on\n    the other, without depending upon the care of any other,\n    to cite before us, or before the official of our cathedral\n    church, on Monday, the f\u00eate-day of the Exaltation of the True\n    Cross, September 19, Gilles, as aforesaid designated the\n    Baron of Retz, to submit to our authority and to accept our\n    jurisdiction; we ourselves cite him by these letters to appear\n    before our bar to respond to the crimes that are laid upon him.\n    Execute, therefore, these orders, you, and each of you, and\n    every one of you, cause them to be executed.\n\n    \u201cGiven at Nantes on Tuesday, the 13th of September, in the year\n    of our Lord, 1440.\n\n    \u201cBy the command of the Bishop of Nantes.\n\n                        (Signed)     \u201cJEAN GUIOLE.\u201d\n\nWhether the Bishop of Nantes had, in his official capacity, already\nestablished a permanent ecclesiastical court for the trial of such\ncases as might properly be brought before it, does not appear; nor\nwhether he had the necessary paraphernalia of officers such as\nprosecutors, clerks, record-keepers, and an executive officer to serve\nprocesses, maintain order, etc., etc., as would be usual and necessary\nin all regularly established courts. So it is not known whether the\nexecutive officer charged with the service of this writ was a regular\nofficer, or only one appointed for the occasion; but it abundantly\nappears that one Robert Guillaumet, a notary of Nantes, received the\nwrit for execution, and that in this matter he acted as executive\nofficer for the Bishop.\n\nGilles de Retz was at that time at his ch\u00e2teau of Machecoul. Robert\nGuillaumet took to his aid Jean l\u2019Abb\u00e9, a captain in the service of\nthe Duke of Brittany, with a number of his troop, and together they\nrepaired to Machecoul for the purpose of arresting Gilles on the\nwarrant of the Bishop.\n\nThere has been some discussion over the part taken in the affair by\nthe Duke of Brittany himself, and how far the proceeding met his\napproval, and how far he stood ready to give aid and assistance in\ncarrying out the purpose of the Bishop. Michelet (_Histoire de France_,\nvol. v.) asserts that the Duke of Brittany was highly favourable to\nthe accusation; that \u201che was delighted at the opportunity to thus\nstrike at a Laval,\u201d and he ascribes this to the fact that the Laval\nfamily, though related to the Montforts, of which the Duke was one,\nhad formed against him an opposition, the intention of which was to\ndeliver Brittany to France. There can be but little doubt that the\nDuke of Brittany was entirely favourable to the Bishop--they were near\nrelatives and good friends, they always had stood together, and though\nthe Bishop never had had any dispute with Gilles de Retz, yet the Duke\nfrequently had.\n\nThe Duke had already foreseen the waning fortune of Gilles, and stood\nready to profit by it. He had refused to make publication in Brittany\nof the decree of interdiction of the King, for the sake of the\nopportunity which might accrue to obtain good bargains in purchasing\nthe property of Gilles. It is scarcely possible, dependent as he must\nhave been upon the Duke and his government and the power and force of\nthe secular arm for the execution of any decree that might be passed,\nthat the Bishop of Nantes would proceed against so powerful a baron as\nGilles, the dean of the nobility of Brittany, Marshal of France, and\nLieutenant-General of the Duke\u2019s army, and enter upon an undertaking\nso gigantic, so fraught with danger, and so easy to miscarry, without\nhaving first consulted with, and obtained the approval and favour of,\nhis sovereign, with the promise of material assistance and governmental\naid in case of need. This understanding between the Bishop and the Duke\nis established by the outcome of the process. We see that in every step\nthe Bishop not only received countenance and favour at the hands of the\nDuke, but that he could be relied upon to furnish the necessary strong\narm for the execution of the Bishop\u2019s writs and decrees.\n\nArmed with the writ and warrant of arrest, Robert Guillaumet and Jean\nl\u2019Abb\u00e9 proceeded to Machecoul with their troop of soldiers. What was\ntheir reception? Would they be successful in their undertaking and\nbring the mighty Baron of Retz back to Nantes as prisoner? Would he\nyield to the mandates of the law, obey the command of the Bishop,\nand surrender himself as prisoner? He had a ch\u00e2teau, a veritable\nstronghold, and he had his army of retainers within it--he could\ndefy both Robert Guillaumet with his writ and Jean l\u2019Abb\u00e9 with his\nescort--but would he do so? Would he resist or would he yield? Michelet\npasses the highest encomiums upon this little band, whose intrepidity\nand courage he lauds as though it was leading a forlorn hope, for its\ndevotion to duty in entering upon so dangerous a procedure as this\narrest. There does not seem, however, to have been any reasonable\napprehension of danger. If Gilles resisted arrest, he would simply\nremain within his castle, refuse to open his gate, and bid defiance\nto the officers. They would then return to Nantes and report their\nfailure, and what would be done further was a matter for their\nsuperiors, the authorities of the kingdom.\n\nThere may have been speculations as to what moved Gilles to surrender,\nand no one can tell with certainty what thus influenced him. He\nhad three alternatives: resist arrest and fight it out with the\nauthorities, drive back the officers and then flee the country,\nor submit to arrest. To shut himself up in his castle and resist\narrest would bring down the entire power of the kingdom, he would be\nexcommunicated by the Church and besieged by the Duke\u2019s army--there\nwas little prospect of success in that direction. Flight would be a\nconfession of guilt, while he would have to leave everything behind--it\nwould be practically impossible for him to take his fortune or even\nany considerable amount of valuables with him, and he would soon become\npoverty-stricken and an outcast. It is more likely that he pursued the\nconservative course of submitting to arrest, trusting to his rank,\nfortune, power, and the law\u2019s failure to make proof against him, hoping\nby these to evade conviction.\n\nThat he was technically guilty of both heresy and sacrilege there\ncould be but little doubt, and it appears that he had greater fear of\nthese charges than of the others. When he found these were not to be\npressed, and that he was to be charged with the abduction of infants,\nhe may have felt stronger in the knowledge that he had never personally\ncommitted these crimes, and that they could not be directly proved\nagainst him. It is to be remembered that these offences had been\nrunning for eight years; that they had been committed in all parts\nof the country, always in isolated places, east, west, north, south;\nand Gilles may have come to the conclusion, during the long series of\nyears, that whatever might be proved against his accomplices and active\nagents, nothing could ever be proved against him. And now, as he must\nmake a decision immediately upon the arrival of Robert Guillaumet with\nhis warrant, Gilles may have felt that the shortest and easiest way\nwas the best. Partly, then, from pride, from policy, from bravado, and\nin the belief that he would be able to defeat his adversaries in their\nproofs, he gave orders to lower the bridge, to raise the portcullis,\nand to open the gates of the castle.\n\nSubmitting himself to arrest, he is reported to have said: \u201cI have\nalways had the design to become a monk, and here comes the Abb\u00e9 to whom\nI now engage myself\u201d (_Proc\u00e8s C\u00e9l\u00e8bres_: Paris, 1858, p. 14). Robert\nGuillaumet and Jean l\u2019Abb\u00e9 made search of the castle. Prelati, Poitou,\nand Henriet were arrested with Gilles at the ch\u00e2teau; Blanchet was\ntaken in the town; but most of the retinue of Gilles escaped. Then the\nescort of Jean l\u2019Abb\u00e9 put themselves in order of march, guarding their\nprisoners. Arrived at the ch\u00e2teau of Nantes, the gates were opened, and\nGilles de Retz, the dean of the barons of Brittany, Marshal of France,\nand his party, were conducted within its heavy walls as prisoners and\nmalefactors. Gilles was assigned one of the upper chambers in the _Tour\nNeuve_ of the ch\u00e2teau, and here he remained during the trial, until\nthe last day, when he was probably placed in the condemned cell. His\naccomplices were not treated with the same consideration, but were\nthrown pell-mell into the common prison of the castle.\n\nThe ch\u00e2teau of Nantes (frontispiece) is really a castle and would be\ncalled such in England or in English-speaking countries. It was built\nby, and had always belonged to, the government, first to the Duke and\nafterward to the King. Its construction dates from the tenth century.\nIt was commenced by Conan, a Count of Rennes, an usurper, who commenced\nthe castle as a stronghold, by the possession of which he hoped to\nresist the lawful claimant of the duchy and overawe the inhabitants of\nthe city. That portion called _Tour Neuve_ was built at this epoch,\nsituated at the confluence of the river Eure with the Loire, and the\nwaters of each of these rivers originally bathed the foot of the walls.\nConan did not long enjoy his possessions in Nantes; he was attacked\nand overthrown, and Americ de Thouars took possession under the\ntitle of Count of Nantes. During this epoch was built the ch\u00e2teau of\nChamptoceau, which figured as the place of the capture of Clisson.\n\nIn the year 1207, Guy de Thouars repaired the ch\u00e2teau of Nantes, and\nin 1227, Pierre de Dreux enlarged it, and so it remained until the time\nof Francis II., when, under Du Cherfan in 1480 to 1499, it was enlarged\nto its present dimensions. The bastion or _Tour Merc\u0153ur_, constructed\nin 1588 by the duke of that name, then Governor of Nantes, was situated\nat the angle of State Street and Port Maillaird. It has been renewed\nand restored sundry times since then, but not to affect the integrity\nof the building as a whole. The _Tour Neuve_ was the prison of Gilles\nde Retz, and in the second story was the grand hall or audience-chamber\nin which the ecclesiastical court was held.\n\nThe ch\u00e2teau of Nantes has figured largely in the history of Brittany\nand France. It was the official residence of the Count of Nantes.\nThe Duke of Brittany resided there when in the city. So also it was\noccupied by the kings of France and other great and noble personages\nduring their passage through, or temporary residence in, the city.\nCharles VIII. and Duchess Anne were married in its chapel. The\ncelebrated Edict of Nantes, issued by Henry IV., King of France, in\nApril, 1598, by which the Protestants were permitted to exercise their\nreligion without hindrance, was passed and signed in this building. In\n1654, the Cardinal of Retz (not to be confounded with Gilles de Retz)\nwas a prisoner here, and thence made his escape. Minister Fouch\u00e9 was\nprisoner in this ch\u00e2teau; Madam S\u00e9vign\u00e9 was also held here in 1648; in\n1842, the Duchess of Berry was also prisoner in this ch\u00e2teau.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nGILLES\u2019S TRIAL BEFORE THE ECCLESIASTICAL TRIBUNAL\n\n  _The Ecclesiastical Tribunal--Record in the Archives of\n      Loire-Inf\u00e9rieure--The Trial--His Confession--Judgment and\n      Sentence._\n\n\nThe ecclesiastical trial Against Gilles de Retz was of course conducted\nby the Bishop. He was the representative of the Church in the diocese,\nand he alone had the authority to act. His name was Jean de Malestroit.\nHe was originally Bishop at St. Brieuc, but had been Bishop of Nantes\nsince 1419. He called, as his assistants in the trial, to aid by their\ncounsel and advice, the Bishops of Mans, of St. Brieuc, and of Saint\nLo, one of the officials of the Church at Nantes, and with them Pierre\nde l\u2019Hospital, President of the High Court of Brittany, and whose aid\nwas asked to represent the civil law and to direct the charges, the\nwitnesses, and the debates in such manner that they should come within\nthe civil law. Three of the notaries of Nantes were made clerks, with\na foreign assistant. Robert Guillaumet was the executive officer,\nthat is to say, the sheriff or bailiff of the court. The prosecuting\nofficer appointed by the Bishop was William Chapeillon, the Cur\u00e9 of St.\nNicholas at Nantes.\n\nIt has been said that the Bishop, for a considerable length of time,\nhad been receiving and hearing complaints and charges against Gilles\nde Retz, and that especially during the last month he had been\ninvestigating their truth. In this he was aided by the aforesaid\nWilliam Chapeillon, who would thus have been entirely familiar with the\ncharges against Gilles de Retz. It was, therefore, eminently proper\nthat he should be appointed prosecutor. Whether the Bishop had the\nfull power under either the civil law or the ecclesiastical law, to\nmake the foregoing appointments of colleagues on his own motion and\naccording to his own will, is not here determined, nor does it appear,\nin making these appointments, whether the accused was consulted or\nwhether he gave his consent, nor does it appear that he either took\nor had the right to take exception to them or any of them and by such\nexception deprive them of the right to act in his case. As to one\naid to the Bishop, Gilles\u2019s consent was asked and obtained before he\nwas allowed to sit, that was Brother Jean Blouyn, of the Order of\n_Fr\u00e8res-Pr\u00eacheurs_ at the Convent at Nantes. He had been appointed\nas Vice-Inquisitor for the diocese of Nantes by the authority of the\nGrand Inquisitor of France, B.\u00a0N. Medici, who had been appointed to\nthat office by the Pope. Great stress is laid, throughout the process\nwherever this appointment came in question, on the fact that Gilles de\nRetz had consented to it before the priest took his seat on the bench.\nJean Blouyn was a man of about forty years of age, who seemed to have\ncommended himself for his moderation in making a decision, and for his\nfirmness in adhering to it. Abb\u00e9 Boussard classes him as _digne de tout\n\u00e9loge et appr\u00e9ci\u00e9 de tout le monde_.\n\nAnother tribunal represented the civil law, and it was by this that the\nsecular sentence of execution was passed.\n\nIn France, as in all countries under the civil or Roman law, and\nin some of the countries under the common law, there has been a\nseparate jurisdiction of certain offences for the ecclesiastical\ncourt. As a matter of course, and necessary for the continuance and\ngood administration of justice, there would be some controversies of\nwhich these two courts would have concurrent jurisdiction. It is quite\nimpossible in such a work as the present to go into this question.\nThose who are interested in the subject are respectfully referred, for\nFrance, to the _Histoire du droit criminel en France_ (pp. 74 and 85)\nby Du Boys; to Faustin-Helie\u2019s _Trait\u00e9 de l\u2019instruction criminelle_;\nFornier\u2019s _Les officialit\u00e9s au moyen \u00e2ge_; Esmien\u2019s _Histoire de\nla proc\u00e9dure criminelle en France, et sp\u00e9cialment de la proc\u00e9dure\ninquisitoriale depuis le XIII^{me} si\u00e8cle jusqu\u2019\u00e0 nos jours_ (Paris,\n1882); and for the general criminal procedure and jurisdiction of the\necclesiastical tribunal, to Beiner\u2019s _Beitrage zu der Geschichte der\nInquisition, prozesses_ (pp. 16\u201378). For a general history of these\nsubjects as applied to England, one should consult the great work on\nthe _History of Common Law_, by Sir Henry Maine.\n\nThe record of the process against Gilles de Retz in the archives of\nthe Department of Loire-Inf\u00e9rieure has been adverted to. We now come\nto a point where it is almost the entire evidence. It consists of the\nrecords of the two courts, one the ecclesiastical court, kept by the\nclerks before-mentioned, and to which the names of some one or all\nof three are signed for each day, either Jean Delaunay, Jean Petit,\nGuillaume Lesne, or Nicholas Giraud. This record, made each day,\napparently was supervised and made official by the prosecutor, William\nChapeillon, and it seems that more than one copy was made of it at that\ntime. This was in Latin, though French was interjected occasionally.\nThe other record was of the civil tribunal, the record of the day\u2019s\nproceedings being reduced to writing and signed by Touscheronde as\nCommissioner of the civil court, or by one of his aids, or, as they\ncall them, _assesseurs_, who signed, alternating with Touscheronde.\nTheir names were, Nicholas Chatau, Michael Eveillard, and Jean\nCoppegorge. This record was kept in French, the vulgar tongue, and very\nbad French and a very vulgar tongue it was. It would be interesting to\nphilologists to note the changes during the last five hundred and fifty\nyears in the spelling and, doubtless, pronunciation of the words of the\nFrench language.\n\nThese two records of the trial, the ecclesiastical and the civil, are\ntreated as one, and their originals are filed together in the archives\nof the Department of Loire-Inf\u00e9rieure in the locality designated as\nCot\u00e9 E, 189. Four copies of this record have been made, two in the year\n1530, one of which was at the request of Gilles de Laval, the other for\nthe Sire de la Tremoille. The copy given to the family of Laval has\ndisappeared and no trace of it is known; the other for Tremoille was\nplaced in the ch\u00e2teau of Thouars which, it is to be remembered, was the\nfamily name of the wife of Gilles de Retz.\n\nThis copy has taken its name from this ch\u00e2teau and is known in history\nas the Manuscrit de Thouars. It was left in this ch\u00e2teau until its\nexistence was forgotten. When the ch\u00e2teau was bought by the State and\nbecame part of the national domain, all papers and documents belonging\nto the family were transported to the ch\u00e2teau of Serrant in Anjou,\nof which one of the ladies of the family of Tremoille was mistress.\nThis copy of the record was in a pile of documents, tossed pell-mell\nand without order, and here Monsieur Marchegay, the archivist of the\nDepartment of Maine-et-Loire, discovered it. The Duke de la Tremoille\nimmediately took steps for its preservation. This record was on\nparchment like the original, and comprises four hundred and twenty\npages, of which three hundred and three, in Latin, are the record of\nthe ecclesiastical trial; the last hundred and eight pages constitute\nthe record of the civil tribunal, and are in French.\n\nTwo other copies have been made in modern times, one for the\nBiblioth\u00e8que Nationale, Paris, made under the Second Empire, and one\nfor the Public Library at Carpentras, both of which have been certified\nas true. The author procured a photograph of an open page from the\noriginal ecclesiastical record in the archives at Nantes. It was made\non his personal application while he was Consul of the United States at\nNantes. These records will be explained in this work, and upon their\nfoundation rests the entire history of Gilles de Retz. Without this\nrecord or its copies, the true story of Bluebeard could not be written.\n\nMichelet (_Histoire de France_, vol. v., pp. 208 _et seq._), in his\ndescription of the arrest and trial of Gilles de Retz, depends on two\nmanuscript copies which he mentions in a note; one in the Biblioth\u00e8que\nRoyale (No. 493 F)--the other communicated to him by M. Louis Du Bois.\n\nThe warrant of arrest of Gilles de Retz was signed by the Bishop on\nthe 13th of September, 1440, it was executed the next day, the 14th,\nand on that day Gilles was thrown in prison. On the 19th, five days\nafter, he was brought before the Bishop in the great hall of the _Tour\nNeuve_, in the ch\u00e2teau of Nantes. No information had been prepared, and\nno indictment filed. The prosecutor informed Gilles that he was charged\nwith the crime of heresy and asked if he was willing to be tried before\nthe ecclesiastical court, to which he consented, and added, with a\ndefiant air full of assurance, that he would recognise in advance any\nother ecclesiastical judges, as he had great desire to clear himself of\nsuch accusation in the presence of any inquisitor, _n\u2019 importe lequel_.\nIt was on this occasion that the Bishop of Nantes called to his aid as\nan auxiliary judge, Jean Blouyn of the Order of _Fr\u00e8res-Pr\u00eacheurs_,\nthe Vice-Inquisitor of the faith for the diocese of Nantes, and then,\nthis business having been brought to a close, the session of the court\nwas adjourned until the 28th of September, when the witnesses would be\nheard.\n\nThe record of this session is rendered in Latin, a translation of which\nis here given:\n\n  (Translation)[3]      \u201cMonday, September 19, 1440.\n\n    _\u201cProces-verbal, appearance in court of Gilles de Retz and his\n    submission to the jurisdiction of the Court._\n\n    \u201cOn aforesaid Monday after aforesaid feast of the Exaltation\n    of the Holy Cross, there appeared personally in court before\n    the afore-mentioned reverend Father the Lord Bishop of Nantes,\n    in the great hall of the new tower of the castle of Nantes,\n    to give hearing before the tribunal holding session there,\n    the honourable Guillermus Chapiellon, promoter of cases\n    of office of the aforesaid court, reproducing in fact the\n    letters of citation enclosed above, together with the enclosed\n    execution of them,--there appeared this Chapeillon on the one\n    hand, and on the other the aforesaid M. Egidius, soldier and\n    baron, the accused. And this M. Egidius [Gilles], soldier and\n    baron, after he in his wisdom had perceived that the promoter\n    accused him of heresy, said that he wished to appear before\n    the aforesaid reverend Father the Lord Bishop of Nantes, and\n    some other ecclesiastical judges, also before the inquisitor\n    for heretical wickedness, and to purge himself of the crimes\n    laid against him. Then the aforesaid reverend Father appointed\n    for the aforesaid Monsieur soldier and baron, who agreed in\n    this, the 28th day of the aforesaid month to legitimately\n    appear before the religious, the brother Jean Blouyn, the vicar\n    of the inquisitor of cases of heretical wickedness, in the\n    afor-mentioned place, to answer to the crimes and charges to be\n    urged against him by the aforesaid promoter, ... to be tried in\n    things pertaining to faith, as is lawful and proper....\n\n    \u201cIn the presence of the distinguished men Master Oliverio\n    Solidi de Beauveron, and M. Johannis Durandi of Blain, rector\n    of the parochial churches, of the diocese of Nantes, called as\n    witness to the foregoing.\u201d\n\n    [3] The entire ecclesiastical record was written in Latin with\n        an occasional interjection of French.\n\nThe commission of Jean Blouyn as Vice-Inquisitor was written in Latin\non parchment, to which was attached the great seal in red wax, which\nhung dangling by two silken cords. It was as follows:\n\n    \u201cWilliam Merici, of the order of Friars Preachers, professor of\n    Sacred Theology, by the apostolic authority Grand Inquisitor of\n    Heresy in the Kingdom of France, to our well-beloved brother in\n    Jesus Christ, Jean Blouyn of the convent of our order in the\n    city of Nantes, salvation by the author of our faith, the Lord\n    Jesus Christ:\n\n    \u201cHeresy, says the Apostle, is an evil that, if not cut up by\n    the roots by the iron of the Inquisition, will propagate itself\n    as a cancer in secret, and in darkness bring death to the most\n    simple soul. Thus, in order to proceed in the interest of their\n    own salvation against heretics, their aiders and abettors, and\n    the evil men, because of heresy or suspected of the crime,\n    against those who oppose the Inquisition, or who restrict its\n    free agency, it is necessary to proceed with great caution and\n    rare prudence. We have fullest confidence in the Lord that\n    you are endowed with a capacity, jurisdiction, and good will\n    to exercise this high charge. For this reason, by the counsel\n    of several of our brothers of which the wisdom is recognised\n    by all, we have made, established, and created to-day, and by\n    these presents we do make, establish, and create you in all\n    forms and with all the conditions required by the law and the\n    best authority which are in our hands, as our vicar in the city\n    and diocese of Nantes.\n\n    \u201cBy these letters, then, and by this concession, power is given\n    to you against heretics and against the culpable persons above\n    designated which may be there or otherwise. Also requests,\n    citations, interviews, interrogations, you can take against\n    all; you can cause them to be retained prisoners and proceed\n    against them in justice in any manner that you may judge\n    convenient, even including a definite sentence. You will have\n    finally all that by custom or by law belong to the charge of\n    Inquisitors; for in all this, as well as by the force of the\n    common law as by the grace of spiritual privileges enjoyed by\n    the Inquisition, we give to you, as much as it is in all our\n    power.\n\n    \u201cIn testimony of which, we have set our hand and seal to these\n    letters patent.\n\n                        (Signed)  \u201cG. MERICI.\n\n    \u201cDone at NANTES July 25, 1426.\u201d\n\nThis letter was read to Gilles, and he was asked if he recognised\nit. He declared \u201cNo!\u201d It was submitted to, and proved by, the\ncourt, and was recognised as authentic and genuine, and under its\nauthority Brother Jean Blouyn was admitted to a seat upon the bench as\nrepresentative of the Holy Inquisition and as judge in the case, aid to\nthe Bishop.\n\nThe session of October 11th was ended, and Gilles led back to prison.\n\nOn Wednesday the judges met, not in the great audience chamber,\nbut in the hall below, _aula bassa_. It was, and is, the custom in\nthe prosecution of criminal cases to have the investigation of the\nwitnesses before either the court or some high officer of justice prior\nto the public or official trial. In this investigation the procedure\ncorresponds in some degree to that of our grand jury, or more properly\nbefore the prosecuting attorney as well as the presiding judge. The\ninquests made by the Bishop of Nantes, and with him his present\nprosecuting attorney, William Chapeillon, during the summer preceding,\nhad been secret, the witnesses having been called up separately and\nexamined privately; but on this occasion the session was open, at least\nto all witnesses, and, as Michelet describes them,\n\n    \u201ca cloud of witnesses, poor people, came up single file, crying\n    and sobbing while they recounted the details of the abduction\n    of their children. Their cries and tears added to the horror\n    of the crimes which they recounted and showed the great sorrow\n    and grief to which they had been subjected, and the terrors\n    through which they had passed.\u201d\n\nThe following is a record of this session, and the depositions of the\nwitnesses heard:\n\n                        \u201cWednesday, September 28, 1440.\n\n    \u201c_Proc\u00e8s-verbal de r\u00e9ception des plaintes._\n\n    \u201cThe register in the case and cases of faith, in the presence\n    of the Reverend Father in Christ, lord Jean de Malestroit,\n    Bishop of Nantes, and of brother Jean Blouyn, vicar of Father\n    Guillermus Merici, the inquisitor mentioned below, against M.\n    Egidius (Gilles) de Rays, soldier, lord, and baron of the same\n    place, under accusation.\n\n    \u201cIn the name of the Lord, Amen.\n\n    \u201cIn the year of the Lord 1440, on Wednesday, September 28, in\n    the third indiction, in the tenth year of the pontificate of\n    our most holy Father in Christ and Lord Eugenius IV., Pope\n    by divine providence, and during the session of the council\n    of Basle, there appeared before ... the lord bishop Johannes\n    de Malestroit, ... and brother Johannes de Blouyn, ... vicar\n    of Guillermus Merici, the inquisitor in matters of heretical\n    wickedness, ... and before their scribes, ... the persons to\n    be mentioned below, who, ... in tears and sorrows complained\n    of the loss of their children and grandchildren and of others\n    mentioned below, asserting that these children and others had,\n    by the aforesaid Egidius de Rays and certain other accomplices\n    of his and his abettors, been treacherously carried off and\n    inhumanly strangled, and that he had committed upon them sins\n    against nature, ... that he had often invoked evil spirits\n    and offered homage to them, and had committed very many other\n    enormous and unheard-of crimes of which the ecclesiastical\n    court takes cognizance....\n\n    \u201cOf whom the first complainant is Agatha the wife of Denys de\n    la Mignon, of the parish of Holy Mary of Nantes, stating that\n    a certain Colin her grandchild, the son of Guillermus Apvrill,\n    about 20 years of age, small of stature and white of face,\n    having on one ear a birth-mark, in the year 1439 in the month\n    of August or thereabouts, on a Monday morning early went to the\n    house commonly called la Suze in the city of Nantes (belonging\n    to and occupied by Baron de Rays).... And afterwards she did\n    not see the aforesaid Colin nor did she hear anything about\n    him until a certain Perrina Martini _alias la Meffraye_, was\n    arrested and shut up in the prisons of the secular court of\n    Nantes. After this arrest she says that she heard it said by\n    many that very many boys and innocent children had been carried\n    off and killed by M. de Rays, she does not know to what purpose.\n\n    \u201cLikewise the widow of Reginald Don\u00e9t\u00e9 of the parish of Holy\n    Mary of Nantes, also complained that Jean her son and son\n    of aforesaid Don\u00e9t\u00e9 used to frequent the house de la Suze\n    in the city of Nantes; and since the feast of St. John the\n    Baptist of the year 1438 she heard nothing about him until the\n    aforesaid Perrina Martin, _alias la Meffraye_, was arrested and\n    imprisoned and confessed that she had given him over to the\n    aforesaid de Rays and his companions.\n\n    \u201cJohanna, the wife of Guibeleti Delit, of the Parish of St.\n    Denys of Nantes, likewise complained that her son Guillermus\n    used to visit the house de la Suze, and went there during the\n    first week of last Lent; and she had heard M. Jean Briant say\n    that he had seen him in the aforesaid house on seven or eight\n    successive days; that she had never afterwards seen her son,\n    and that she suspected that he had been put to death in that\n    house.\n\n    \u201cJohannes Hubert and his wife, parishioners of St. Vincent of\n    Nantes, complained that a certain son of theirs Jean by name,\n    about 14 years of age, went to the house la Suze two years\n    before the feast of the Nativity of St. John of last year, and\n    then returning to the house of his parents, told his mother\n    that he had cleansed the room of the aforesaid de Rays in the\n    house de la Suze and had therefor bread in the aforesaid house,\n    which bread he brought home and gave to his mother; to whom\n    he also said that he was in favour with M. de Rays, and that\n    the lord had given him white wine to drink; consequently he\n    immediately returned to the house of Suze and was never again\n    seen by his parents.\n\n    \u201cJohanna, the wife of Johannes Darel, of the parish of St.\n    Similien near Nantes, complained that on the feast of Sts.\n    Peter and Paul of the year before last, she was going home from\n    the church of Nantes in the evening, and a child of hers aged\n    seven or eight years was following her. When she had reached\n    the church of St. Saturnine of Nantes, or was near it, she\n    looked around to see her son, whom she thought to be following\n    her, but she saw him neither then nor ever after.\n\n    \u201cThe wife of Yvon Kyeguen, stonecutter, of the parish of the\n    Holy Cross of Nantes, complained that she had given to a\n    certain Poitou, a servant of M. de Rays, one of her sons (this\n    she did between the feasts of Easter and Ascension) to be a\n    servant to him, as the aforesaid Poitou asserted; the son was\n    about 15 years of age; and afterwards she never saw him again.\n\n    \u201cTheophania, the wife of Eonette le Charpentier, butcher, of\n    the parish of St. Clement near Nantes, complained that Peter\n    the son of Eonet le Dagaye, the grandchild of the complainant,\n    ten years old or thereabouts, was lost two years ago, and\n    from that time nothing was heard of him until the aforesaid\n    Perrina Martin, _alias_ la Peliszonne, nicknamed _la Meffraye_,\n    confessed, as is said, that she had given him to the followers\n    of M. de Rays.\n\n    \u201cThe wife of Peter Coupperie likewise complained that she had\n    lost her two sons, one eight and the other nine years old.\n\n    \u201cJohannes Magnet complained that he had lost a son. Wherefore\n    the said complainants said that they suspected that the\n    aforesaid M. de Rays and his accomplices were culpable and\n    conscious of the loss and death of the aforesaid children.\u201d\n\nThe judges and those present and in authority were much moved by these\nscenes, and they declared that such crimes should not go unpunished,\nhowever high the rank of the accused, and they directed the bailiff to\nnotify Gilles to appear before their tribunal the 8th of October to\nrespond in their presence to the accusations against him. On that day\nmore witnesses were introduced, but their depositions were not written\nout, or at least are not in the record.\n\nThe court was opened in the great audience chamber in due form and\nsolemnity, at about nine o\u2019clock in the morning. The audience was\npublic, and the hall was crowded. Gilles was brought to the bar as a\ncriminal, and required to plead. He carried a high head, looking around\nhim disdainfully, as in the days of his power and strength. The bailiff\nrecited that in accordance with the orders given to him, he had the\npossession of the body of Gilles de Retz, which he now presented before\nthe court. Immediately the prosecutor arose, and proceeded verbally\nwith the arraignment of the prisoner. It is to be remembered that the\nmethods of procedure in the courts of that country are now, and were\nthen, quite different from that of the common law courts.\n\nAfter the oral statement of the crimes of which he was accused, the\nprosecutor called upon Gilles to plead, to which Gilles (also orally)\ndeclared his refusal, and demanded an appeal from the Bishop of Nantes\nand the Vice-Inquisitor,--supposed to be an appeal to the Archbishop\nat Tours or to the Pope himself. His appeal was refused immediately,\nand his plea demanded. Michelet (_Histoire de France_, vol. v., p. 210)\njustifies Gilles in his refusal to plead and his demand for an appeal.\n\u201cFor,\u201d he says, \u201cone cannot deny that the judges before whom Gilles was\nto be tried were his enemies.\u201d Gilles seems, in making these demands,\nto have intended to use the law\u2019s delay more than to have had any\nspecial hope of being sustained by the higher courts.\n\nIt is remarkable, though, to consider the value attached by the court\nto Gilles\u2019s plea. It was evident that when he did plead, it would be a\nplea of \u201cnot guilty\u201d; but this seemed to have had no effect upon the\njudges or upon their course of procedure. They appeared quite willing\nto permit the plea of \u201cnot guilty,\u201d but were determined to have a\nplea of some kind entered. It would be curious to trace the causes of\nthis solicitude on the part of the judges. The filing of the plea may\nhave been required for some purpose deeper than the appearance would\nindicate; possibly it stood in the stead of the present rule of law\nthat requires the criminal to be arrested and brought before the court\nin order to give it jurisdiction. True, the party can, in France, be\ntried in his absence and convicted _in contumacion_; but this can only\nbe done after the party shall have been arrested and filed his plea. In\nmurder trials, no conviction can be had in the court of any civilised\ncountry until the proof shall be made of the _corpus delicti_. It would\nappear as though the importance of this plea was that it should be an\nevidence of the presence of the prisoner before the court. It may have\nbeen, in the eye of the law, a synecdoche, wherein a part stood for the\nwhole,--a plea standing for the evidence of arrest and presence of the\nprisoner before the court,--which was necessary to give it jurisdiction\nover the case. However this may have been, the court manifested great\ndetermination to obtain the plea from Gilles. They gave him some days\nto consider the matter, but he replied at once that\n\n    \u201cnone of the articles which you have presented against me are\n    true except two things therein charged; the baptism that I have\n    received, and the renunciation which I have sworn against the\n    demon, his pomp and his works. I am now, and always have been,\n    a true Christian.\u201d\n\nUpon the receipt of this answer and defiance, the prosecutor became\nindignant. He offered his oath to support each and every one of the\narticles he had presented. Turning to Gilles, he demanded that he\nmake the same oath, and in the same manner, that is, between the\nhands of the Bishop and the Vice-Inquisitor (\u201c_entre les mains de\nl\u2019\u00e9v\u00eaque et du Vice-inquisiteur_\u201d). This was demanded of him four\ndifferent times--he was begged, pleaded with, implored, threatened,\nmenaced with excommunication, but he remained strong in his refusal.\nWhat a strange thing is human nature! This man had committed the most\nfearful, inhuman, and base crimes,--crimes against the innocent and\ndefenceless,--and yet, when brought to the bar of trial, he insisted\nhe was a true Christian, and whatever else he might do or have done,\nhe stood firm in his resolve not to take a false oath. He could commit\nmurder times without number, and he seemed to consider the punishment\nfor this relating only to the body. A false oath taken before God\nseemed to him to carry its punishment into the next world and to\nimperil his soul through eternity. He was willing to commit murder, but\nhe was afraid to commit perjury.\n\nThe hearing was postponed until the 11th of October, to give the\nprosecutor time to prepare the information which should serve as an\nindictment and which had not yet been formally presented nor made a\nmatter of record.\n\nIn the meantime, public attention must have been greatly attracted to\nthe proceedings as they were progressing, and invitations went out to\nall persons who had lost children by abduction within the specified\ntime and who had reason to suppose that the crime could be laid to\nGilles, or his accomplices, to present themselves before the court and\nmake their complaints.\n\nLemire relates (p. 39) this incident:\n\n    \u201cOn the 10th of October, a herald-at-arms of the Duke of\n    Brittany, bearing his livery, sounded the trumpet three times\n    before the ch\u00e2teau and then, in a loud voice, demanded that any\n    person having knowledge of the affair of Gilles de Retz was\n    summoned to appear before the court and tell what he knew under\n    pain of fine and imprisonment. No person responded to this\n    appeal.\u201d\n\nSo great was the number appearing the next day in response to this\nnotification that the court was unable to proceed with the trial,\nand consumed the 11th and 12th in its inquest, hearing and recording\ncomplaints of the many witnesses. As we have seen, these witnesses\nwere presented before the judges, interrogated, and their statements\ntaken down in the form of depositions, to the end that they might be\nincluded in the information against the prisoner. On October 13th,\nhaving finished this work, the court had the prisoner brought before\nit. The session of the court was held in public; the bench appears to\nhave been filled with ecclesiastical dignitaries, many of them bishops\nfrom the neighbouring dioceses, with judges and lawyers; while below,\nan immense pressing, pushing, exasperated crowd of bereaved parents and\nfriends, filled with emotion, added much to the excitement by their\ndeclarations of the losses they had sustained by the abduction of their\ndear children, and who filled the room with their cries against the\nperpetrator of the crimes by which they had been robbed of their loved\nones.\n\nThe hour for opening was, as usual, nine o\u2019clock. The first business\nwas a return to the question of the plea to be filed by the accused.\nGilles refused with greater hauteur than before, and pushed his refusal\ndisdainfully, ending by becoming abusive of the judges and officers of\nthe court, and conducting himself in a highly improper and insulting\nmanner. The following extracts are from _Proc\u00e8s-verbal_ of the audience\n(translated):\n\n                        \u201cThursday, October 13, 1440.\n\n    \u201cOn the above-mentioned Thursday, the 13th day of October,\n    there appeared in the court before the Lord Bishop of Nantes,\n    etc., etc....\n\n    \u201cThen the same Lord Bishop and the Vice-inquisitor and the\n    aforesaid promoter, asked the aforesaid Egidius [Gilles],\n    the accused, whether he wished to reply to the positions and\n    articles against him, or whether he wished to say anything\n    against them or to take any exception to them. He answered with\n    pride and haughtiness that he wished to give no answer to the\n    positions and articles, asserting that the aforesaid lords, the\n    Bishop and Vice-inquisitor, were not his judges, and that he\n    appealed from them, speaking irreverently and improperly.\n\n    \u201cMoreover, the aforesaid Egidius, accused, then said that\n    the aforesaid lords, the Bishop of Nantes and brother Jean\n    Blouyn the vicar of the aforesaid Inquisitor, and all other\n    ecclesiastical men were guilty of simony and were ribalds,\n    and that he would rather be hanged by the neck than to answer\n    before such ecclesiastics and judges, feeling it a grievance\n    to have to appear before them, ... and finally addressing the\n    lord Bishop, he said in the vernacular, \u2018_Je ne feroye rien\n    pour vous comme \u00e9vesque de Nantes_.\u2019 ... Then under pain of\n    excommunication he was asked to reply to the charges made\n    against him, but he refused, saying that he wondered how it was\n    that Petrus de l\u2019Hospital, the President of Brittany, could\n    have permitted that the ecclesiastics should be present at the\n    accusation of such crimes against him, stating that he was\n    a Christian and a Catholic, and that he was aware that such\n    crimes would have been against faith.\n\n    \u201cThen he was formally excommunicated, and it was decided to\n    proceed with the trial, paying no attention to his declaration\n    that he had appealed, since such appellation was merely in\n    verbal declaration and not in writing, and since the enormity\n    of the crimes of which he was accused demanded immediate\n    attention.\u201d\n\nNo progress was made during the day, and the court was adjourned until\nthe morrow, when the information would be completed and formally lodged\nagainst the accused.\n\nThe criminal proceedings in France, while different from those\nunder the common law, yet still have some analogy therewith. There\nis no grand jury, but in its stead is an officer now called _juge\nd\u2019instruction_. In this court no such special officer seems to have\nexisted, but the duty of examining the witnesses, as done by the grand\njury in the United States, was performed by the court itself, aided by\nthe prosecutor. Instead of an indictment charging the crime as under\nthe common law, an information is filed. The information is signed\nand presented in court by the prosecutor, and while being prepared is\nentirely within his control. He has, under the law, the power of our\ngrand jury of charging, or refusing to charge, crimes; therefore the\nindictment is his. This information, instead of simply charging the\ncrime directly, and in legal language, sets forth the history of the\ncase, the jurisdiction of the court, the attending circumstances of\nthe crime charged, and ends with the usual prayers for conviction and\npunishment.\n\nThe information against Gilles de Retz contained forty-nine articles,\nand charged him with three distinct crimes: (1) the crimes of\nabduction, violation, and murder of the infants named; (2) the crimes\nof magic and sorcery; (3) sacrilege in having violated the ecclesiastic\nimmunity of the chapel of Saint \u00c9tienne-de-Mer-Morte. The information\nwas divided into three parts. The first fourteen of the forty-nine\narticles were occupied with stating the jurisdiction of the court,\nthat is to say, that Jean de Malestroit was the Bishop of Nantes, that\nhe was properly and legally appointed as such, that he was under his\nsuperior, the archbishop, whose ecclesiastical province or cathedral\nwas located at Tours; then followed the power, authority, and right\nto sit, of Jean Blouyn, the Vice-Inquisitor; then the declaration of\nthe nativity of Gilles de Retz, his residence in the diocese of, and\nduty owed to, the Bishop of Nantes; a declaration of the ecclesiastical\nauthority of the Bishop within his diocese over the ch\u00e2teau of\nMachecoul and the chapel of Saint \u00c9tienne-de-Mer-Morte and, in fine,\na complete statement of all necessary authority over the accused, and\nthis part finished with the declaration that all things herein set\nforth were true, notorious, manifest, and within the knowledge of all\nand every person.\n\nThe second part of the information comprised articles fifteen to\nforty-one. Article fifteen was a general statement of all the\ncrimes charged against Gilles and his accomplices. The names of the\naccused were first stated: Gilles de Retz, Gilles de Sill\u00e9, Roger\nde Briqueville, Henriet Griart, \u00c9tienne Corrillaud, _alias_ Poitou,\nAndrea Bouchet, Jean Rossignol, Robin Romulart, called Spadin, Huguet\nde Bremont, and the crimes charged were the murder of infants, killed,\ndismembered, burned, treated in an inhuman manner. Then there were the\nimmolation damnable of the bodies of these infants offered to the demon\nas a sacrifice; consultation with the demon, odious conduct, frightful\nabomination, brutal debauches, and, taken together, a catalogue of\ncrimes, a luxury of offences that exhausted the prosecutor to qualify\nin proper terms, and which, before a mixed assembly, could only be\npronounced decently in Latin and not in vulgar language.\n\nHe told of the excitement, dread, fear, of the people; the public\nclamour that had sprung up from one end of the country to the other;\nhow it at last settled around the ch\u00e2teau of Machecoul, and that\nevery time an abduction took place some one of the accomplices of\nGilles had been discovered in the neighbourhood. In making this part\nof his accusation, the prosecutor became filled with emotion, excited\nin his address, and eloquent in his words. He described the conduct\nand feelings of the people, and especially of the stricken parents,\nof their cries (_clamosa_, for his first presentation and reading of\nthe information was in Latin), the loud lamentations (_lamentabile_),\nthe immense sorrow (_plurimum dolorosa_), the accusing insinuations\nof the people; he showed the innumerable persons of both sexes and\nall conditions, both in the cities and in the diocese of Nantes,\n(_pr\u00e6cedentibus vocibus quam plurimarum personarum utriusque sexus_),\nwho, bowed down by the weight of their grief and fright, had appealed\nto justice and to heaven with howls and cries (_ululantium_), and had\npresented their complaints together before the seat of justice, their\nvisages bathed in tears (_conquerentium et plangentium_), for the loss\nof their sons and daughters, bringing to the Bishop, the commissioners,\nand the prosecutors the authority of their tears and their griefs in\nsupport of this accusation.\n\nArticle sixteen commenced with the charge of the crime of conjuration\nand invocation of demons. Over this the prosecutor also became\neloquent. His accusation was of an infraction of ecclesiastical law,\nand he dealt largely with the law of the Church; his charges abounded\nin quotations from the Bible (Fourth and Thirty-ninth Psalms),\nadjurations from holy men, and was filled with many brave and eloquent\nwords in description and denunciation of the abominable crime of black\nmagic, conjuration, and sorcery. He takes up the Italian priests from\ntheir respective places in their native country, and brings them along\nuntil they are joined to Gilles in Brittany. In the articles alleging\ncrimes against infants, in article twenty-seven, the accusation says,\n\u201cand the number of victims is upward of one hundred and forty, and\npossibly more. The articles of the accusation following set forth the\ndetails of all these horrors; the action, conduct, and aid of the\nfamiliars of Gilles and his accomplices; when, where, for whom, and\nby whom the infants were taken, and their respective fates. These\nwere all set forth in great detail and with great particularity, and\narticle forty-one closes with the words: \u201cThese are the crimes which\nmake Gilles de Retz infamous, a heretic, an apostate, an idolate, and a\n_relaps_.\u201d\n\nArticles forty-two to forty-seven were occupied with a recapitulation\nof the crimes committed by Gilles and his accomplices, and in article\nforty-nine he concludes with the assurance that by such crimes and by\nsuch offences the accused had incurred the sentence of excommunication\nand all other pains which follow the punishment to be assessed against\nsuch culpable of being _auruspex et ariolus_, the doers of evil deeds,\nthe conjurors of evil spirits, their aiders and abettors, their\nfriends, their dependants, and, finally, all those who have delivered\nthemselves over to magic and the prohibited art. That the accused\nhad fallen into heresy, that they were guilty of _relaps_, that they\nhad offended the majesty of God, which was infinitely worse than the\noffence against the priests; they had incurred, consequently, the\npenalties for crimes against His Majesty Divine; they had broken the\ncommands of the Decalogue, the laws of the Church; they had sown among\nthe faithful Christians the most dangerous errors; finally, that they\nwere rendered culpable of crimes as enormous as they were hideous, all\nof which were in the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Nantes. And in the\nclosing sentences the prosecutor demands that he shall be admitted\nnow to make proof of what he has advanced, and this he will do, so he\npromises, without further superfluity, reserving only the right to add,\nto correct, to change, to diminish, to interpret, and to put in order\nand produce any new matters if they shall be necessary at the time and\nplace convenient; and he demands the application of the punishment due\nfor this crime. The prosecutor admitted that certain of the crimes\nset forth in the information were not within the jurisdiction of the\necclesiastical court, and that they would have to be remitted to the\nsecular court if punishment was expected.\n\nGilles de Retz interrupted the reading of the information many times,\nmaking denials in favour of himself, blaming his judges, and denouncing\nthe prosecutors. Everybody seems to have preserved his temper except\nGilles, and at the close of the reading of the information, the judges\nturned to him and demanded his formal plea to the various accusations\nagainst him. Gilles remained obstinate and refused to plead, and\ndemanded an appeal to the higher court. His conduct during the reading\nwas such as to destroy any sympathy the judges may have had. Bishops\nand judges are but men, and it was too much to expect that the human\nside of the court would hear, unmoved, this abuse and contumely heaped\nupon it.\n\nGilles\u2019s continued refusal to plead gave the prosecutor and court an\nopportunity to exercise their legal power, and the prosecutor demanded\na decree of excommunication against Gilles for his contempt in this\nbehalf committed. This was an interlocutory order, intended to correct\nthe faults of Gilles during the trial. It was useless to imprison him,\nfor he was already a prisoner; it was useless to threaten him with\nany other pains or penalties applied to his physical body; therefore,\nthe court, using the only other power it had as an ecclesiastical\nbody, issued its decree of excommunication, the only thunder it could\nfulminate against him.\n\nIt is a curious commentary upon human nature, and throws a side light,\nnot simply upon the ecclesiastical courts, but also upon the human\nnature of that day, that Gilles, who had committed all the crimes in\nthe calendar, and deserved death a thousand times if he had had that\nmany lives; who seemed to have no fear of any punishment inflicting\nphysical pain or discomfort in this world, yet was so filled with\ndread of punishment in the next world, arising from the decree of\nexcommunication which he believed and feared would deprive him of the\nsolace of his religion and the benefit of the vicarious intercession of\nhis holy Mother Church that, as we shall see, it produced the greatest\neffect upon him and was of the greatest efficacy in changing his course.\n\nThe decree of excommunication having been passed upon Gilles de Retz, a\npostponement was ordered until the Saturday following, October 15th.\n\nAt the next sitting Gilles had had two or three days in which to think\nover his condition. Brought to the bar, the Court put to him the\noriginal question, \u201cDo you recognise us as your legitimate judges?\u201d\nTo which question, to the suprise of everyone who heard him, Gilles,\nwho had heretofore been so proud and disdainful in all his refusals to\nrespond affirmatively to this question, spoke out, \u201cYes; I recognise\nthe Court as at present constituted. I have committed crimes, and they\nhave been within the limits of this diocese.\u201d With words of humility\nand regret, his voice broken with emotion, with tears in his eyes, he\ndemanded pardon of the Bishop and Vice-Inquisitor for the words he had\nspoken so harshly against them.\n\nThe Bishop, who had heretofore been dignified, reserved, severe,\nas became a judge in the trial of a case, on hearing these words\nof submission and request for pardon, turned the other side of his\ncharacter towards the repentant. He then became the priest whose duty\nwas to pardon, comfort, and console erring and sinful men; and when\nGilles prayed that his decree of excommunication be revoked, that he\nshould be re-admitted to the fold of the Church and again be given the\ncomforts of his religion, the Bishop granted the prayers, and received\nhim again into the Church, giving him words of comfort and good cheer.\n\nWhen this scene was finished, the prosecutor asked for the progress\nof the trial in the usual way. Gilles raised no objection, and\nexpressed his willingness to enter his plea and take oath to speak\nthe truth in all things whereof he was accused. The information was\nread to him at length in the Latin language, and explained, section by\nsection, in the common French. Gilles responded to the first fourteen\narticles, admitting in succession the powers of the Bishop and of the\nVice-Inquisitor, the lawful constitution of the court, and that he\nwas a member of the Church, and that the _venue_, as laid, was within\nthe jurisdiction. Being further interrogated, he, however, denied all\ndealings with the Evil One, all performances of magic, all attempts at\nsorcery, or that he had ever, either by himself or by another, sought\nto have communication with the Evil One, or to invoke his power in\nany way in order to obtain riches, power, or long life. He admitted\nthat he had once possessed a book that treated of alchemy and of the\ninvocation of demons; that he had obtained it from a soldier who had\nbeen thrown in prison at Angers; that he had talked with the soldier\nupon that subject, but had done nothing more--he had returned the book.\n\nThe record recounts how, at this period in the trial, the prosecutor\ndemanded of Gilles that they two, in order to be on equal terms,\nshould take the oath to speak the truth. They advanced together, the\nprosecutor and the defendant, and putting their left hands between\nthe hands of the Bishop and of the Vice-Inquisitor, their right hands\nbearing upon the Holy Evangel, they took together the oath \u201cTo speak\nthe truth and nothing but the truth,\u201d as to the matter before the court.\n\nThis ceremony over, the formal plea of \u201cnot guilty\u201d was entered by\nGilles. Then came the introduction of witnesses, who were, Henri\nGriard, \u00c9tienne Corrillaud, _alias_ Poitou, Fran\u00e7ois Prelati, Demontie\nCativo, Eustache Blanchet, \u00c9tienne of St. Malo, Steophanie Etiennette,\nwidow of Robert Branchee, and Perrina Martin, surnamed _la Meffraye_.\nThey were all brought to the bar by Robert Guillaumet, the bailiff, and\nappeared on the side of the prosecutor and against the defendant. The\noath which the witnesses took is given in substance in the record. They\nwere sworn between the hands of the Bishop and the Vice-Inquisitor, as\nGilles and the prosecutor had been, and their oath was that neither\nfavour, nor resentment, nor fear, nor hate, nor friendship, nor\nrelationship, should have any part in their words; and they put aside\nevery spirit of party and all personal affection, having regard only\nfor truth and justice.\n\nThe judges announced to Gilles the privileges of cross-examination,\nputting the questions himself if he desired to do so, for, be it\nunderstood, usually in criminal trials under the civil law, especially\nin France, the questions, whether they be by the prosecutor or by the\naccused, have to be handed up, and are put by the presiding justice.\nBut as it is usual for the witnesses to proceed and tell their story\nwithout interrogation, Gilles declared his willingness to have the\nregular course pursued, and that he would leave the matter to the\nconscience of the Court. This being done, the witnesses were removed;\nfor, be it understood, by no court practice in France are the witnesses\nwho have not testified permitted to remain while others are giving\ntestimony. The presence of Gilles\u2019s accomplices as witnesses against\nhim must have given him an awful shock. As soon as the witnesses had\nleft the court-room, it seems that the condition of affairs presented\nthemselves to Gilles in their true light, and showed him his serious\nand compromising situation. He was moved to great emotion, whether of\nremorse or fear cannot now be said. He demanded, in supplicating tones,\nthat the revocation of the decree of excommunication should be in\nwriting, not simply by oral decree.\n\nIt would appear from such of the history of this great criminal as\nwe have, that the only thing which produced any emotion in him and\ncaused him to exhibit fear or dread of his position was this decree of\nexcommunication. The Bishop was in his forgiving mood, he had resumed\nhis _r\u00f4le_ of priest, and, very properly, he consented to do in writing\nwhat he had already done verbally, and the decree of excommunication\nwas revoked.\n\nThe court adjourned until the Monday thereafter, the 17th of October,\nwhen it was expected that the introduction of evidence would begin. The\nexamination was taken either orally (_viva voce_), before the court,\nor by the clerks, or _greffiers_, who acted as examiners, or notaries,\nand reduced the testimony to writing, reporting it or its substance\nto the court. De Alneto, Jo. Parvi, and G. Lesne were _greffiers_,\nand took most of the testimony for the ecclesiastical court; while de\nTouscheronde did the same for the civil court, and it was reported\nunder their respective certificates.\n\nOctober 17th was occupied with witnesses proving the crime of sacrilege\ncommitted on the chapel of Saint \u00c9tienne-de-Mer-Morte. On the 19th the\nwitnesses were examined touching the crime of abduction of infants.\nThis interests us more than the other, and therefore we follow it\nwith the names of the witnesses: Professor Jean de Pencortic, Jean\nAndilanrech, Andr\u00e9 Seguin, Pierre Vimain, Jean Orienst, Jean Brient,\nJean Le Veill, Jean Picard, Guillaume Michel, Pierre Drouet, Eutrope\nChardavoine, Robert Guillaumet (Doctor), Robin Riou, Jacques Tennecy,\nand Jean Letournours. All of these were sworn, as before, to tell the\ntruth without consideration of prayers, or recompense, or fear, or\nfavour, or hate, or resentment, or friendship, or acquaintance\u2019s sake.\nGilles again declined to cross-examine the witnesses; he declared his\nwillingness to abide by their conscientious declarations.\n\nOn the 20th of October the court was convened for the purpose of\nhearing the depositions, and Gilles was asked, with many questions,\nwhat response he had to make. He continually said he had none: nothing\nto say, nothing to ask of the witnesses, and no witnesses of his own\nto introduce. Practically, he made no controversy over the testimony\nagainst him.\n\nThe ecclesiastical court was equal to a court of the Inquisition. Two\nhundred or more years of practice by the Inquisition in prosecution\nof heresy had served to formulate rules of practice. And here is\nintroduced one of the curiosities of human nature manifested in trials\nof justice when they are started in a given direction. Recurring to\nremarks concerning the legal necessity of obtaining a plea to the\nindictment or information, in order, possibly, to show the presence of\nthe accused, and speculating upon that as the origin of the theory of\nthe common law requiring the personal presence of the accused in order\nto give the court jurisdiction to try the case, and the proof of the\n_corpus delicti_ in order to convict, it seems proper that a similar\ncourse of procedure and reasoning should prevail in cases of heresy, an\noffence which dealt so largely with matters of belief; therefore, the\necclesiastical court, or the Inquisitor, whether established as a court\nor not, deemed it necessary to appeal to the inner consciousness and\nthe private knowledge of the accused in regard to his belief, and to\nthat end put questions that demanded an answer.\n\nAs a matter of course, the prisoner, if a heretic, would refuse to\nanswer because he would not convict himself, and hence grew up (this\nis only a suggestion of the author) a system which seems horrible\nand revolting to all lawyers; that is, the application of torture to\ncompel the prisoner to make the necessary answer. No other punishment\ncould be provided, for the accused was already a prisoner, and being\npunished as such. As nothing in the way of legal punishment further\nthan imprisonment would be visited upon him, the Inquisition fell upon\ntorture as a means of extorting a confession, and thus it forced from\nthe unwilling lips of the accused a declaration of his belief. This\nwould soon extend to include all his knowledge concerning matters at\nissue; and when he should declare himself innocent, however true it\nmight be, the torture could be applied again and again, harder and\ngreater, until the power of resistance on the part of the accused was\novercome, and he would give up because of his inability to resist\nfurther.\n\nSo it appeared in the case of Gilles. The witnesses had testified to\neverything necessary to be proved; Gilles had admitted the jurisdiction\nand the _corpus delicti_, had practically admitted his immediate and\ndirect connivance and assistance in the various abductions, as well as\nthe sacrilege; still, on his refusal to proceed further, the prosecutor\ndemanded the application of torture.\n\nIt was, according to our ideas, a lamentable condition of the course of\njustice when the application of the torture should have been so common\na proceeding that, on demand of the prosecutor, it would be allowed by\nthe court, even when the guilt of the prisoner was beyond dispute. This\nseems to have been the course of the court in the case of Gilles, and\nthe petition for torture, as made by the prosecutor, was allowed by the\ncourt, and the next day set for its application.\n\n    \u201cEt tunc idem promotor dixit quod, attenta confessione\n    dicti Egidii, rei, productionibus testium et eorum dictis\n    depositionibus satis constabat de intencione sua in causa et\n    hujusmodi, sed nichilominus, ad veritatem lacius elucidandam\n    et perscrutandam, torturam seu questionem dicto Egidio, reo,\n    per eosdem dominos episcopum Nannetensem et Fratrem Johannem\n    Blouyn, judices, et ipsum questionari debere, instanter\n    postulavit.\n\n    \u201cQui quidem domini episcopus et vicarius dicti inquisitoris,\n    prius habito per eos super his omnibus consilio cum peritis,\n    premissis consideratis, decreverunt questionem sive torturam\n    dicto Egidio _de Rays_, et eum torturam pati, ipsumque Egidium,\n    reum, torturis sive questionibus subici debere.\u201d\n\nIt was said that the instrument of torture had already been put in\nplace, and for the convenience of all parties the prosecutor had chosen\nthe hall adjoining that occupied by Gilles, to the end that the torture\ncould be applied with as little trouble as possible, and whatever\nmight be the result of it that Gilles could be properly attended to\nin case of need. On this demand of the prosecutor for torture, and\nits allowance by the judges, Gilles\u2019s courage left him; he became\nfrightened, turned pale and trembled. So full of fear and terror was\nhe, as scarcely to be able to speak intelligently. He threw himself at\nthe feet of his judges and, in broken accents, with cries and sobs,\nbesought and supplicated them not to put him to this test, making all\nkinds of promises as to what he would do in order to escape torture.\n\nHe prayed for leave to make confession of his crimes, and to have the\nBishop of Saint-Brieuc assigned for that purpose.\n\nIt was agreed that the judge, Pierre l\u2019Hospital, the President of\nBrittany, should sit with the Bishop to hear the proposed confession,\nand that the session should be held at two o\u2019clock that afternoon.\nGilles agreed to this, as he would have agreed to anything else, and he\npromised to make a clean breast of the whole affair. But as an evidence\nof the terror with which he contemplated the torture, he demanded\n(this seems to have been his only condition) that his examination and\nconfession should be taken in a hall as distant as possible from that\nof the torture. The court agreed to this proposition at once, and the\ntwo officials named were assigned the duty. The secretaries, or clerks\nof the court, acting respectively for these high functionaries, were\nJean Parvi for the ecclesiastical court, and Jean de Touscheronde for\nthe civil court.\n\nIt is said that Gilles\u2019s confession before these two representatives\nof the ecclesiastical and civil powers was made in public, where\neverybody who desired could enter and hear. This confession of the\nsame day is headed, in the records (archives), _extra-judiciare_, for\nwhat reason is unknown; but, as there was a fuller, and apparently a\njudicial, confession made by him the next day, which will be given at\nlength, the confession _extra-judiciare_ is omitted, the incident only\nbeing mentioned.\n\nThe President of Brittany, Pierre l\u2019Hospital, undertook the\ninterrogation of Gilles. He took up first the crimes against the\ninfants, their abduction and murder, and went through that with great\nminuti\u00e6, pushing it to all details; then the same with regard to\nsorcery and the invocation of demons; the bloody sacrifices that had\nbeen offered to the Evil One, as had been in evidence so many days.\nPressed to tell where this commenced, Gilles said it was at the ch\u00e2teau\nof Champtoc\u00e9, that the time was so long ago that he had forgotten and\nwas unable to identify it, except that it was in the year in which his\ngrandfather, Jean de Craon, had died. \u201cWho gave to you, and how did you\nget, the idea of committing these crimes?\u201d \u201cNo one; my own imagination\ndrove me to do so. The thought was my own, and I have nothing to which\nto attribute it except my own desire for knowledge of evil.\u201d\n\nIt appears, from the report of the case, that the President of Brittany\ndid not believe these statements of Gilles\u2019s to be possible. He was so\nmuch astonished to hear this declaration that he pushed the examination\nwith great detail, and insisted upon fuller and more specific answers.\nHe approached Gilles sometimes from the legal side, sometimes from the\necclesiastical; sometimes he threatened him with the punishment of the\nsecular arm, at other times he pleaded with him and held out the offers\nof pardon from the Lord Jesus Christ; and by virtue of all these, he\nbesought Gilles to go back over the words which he had spoken, to make\na truthful and honest avowal of the causes which had led him to the\ncommission of these frightful crimes.\n\nThere were three languages employed in these proceedings; probably all\nthree were spoken by the higher orders: the Latin by the ecclesiastical\nauthorities, and that language was employed by the ecclesiastical\ncourt; then the French language, which was foreign to Brittany, but\nwhich probably Gilles and all those concerned in the trial understood;\nwhile as for the common people, doubtless their knowledge was confined\nto the Breton language. The confession of Gilles, reduced to writing\nby the clerk\u2019s secretary, not verbatim, nor pretending to be so, but\nto have been written out only in substance, as is done in the case of\ntestimony before an examiner or notary who employs longhand.\n\nWhile the President was pushing this investigation and\ncross-examination so far, to the visible annoyance and great trouble\nof Gilles, he cried out in French: \u201cAlas, Monseigneur, you torment\nyourself and me also, both of us, unnecessarily!\u201d \u201cNo,\u201d replied the\nPresident of Brittany, \u201cI do not torment myself; but I am astonished at\nwhat you have said, and I am scarcely content with it. My only desire\nis to have you tell the truth concerning the causes which I have so\noftentimes asked you.\u201d Responded Gilles: \u201cThere is no other cause; I\nhave told you the truth and everything as it happened; _Je vous ay dit\nde plus grans choses que n\u2019est cest cy, et assez pour faire mourir dix\nmilles hommes_ (I have said to you all things as they are, and enough\nto kill ten thousand men).\u201d Then the President gave over interrogating\nhim, and accepted his declaration as true. He was sent back to his\nchamber, and his accomplice, Fran\u00e7ois Prelati, the Italian priest,\nchemist, and alchemist, was brought out.\n\n    _Transcription of opposite page, being sample (photograph by\n    the author) of a Latin manuscript of the Record in the process\n    against Gilles de Retz, from the Archives of Loire-Inf\u00e9rieure,\n    Nantes, a page of his (extra-judicial) confession._\n\n    \u201choc facere illo anno quo defunctus avunculus suus dominus _de\n    la Suze_ decessit.\n\n    \u201cItem, interrogatus per ipsum dominum presidentem quis\n    eundem reum advisavit, consuluit vel instruxit ad predicta\n    facinora facienda, respondit quod hec de se ipso imaginatus\n    fuit, cogitavit, fecit, et perpetravit, nemine consulente\n    seu advertente aut ipsum ad hoc introducente, sed ex proprio\n    suo sensu et capite ac pro complicencia et delectacione suis\n    libidinosis explendis, et non pro quacumque alia intencione\n    seu fine, predicta peccata, scelera et delicta fecerat et\n    commiserat. Et, cum dictus dominus presidens, admirans, ut\n    dicebat, qualiter ipse reus hec premissa scelera et delicta\n    de se ipso et nemine instigante fecisset, ipsum reum iterum\n    summasset ut ex quo motivo seu intencione et ad quem finem\n    dictorum puerorum occisionem, cum eis commixtionem seu\n    pollucionem, et ipsorum cadaverum combustionem, et reliqua\n    scelera et peccata predicta fecisset, vellet ipse reus, ad sue\n    consciencie, ipsum verissimiliter accusantis, exonerationem,\n    et pro venia clementissimi Redemptoris inde super commissis\n    facilius obtinenda, plenius declarare: tune idem reus,\n    quasi quodammodo indignatus super tam sollicita et exacta\n    inquiscione dicti domini presidentis, dixit eidem verba que\n    secuntur gallice: _\u2018Helas, Monseigneur, vous vous tourmentez\n    et moy avecques\u2019_: cui reo dicenti dominus presidens ita\n    dixit gallice: _\u2018Je ne me tourmente point, mais je suis moult\n    esmerveill\u00e9 de ce que vous me dites et ne m\u2019en puis bonnement\n    contenter. Ainczois, je desire et vouldroye par vous en savoir\n    la pure verit\u00e9 pour les causes que je vous ay ja souventes foiz\n    dictes.\u2019_ Cui domino presidenti ipse reus tunc respondit, hec\n    dicens gallice: _\u2018Vrayement, il n\u2019y avoit autre cause, fin, ne\n    intencion que ce que je vous ay dit: je vous ay dit de plus\n    grans choses que n\u2019est cest cy, et assez pour faire mourir dix\n    mille hommes.\u2019_ Qui quidem dominis presidens tunc omisit ipsum\n    reum.\u201d\n\n[Illustration: Facsimile of folio page from archives of trial at\nNantes. Confession of Gilles de Retz.]\n\nPrelati had already confessed to the invocation of evil spirits, and\nthat he had made offerings of the blood and of the members of an\ninfant. Being interrogated, he made his formal confession, also reduced\nto writing, but it turned out that this was only a repetition of an\ninformal confession, so excited no great surprise. The interrogators\nseemed more interested in the invocation of demons than in the\nabduction and murder of the infants. Gilles and Fran\u00e7ois were brought\ntogether before the judges and the Bishop, and upon the conclusion of\nthe s\u00e9ance they were sent back to their respective prisons. On parting,\nGilles turned towards Fran\u00e7ois, and sobbing, embraced him with sorrow,\nand addressed to him his last words: \u201cAdieu, Fran\u00e7ois, my friend. Never\nagain will we see each other in this world. I pray that you may have\ngood patience and hope in God, and that we will see each other in the\ngreat joy of Paradise. Pray to God for me and I will pray for you.\u201d\n\nThey tenderly embraced each other and then separated, never to see each\nother again. This scene happened, and these two confessions were made,\nbefore the two officers in private audience, in chambers, as it were.\n\nOn the next day, Saturday, October 22d, the _judicial_ confession of\nGilles was made, and presented before the court. It is herewith given\nin the _proc\u00e8s-verbal_ of the session:\n\n    TRANSLATION OF THE CONFESSION OF GILLES DE RETZ.\n\n    \u201cOn Saturday, the 22d of the aforesaid month of October, the\n    aforesaid master Guillermus Champeillon, promoter, prosecutor,\n    on the one hand, and the aforesaid Gilles de Retz, defendant,\n    on the other, personally repaired to the trial before the\n    before-mentioned lords, the reverend Father, the Lord Bishop\n    of Nantes, and Brother John Blouyn, vicar of the said\n    Inquisitor, who had taken their seats in the tribunal there\n    in the aforesaid place at the vesper hour for the rendition\n    of justice. And acting in accordance with the assignment of\n    the day of trial on the motion of the said prosecutor, the\n    afore-mentioned lords, the Bishop of Nantes and Brother John\n    Blouyn, vicar of the aforesaid Inquisitor, asked the aforesaid\n    Gilles, defendant, whether he wished to say anything or make\n    any opposition or objection to (the evidence or charges)\n    produced or maintained in this case and similar cases. The\n    defendant, indeed, said and replied that he did not wish to\n    say anything, and fully and of his own accord, and with great\n    compunction and bitterness of heart, as was evident at first\n    sight, and with copious shedding of tears, confessed that\n    the already recorded [charges], elsewhere, as [mentioned]\n    above, extra-judicially confessed to, [namely] in his room in\n    presence of the aforesaid reverend Father, the Lord Bishop of\n    Saint-Brieuc, of master Pierre de l\u2019Hospital, the President,\n    of John de Touscheronde and of John Parvi, as well as all and\n    everything contained and described in the articles inserted\n    above, will be and are true. And adding to his extra-judicial\n    confession already inserted and not receding from it, which the\n    same accused wished right here [to be considered] as repeated\n    and declared, and as he stated, rectifying the defects if\n    perchance he had omitted anything in it, and moreover more\n    fully declaring and enlarging, he freely confessed some things\n    contained in a summary form in certain of the afore-mentioned\n    articles, and said, to wit, that he had committed and\n    perpetrated very many other greater and more enormous crimes\n    and sins against God and His commandments than are contained\n    in the articles already inserted, from the beginning of his\n    iniquitous youth against God and His writings, and that he\n    had offended our Saviour Himself by the evil training he had\n    had in his boyhood in which he had endeavoured to perform\n    whatever pleased him with unbridled rein and had given himself\n    to everything illicit; and imploring those present who had\n    children, that they have their sons brought up and trained in\n    their youth and boyhood in religious instruction and virtue.\n\n    \u201cAfter this confession, as it is already stated, judicially\n    given and made by the aforesaid Gilles de Retz, the accused,\n    of the contents in the aforesaid articles, and, [after] that\n    extra-judicial [confession] repeated and declared, the same\n    accused moreover made another confession of the following\n    tenor, separate and apart, in the presence of the reverend\n    Father in Christ, Lord John Prigencii, Bishop of Saint-Brieuc\n    and the nobleman Pierre de l\u2019Hospital, the above-mentioned\n    President of Brittany, and of John Abbatis, the shield-bearer,\n    and of me, John Parvi, notary public and general examiner\n    of the ecclesiastical court of Nantes, a second of the\n    secretaries of [this] cause and of similar causes, and of\n    John de Touscheronde, also secretary of the civil court of\n    the same place, concerning the afore-mentioned perpetrations,\n    crimes, and sins, embracing the vices and sins mentioned ...\n    [all] iniquitously committed by him: not only as much as is\n    perhaps contained in the aforewritten articles already freely\n    confessed to, by Gilles himself, the accused, and in order\n    that said secret confession be more widely published, the same\n    Gilles, defendant, thought it proper that, without departing\n    from the said extra-judicial confession made by him concerning\n    the said charges, but rather to strengthen and corroborate\n    it, the confession itself be published in the vernacular for\n    the benefit of the people and all then and there assisting,\n    of whom the greater part knew no Latin; that, however, an\n    introductory remark be added informing those present that the\n    culprit submitted to this general revelation of his guilt in\n    order by the shame this publication and confession of such\n    crimes committed by him would cause him, the more easily to\n    obtain from God pardon and remission for his sins and to have\n    wiped away the transgression committed by him. [He wished the\n    public to know] that during his youth he had always been\n    tenderly reared, had committed as much as in him lay and\n    with nothing to check his inclination, all the evil deeds he\n    could, had centred all his hope, intention, and work upon the\n    commission of illicit and shameful deeds and had employed [his\n    hope, intention, and work] in unlawful acts by perpetrating\n    said crimes--most earnestly beseeching and exhorting the\n    fathers, mothers, friends, and relatives of all youths to\n    guide their charges along the paths of honesty by setting them\n    a good example and instilling into them sound doctrine, and\n    to chastise every fault against good morals to save them from\n    the snares into which he himself had fallen. By this secret\n    confession which was examined and publicly read in court in\n    the presence of the said Gilles, defendant, and approved by\n    Gilles himself, the defendant, the said Gilles de Retz, the\n    defendant, manifested of his own accord before all present\n    and confessed that he, led by passion and the delight he took\n    in satisfying his carnal appetite--of which mention will be\n    made later on--had stolen or caused to be stolen very many\n    boys--the number he could not remember; that he had put these\n    boys to death and caused them to be killed and that with them\n    he had committed crimes and sins ... [that he had killed]\n    these boys, sometimes himself with his own hand, and sometimes\n    through the agency of others and especially the above-mentioned\n    Gilles de Sill\u00e9, the Lord Roger Briqueville, soldier, Henriet\n    et Poitou, Rossignol and Little Robin, by various kinds and\n    modes of torture, some by the amputation and separation of\n    their heads from their bodies using daggers or poniards and\n    knives; others, however, with sticks or other implements for\n    striking by beating them on the head with violent blows;\n    others again by tying them with cords and fastening them to\n    some door or iron hook ... in his own room that they might be\n    strangled and languish. [He continued] that with these boys\n    even whilst languishing ... and after their death he took\n    delight in kissing, in gazing intently at those who had the\n    more beautifully formed heads and in cruelly opening or causing\n    to be opened their bodies that he might see their interior, and\n    that frequently, whilst these boys were dying, he would sit\n    on their stomachs and take great pleasure in seeing them thus\n    dying, and that he used to laugh heartily at the sight with the\n    said Corrillaud and Henriet. The corpses he caused afterwards\n    to be burned and reduced to ashes by the same Corrillaud and\n    Henriet and others.\n\n    \u201cInterrogated concerning the places where he had perpetrated\n    the afore-mentioned crimes and at what time he had begun to\n    do these things and concerning the number of those killed\n    after this manner, he answered and said that [first he had\n    done so] in the Ch\u00e2teau de Champtoc\u00e9 and from that year on in\n    which lived the lord de la Suze, the maternal uncle of said\n    defendant; that in this place he had killed and caused to be\n    killed very many boys--the number he could not remember--\n    ... the aforesaid Gilles de la Sill\u00e9 alone knowing of the\n    matter at that time; but that afterwards the aforesaid Roger\n    de Briqueville and then Henriet, Stephen Corrillaud (_alias_\n    Poitou), Rossignol, and Robin became successively his\n    accomplices and sharers in these crimes. And he said that the\n    bones both of the heads and the bodies of the boys killed in\n    the aforesaid Ch\u00e2teau de Champtoc\u00e9, as has been stated, which\n    had been thrown into the lower apartment of a certain tower\n    of that castle, he himself, defendant, produced from that\n    spot, placed in coffins or chests, and transported by water to\n    the place and castle of Machecoul aforesaid, burned there and\n    caused to be reduced to ashes; that also, in the same place of\n    Machecoul, he himself, defendant, seized, killed, and caused to\n    be stolen and killed many other boys in large numbers--how many\n    he could not recollect; and that, again, in the manor called\n    la Suze, of Nantes, which he, Gilles, defendant, then owned,\n    he had similarly killed and caused to be killed, burned, and\n    reduced to ashes many other boys of whom he could not remember\n    the numbers.... The same Gilles de Retz, defendant, narrated\n    and confessed that all misdeeds, crimes, and transgressions\n    above mentioned he committed and criminally perpetrated of his\n    own free will and accord alone, for the purpose of satisfying\n    his evil and iniquitous complacency and pleasure and not out of\n    any other motive or intention, with no one to urge or advise\n    him, defendant, or even to call to his attention such thoughts.\n\n    \u201cFurthermore, he declared and confessed that, after the\n    expiration of a year and a half, the Lord Eustace Blanchet\n    aforesaid summoned the aforesaid Fran\u00e7ois Prelati from the\n    country of Florence in Lombardy and invited him to the same\n    Gilles, defendant, for the purpose of invoking demons according\n    to the intention of the defendant, and that Fran\u00e7ois, summoned\n    to the same defendant, informed him that he, Fran\u00e7ois, had\n    discovered in the country whence he had come means of conjuring\n    up a certain spirit by the aid of incantations, which spirit\n    had promised him, Fran\u00e7ois, that he would cause a certain demon\n    called _Barron_ to come to him, Fran\u00e7ois, as often as the same\n    Fran\u00e7ois might desire.\n\n    \u201cLikewise, the same Gilles de Retz declared and confessed\n    that the same Fran\u00e7ois made several invocations of demons\n    in compliance with a command of himself, defendant, both\n    during his absence and sometimes when he was present, and\n    that he himself, defendant, was in person present at three\n    such invocations of Fran\u00e7ois who made them: One in the\n    Ch\u00e2teau Tiffauges, another in Bourgneuf de Retz, aforesaid,\n    and that concerning the third aforesaid invocation he did\n    not recall in which place it was made. And he added that the\n    said Lord Eustace knew that the said Fran\u00e7ois was making such\n    invocations, but that the same Lord Eustace was not present\n    at these invocations, since neither the defendant himself nor\n    Fran\u00e7ois would permit him to be present at the incantations,\n    as the same Lord Eustace had an indirect, evil, and restless\n    tongue.\n\n    \u201cBesides, the selfsame defendant declared and confessed that\n    during these invocations there were traced as characters on\n    the ground figures of a circle and a cross, and that the same\n    Fran\u00e7ois possessed a book which he had carried about his\n    person, as he used to say, which contained many names of demons\n    and formul\u00e6 for the making of such conjurations and invocations\n    of demons, which names and formul\u00e6 he, defendant, could not\n    remember; that the said Fran\u00e7ois held and read this book for\n    about two hours during and for each invocation; but that at\n    none of his own conjurations or invocations the defendant saw\n    or noticed any devil, and that none spoke to him, at which he,\n    defendant, was much displeased and vexed.\n\n    \u201cAfterwards the same defendant declared and confessed that\n    after a certain invocation made by the said Fran\u00e7ois during\n    the absence of the said defendant, the same Fran\u00e7ois on his\n    return from that very invocation informed the said defendant\n    that he, Fran\u00e7ois, had seen and addressed the said _Barron_,\n    who had told him, Fran\u00e7ois, that he, _Barron_, did not appear\n    to the said defendant because the defendant had deceived\n    _Barron_ regarding some promises read by the said defendant\n    to the said _Barron_ and because he had not fulfilled his\n    promise. Hearing this, the said defendant bade Fran\u00e7ois ask the\n    same devil what he wished to receive from the said defendant\n    and that whatever the same _Barron_ might wish to receive\n    and ask of the said defendant, he, the defendant, would give\n    him--except his soul and life and provided the devil would\n    give and grant him, defendant, whatsoever he would ask. The\n    defendant added then that it had been and was his intention\n    to ask and acquire from the same devil knowledge, riches, and\n    power, by the possession and aid of which he, defendant, would\n    be enabled to return to his former state of dominion and power;\n    and that, afterward, the same Fran\u00e7ois told the said defendant\n    that he had conversed with the devil and that the said devil,\n    among other things, required and wished that the defendant\n    present to him, the devil, a limb or limbs of some infant.\n    That the defendant, later, delivered to the said Fran\u00e7ois the\n    hand, heart, and eyes of an infant to be offered and given to\n    the same devil by the said Fran\u00e7ois, on the part of the said\n    defendant.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the said Gilles de Retz, defendant, declared and\n    confessed that before he, defendant, took part in the second\n    of the three aforesaid invocations at which he assisted in\n    person as is stated above, he [defendant] wrote and signed\n    with his own hand a grant ... to the bottom of which he\n    appended his name in the vernacular, videlicet \u2018Gilles,\u2019 the\n    contents of which, however, he does not remember; which grant\n    he composed and signed with the intention of handing it over\n    to the devil if and while he came, conjured or summoned by\n    the said Fran\u00e7ois, and this he did acting upon the advice of\n    the said Fran\u00e7ois, who previously had told the defendant that\n    he, the defendant, must hand over that grant to the devil as\n    soon as the spirit should come or approach: and that during\n    this invocation the defendant continually held that grant in\n    his hand waiting to hear the promise and agreement concerning\n    which Fran\u00e7ois and the devil should come to terms regarding\n    the matters which the said defendant was to promise and to do\n    for the devil, who did not appear or speak with them so that,\n    accordingly, the defendant did not ever hand over the mentioned\n    grant.\n\n    \u201cAgain, said defendant declared and confessed that he himself\n    sent the aforesaid Stephen Corrillaud, _alias_ Poitou, along\n    with the said Fran\u00e7ois, as Fran\u00e7ois was one night going out\n    to make one of the aforesaid invocations. These two on their\n    return, drenched by a heavy rainstorm, stated to the said\n    defendant that during the invocation nothing had come to them.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the said defendant declared and confessed that wishing\n    to assist at a certain invocation which Fran\u00e7ois proposed to\n    make, the latter expressed his dissatisfaction that Gilles\n    should then be present at the invocation. Returning from the\n    invocation, he told the said defendant that, if he had been\n    present at the invocation, he would have run great risk, for at\n    that invocation there came and appeared a serpent to the same\n    Fran\u00e7ois which filled him with great fear: hearing this the\n    said defendant after taking and causing to be carried near him\n    a particle of the True Cross in his possession, expressed a\n    longing to go to the spot of the said invocation where the said\n    Fran\u00e7ois claimed to have seen the reptile. This, however, he\n    did not in deference to Fran\u00e7ois\u2019s prohibition.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the same Gilles de Retz, defendant, declared and\n    confessed that at one of the three aforesaid invocations at\n    which he assisted, as is stated above, the said Fran\u00e7ois\n    informed him that he, Fran\u00e7ois, had seen the said _Barron_ who\n    showed him a large quantity of gold and, among other things, an\n    ingot of gold; but the said defendant said he had seen neither\n    the devil nor the said ingot but only a sort of gold-leaf\n    [_auripelli aurum-pellis_ (?)] under the form of a leaf of gold\n    which he, defendant, did not touch.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the said defendant declared and confessed subsequently\n    that when he was recently at the court of the most illustrious\n    Lord and Prince, the Lord of Brittany, in the Canton Jocelin,\n    of the diocese of Maclovia he, defendant, caused to be killed\n    several boys furnished him by the aforesaid Henriet, ... in the\n    above stated manner.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the same defendant declared and confessed that the said\n    Fran\u00e7ois, acting on the instigation and during the absence of\n    the defendant, performed there, viz. at Jocelin, an invocation\n    of the demons, at which he learned that nothing took place.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the said defendant, setting out from Bituris, dismissed\n    the said Fran\u00e7ois at the same Ch\u00e2teau de Tiffauges, asking\n    him meanwhile and during the absence of the said defendant\n    to attend and devote himself diligently to such incantations,\n    and to repeat to the defendant whatsoever he would learn, do,\n    and think in that regard; and that Fran\u00e7ois wrote to him, the\n    absent defendant, as has been stated, in cipher, called in\n    French _par paroles couvertes_, that his transactions went on\n    satisfactorily and that at this time the same Fran\u00e7ois sent\n    him, the defendant, a certain object after the manner of an\n    ointment lodged in a silver capsule and purse (_bursa_) also\n    made of silver, the said Fran\u00e7ois writing at the same time to\n    the aforesaid defendant that this was an entirely precious\n    object and advising the said defendant furthermore in his\n    letter to guard the object solicitously. The defendant, giving\n    credence to this admonition of the said Fran\u00e7ois, hung the\n    object with the above-mentioned _bursa_ about his neck and wore\n    it for several days thus suspended; afterwards, however, the\n    defendant removed the object from his neck and threw it away,\n    as he discovered that it would not in the least benefit him.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the same defendant declared and confessed that the said\n    Fran\u00e7ois once told him that the aforesaid _Barron_ bade the\n    defendant feed, in the name of the said _Barron_, three poor\n    men on three great feasts, which the defendant did on a certain\n    All Saints\u2019 Day, and only once.\n\n    \u201cInterrogated why he thus kept in his house and about his\n    person the afore-mentioned Fran\u00e7ois, he made answer that\n    Fran\u00e7ois was clever, valuable to him, and pleasant company\n    because he spoke Latin beautifully and charmingly, and because,\n    furthermore, he showed himself anxious concerning the proper\n    administration of his affairs.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the said defendant declared and confessed that, after\n    the last festival of St. John the Baptist, a certain handsome\n    youth who stayed with a man named Rodigus dwelling in the\n    aforesaid Place Bourgneuf de Retz, was one night brought to\n    him, defendant, as he dwelt in the same place, by the said\n    Henriet and Stephen Corrillaud, _alias_ Poitou, and that during\n    that night the defendant ... caused him to be killed and to be\n    burned near Machecoul.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the said defendant declared and confessed that, news\n    having reached him that the soldiers of the municipal fortress\n    of Paluau strove to put to death the captain of the fortress,\n    St. Stephen de Mala, when, indignant at this, he, defendant,\n    set out with his men and rode on a certain day, which he did\n    not remember, from daybreak intending to attack the soldiery of\n    the fortress of Paluau, seize them, and punish them if he could\n    meet them, the said Fran\u00e7ois, who rode among the others in the\n    retinue of the said defendant, foretold from the start of this\n    expedition that the defendant would not find on that day the\n    said soldiery of the fortress of Paluau, and that in fact he\n    did not meet them, so that the intention of the defendant was\n    frustrated.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the same Gilles de Retz declared and confessed that\n    he had detained in his power and caused to be killed two\n    apprentices, one of Guillemain Sanxaye and the other of Petri\n    Jaquet, named Princzay or Princ\u00e9....\n\n    \u201cAgain, the said defendant declared and confessed in court\n    that, at the time of his last stay at Vienne (_Veneti_) in the\n    month of last July, Andrew Buschet handed over and delivered\n    up to the said Gilles, defendant, in the dwelling house of\n    a certain John Lemoyne at which the said Gilles, defendant,\n    was at that time enjoying hospitality, a certain boy, ... and\n    that he himself afterwards caused the said Poitou to throw the\n    killed lad into the privy of a residence belonging to a certain\n    Boetdan, close by the residence of the said Lemoyne, in which\n    residence or house of Boetdan the horses of said defendant had\n    been sheltered (_apud marchiliam_) near the market-place of\n    said Vienne, and that Poitou for this purpose flooded the privy\n    so as to submerge and cover the corpse of said boy, lest it be\n    discovered.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the said Gilles similarly declared and confessed that\n    before the arrival of the aforesaid Fran\u00e7ois he had had other\n    conjurors of demons, that is to say, a certain trumpeter\n    called de Mesnill, master John Ripparia, a certain Louis,\n    master Anthony de Palermo, and another whose name he could\n    not remember; that these conjurors at the instigation of said\n    Gilles, defendant, made several incantations of spirits, at\n    some of which the said Gilles, defendant, was present in\n    person, both near the aforesaid Ch\u00e2teau de Machecoul and\n    elsewhere [and that he attended], principally to see the circle\n    or outline or sign of a circle drawn on the ground prior to\n    the incantation, with the intention of seeing the devil, of\n    speaking with him, and making bargains with him. But the same\n    defendant declared that he never could see nor converse with\n    the said devil, though for this purpose he had taken all the\n    pains he could, so that indeed it was not the fault of the said\n    defendant that he did not see the devil nor converse with him.\n\n    \u201cAgain, the frequently mentioned Gilles declared and confessed\n    that the aforesaid de Mesnill, wizard, informed the defendant\n    once that the devil, in order to do and fulfil the things\n    which the said defendant intended to ask and obtain from the\n    said devil, desired to receive from the said defendant a\n    grant, written, made by him, defendant, with his own hand,\n    and signed with the blood of one of his fingers, in which\n    grant the aforesaid defendant should promise to give to the\n    said devil whenever he appeared during the invocation of the\n    said defendant, certain things which he, defendant, could\n    not remember; and that the same defendant, for this purpose\n    and end, signed the said grant with his own hand, with blood\n    drawn from his little finger, and subjoined his own name to\n    the said grant, i. e., _Gilles_ [see p. 22]. That he could not\n    accurately remember the other statements contained in this\n    grant, except that he promised by the honour of said grant to\n    deliver up to said devil the articles mentioned in the grant,\n    provided that the devil would give or grant the same Gilles\n    knowledge, power, and riches. But the defendant is quite\n    certain, as he says, that whatsoever he may have promised the\n    devil by this or other grants, he always and decidedly made\n    exception of and reserved his soul and his life: and he says\n    that this grant was not handed to the devil at this time, since\n    he did not appear to the said Gilles, defendant, at or during\n    said incantation.\n\n    \u201cFurthermore, the said defendant likewise declared and\n    confessed that once the said master John Ripparia made one of\n    his invocations in a wood or grove situated near the Ch\u00e2teau\n    de Pouzauges, and that this Ripparia, before going to make\n    this invocation, armed himself with weapons and implements of\n    protection to his body, and thus armed he approached the said\n    grove intending to make the invocation;--and that, when the\n    said defendant, accompanied by his servants and, especially,\n    by Eustace, Henriet, and Stephen Corrillaud, _alias_ Poitou,\n    aforesaid, started after a little while towards the said grove\n    and met the said de Ripparia returning from that grove, then\n    the said de Ripparia told the said Gilles, defendant, that he\n    had seen the devil coming to him in the guise of a leopard\n    that passed in front of him and told something to him, de\n    Ripparia, which, as he said, infused great fear into the said\n    de Ripparia. And the defendant added in his narration, that\n    the said de Ripparia, to whom the defendant had given the sum\n    of twenty louis d\u2019or (_regalium auri_), took his departure\n    after this invocation, promising to return later to the said\n    defendant, which he did not do.\n\n    \u201cSimilarly, the same accused said and confessed that when\n    another invocation of the demons which the accused and a\n    certain one of the above-mentioned invocators, whose name\n    is not mentioned, and who was an associate of Gilles de la\n    Sill\u00e9, made in a certain room of the above-mentioned Ch\u00e2teau\n    Tiffauges, de la Sill\u00e9 himself did not attempt to enter\n    the circle or circular sign made in the said room for the\n    invocation, nay, rather, he withdrew to a window of that room\n    with the intention of jumping out if he should feel anything\n    terrible approach, there holding in his arms an image of the\n    Blessed Virgin Mary; and the said accused standing within\n    the circular sign, feared very much, and especially as the\n    said invocator forbade him to make the sign of the cross, as\n    otherwise they, the accused and the invocator, would be in\n    great danger, nor did the accused for this reason attempt\n    to make that sign, but then remembering a certain prayer\n    of the Blessed Virgin Mary which begins \u2018_Alma_,\u2019[4] said\n    invocator ordered the said accused to go out of the circle, and\n    withdrawing quickly and going out of the room, the invocator\n    being left remaining there, and the door of the room being\n    closed by the above-said invocator, he went to the aforesaid\n    Gilles de la Sill\u00e9, who forthwith said to the accused that the\n    invocator thus left in the room was beaten and struck to such\n    an extent as if the striking was done by kicking. And when the\n    accused heard this, he opened the room right away, and in the\n    entrance of the room said accused saw said invocator [lying]\n    on his face, grievously wounded and weakened in other parts\n    of his body, among other strokes and blows then sustained by\n    said invocator, ... in the forehead and otherwise wounded so\n    that the invocator could not support himself, wherefore said\n    accused, fearing that said invocator by reason of that beating\n    would die, wanted and made said invocator receive the sacrament\n    of confession; he, however, did not die, but got well after\n    that same trouncing.\n\n    [4] _Alma Redemptoris Mater_, an anthem chanted during Advent.\n\n\u201cThe said Gilles de Retz, accused, also said and confessed that he\ncommissioned the aforesaid Gilles de la Sill\u00e9 [to go] to the upper\ncountry to look for and bring to said Gilles, accused, invocators of\ndemons or malignant spirits. And that this Gilles de la Sill\u00e9, thus\ncommissioned and then having returned, related to the same Gilles,\naccused, how he, de Sill\u00e9, had found a woman who occupied herself with\nsuch invocations, and that she said to the same de Sill\u00e9 that unless\nGilles de Retz would remove his heart from the Church and his chapel,\nhe could never fulfil his intention; and that the said de Sill\u00e9 found\nin those parts another woman who had said to the same de Sill\u00e9 that\nunless the said accused would desist and cease from a certain work\non which he was intent and which he desired to follow out, he would\nnever have a day\u2019s luck. Also, said de Sill\u00e9 had found in these parts\nan invocator whom the said de Sill\u00e9 proposed and began, as he said,\nto conduct to the said accused, but that on the way, the invocator,\nbeing disposed to come to the said accused, as he was crossing a\nriver or stream, accidentally fell in. Also said Gilles, accused,\nsaid and confessed that de Sill\u00e9 brought another invocator to said\naccused and that he died without delay; in and from the obsequies of\nsuch unfortunate deceased and from other previous difficulties, which\ninterfering he could not come to the aforesaid invocations and his\nother damnable intentions; he said that he believed the Divine clemency\nand intercessory prayers of the Church, from which his heart and hope\nnever deviated, mercifully preserved him from perishing in such risks\nand dangers, and for this reason he proposed to desist from his bad\nlife for the future and to visit the [holy] places in Jerusalem and\nto visit abroad the principal places of the life and Passion of his\nRedeemer, and to perform other [penances] by which he might mercifully\nobtain from his Redeemer the pardon of his sins. Wherefore, after he\nhad said and confessed freely and of his own accord the aforesaid\nthings at the trial, as recorded, he exhorted the people there present,\nand especially the ecclesiastics who were present in the majority, that\nthey always hold in reverence and in the highest esteem holy Mother\nChurch and never depart from it, especially adding that had he, the\naccused, not directed and attached his heart and mind to the Church,\nhe could never have escaped the malice and schemes of the devil, nay,\nrather he believed that the devil would long since have strangled him\nand almost have carried off his soul by reason of his enormous crimes\nand sins; and he, moreover, exhorted every head of a family to avoid\npermitting their children\u2019s being clothed in soft raiment and living\nin idleness, hinting and asserting that from idleness and excess at\ntable many evils spring, more expressly declaring in his own case that\nidleness and the too frequent and too choice partaking of delicate\nmeats and blood-stirring wines were the chief sources of his having\ncommitted so many sins and crimes.\n\n\u201cFor which sins and crimes committed by him, as stated, he, Gilles\nde Retz, accused, humbly and in tears begged mercy and pardon of his\nCreator and Most Holy Redeemer, as well as of the parents and friends\nof the aforesaid children cruelly murdered, and of all others whom he\nhad sinned against, or injured, both those there present or elsewhere,\nand the help of the devout prayers of all Christ\u2019s faithful and\nChrist\u2019s worshippers, both present and absent.\n\n\u201cWherefore the aforesaid master, Guillermus Chapeillon, promoter in\ncase of said Gilles de Retz, accused, having the free confession of the\nmatter and the other facts legitimately proved against same accused,\nimmediately asked that a certain day and suitable closing day of\ntrial for same Gilles de Retz, accused, be preferred and assigned for\nbringing [trial] to an end, and seeing to its being brought to an end\nas well as for judgment and definite sentence [being pronounced] by\nsaid reverend Father in Christ, the Lord Bishop of Nantes, and Brother\nJohn Blouyn, vicar of said Inquisition, and by every one of them or\nof those, and by those assigned and deputed to this [trial], and made\nin writing and promulgated in [this] trial and trials of this kind:\nor that said Gilles de Retz, accused, should state cause, if he had a\nreasonable one, why this should not be done. Whereupon the lords, the\nBishop, and the vicar of the aforesaid Inquisition said that Tuesday\nnext was fixed, determined on, and assigned for the prosecutor and for\nGilles de Retz, accused, he not opposing it, to proceed to justice, as\nit might seem necessary in this and similar trials.\n\n\u201cOf the aforesaid [things], said prosecutor asked that one and several\ndocuments be made and drawn up for him by us, the subscribed notaries\nand scribes. There were present in aforesaid place [of trial] reverend\nFather in Christ, Lord Jean Prigencii, Bishop of St. Brieuc, master\nPierre de l\u2019Hospital, President of Brittany, Robert de Ripparia and\nLord Robert d\u2019Espinay, aforesaid soldier, and the nobleman Yvone de\nRocerff, as well as the honourable men, masters Yvon Coyer, dean, John\nMorelli, chanter, Graciano Ruitz, Guillermo Groygueti, licentiate of\nlaws, Jean de Castrogironis, Peter Aprilis, Robert Vigerii, Gauffredo\nde Chevigneyo, licentiate of laws, the seigniors of Nantes, Gauffredo\nPiperarii, capicerio, Peter Hamonis, John Guerrine, John Vaedie, and\nJohn Symonis, the canons of the Church of the Blessed Mary of Nantes\nand St. Brieuc, Herveo Levy, Seneschal Corisopitensi, and master\nGuillermo de la Loherie, licentiate of laws, advocate of the secular\ncourt of Nantes, as well as several other witnesses gathered in [that]\ngreat crowd, being specially summoned and called for the aforesaid\nthings.\n\n                        (Signed)\u00a0\u00a0\u201cDE ALNETO. }\n                                  \u201cJO. PARVI. }    Notaries.\u201d\n                                  \u201cG. LESNE.  }\n\nBy this time all hope seemed to have departed from Gilles. He had none\nof the bravado that sustained him at the beginning of the trial. He\napparently had recognised his condition and had thrown himself upon\nthe mercy of God. One can easily understand how he was thus affected\nwhile under the influence of the saintly churchmen by whom he was\nsurrounded, with their prayers and beseechings that if his body was\nto be condemned for the deeds done, he should at least save his soul\nfrom the fires of hell. When Gilles was interrogated before the court\nas to the genuineness of this confession, and asked if he desired to\nmake any retraction or explanation, he seemed to add to, rather than\ndetract from, it; and believing, as was probably the truth, that he\ncould only save his soul by making a surrender of all his thoughts and\na confession of all his sins, he seemed to insist on having the record\nof his crimes made fuller and in greater detail, so that none of them,\neven with all their horror, should be omitted. It was during this\nsession that he used the remarkable words partially quoted in the early\npart of this book, page 7:\n\n    \u201cIf I have so much offended against God, I owe it, alas, to the\n    evil direction that I received in my youth. I went, at that\n    time, the reins upon my neck, free to pursue all my pleasures,\n    and did not restrain myself from anything evil.\u201d\n\nAnd addressing himself to the parents in the crowd, he said:\n\n    \u201cO you, who have sons and daughters, I pray you to instruct\n    them in good doctrine in their infancy and their youth, and to\n    lead them with care in the paths of virtue.\u201d\n\nThe relief produced on his mind by his confession, casting off the\ngreat load he had been carrying, caused his spirits to rise to a\ncontemplation of the situation, which produced a calm, if not a joy, in\nthe assurance that he had made his peace with God and secured a place\nin Paradise. Apparently stimulated by this feeling, he grew eloquent,\nand though some of the words may have been put into his mouth by those\nwho reported him, yet one can easily see that he was filled with\nemotion, and that the thoughts crowded thick upon him because of his\nbelief that in this way his soul had escaped hell fire:\n\n    \u201cJudged by the declaration that I have made here, of the faults\n    of which I am culpable, by the shame which appears in my face,\n    I hope to obtain more easily the Grace of God and the remission\n    of my sins. I think they will be easier forgotten in His mercy.\n    My entire youth was passed in the delicacies of the table, I\n    was subject to my caprices, nothing to me was sacred, all the\n    evils that I could do have been accomplished. In this I put\n    all my hope, all my thought, all my care. Everything that was\n    prohibited, everything that was dishonest, attracted me, and\n    in order to obtain it there was no means, however shameful and\n    disgraceful, that I was not ready to employ.\u201d\n\nAddressing himself this time to the public present, he said:\n\n    \u201cFathers and mothers who hear me, and you all, friends,\n    relatives, and guardians of the young whom you love, whoever\n    you may be, I pray you be watchful over them, form for them\n    good manners, set for them a good example, teach them healthy\n    doctrine, nourish them in your hearts, but above all, do not\n    fear to correct their faults, for, as I myself have been, so is\n    it possible for them to become, and so likewise, they may fall\n    into the same abyss.\u201d\n\nAs he sat down amidst the silence of that awful hour, a visible\nshudder ran over the audience; judges and priests, accustomed, one to\ncondemn, the other to console, both hearing these terrible confessions\nof evil deeds, were visibly affected. Before any word or business could\nbe spoken, Gilles arose again to say another word:\n\n    \u201cWhatever may be the perils of my soul, I am still not drowned\n    or lost--I am redeemable, and I believe that the clemencies\n    of God and the suffrages of the holy Church, in which I have\n    always put my hope and my heart, have succoured me with such\n    mercy. To all who hear me, clerks and priests of the Church,\n    I would say: love always our holy Mother Church, revere her,\n    give to her always the greatest respect. If I had not had this\n    reverence and respect for her in my heart and in my affliction,\n    I never would have been able to escape the hands of the demon.\n    The nature of my crimes is such, that without the protection of\n    the Church, the demon would have strangled me and carried me,\n    soul and body, to the depths.\u201d\n\nIt is reported that, addressing for a third time the fathers of\nfamilies, he said:\n\n    \u201cGuard you well, I pray you, to lift your infants above the\n    delicacies of life and the fatal sweetness of idleness, for the\n    excesses of appetite and the habits of idleness give rise to\n    the greatest evils. Idleness, the delicacies of the table, the\n    frequent use of wine, drinking, appetite, drunkenness, these\n    things are the causes of my faults and my crimes. O God, my\n    Creator and my well-beloved Redeemer, I ask mercy and pardon!\n    And you, parents and friends of the infants that I have so\n    cruelly put to death, you against whom I have sinned and whom I\n    have so nearly destroyed, present or absent, in whatever place\n    you may be, as Christians and faithfuls of Jesus Christ, I pray\n    you on my knees and with tears, to accord to me, oh, to give to\n    me, the succour and aid of your pious prayers.\u201d\n\nThe effect of these words can be better understood than described. Amid\nthe impressive silence of such a spectacle, nothing was to be said.\nThe court adjourned until the next day, Tuesday, October 25th, and the\ncrowd poured silently and sorrowfully into the streets on their way to\ntheir homes, each heart filled with the most profound emotions, and\neach person cherishing the remembrance of the most solemn scene he had\never witnessed and the gravest advice he had ever heard.\n\nThe session of the next day was to hear the sentence of the court.\nIt had been reduced to writing, and was read by the clerk, Jacques\nPencoetdic, an official of the church of Nantes:\n\n    \u201cIn the holy name of Christ, we, Jean, Bishop of Nantes, and\n    Brother Jean Blouyn, Bachelor of Holy Scripture of the order\n    of Friars Preachers and the Delegate for the Inquisitor for\n    heresy for the city and diocese of Nantes, in session as\n    attributed, and having nothing before our eyes but God alone,\n    the advice and consent of our Lord Bishop, the Jurisconsuls,\n    the doctors, professors of Holy Scripture here present; after\n    having examined all the depositions of the witnesses in charge\n    called in our own name and in the name of the prosecutor\n    deputised by us, against Gilles de Retz, our subject, and\n    under our jurisdiction, after having reduced to writing and\n    digested the depositions, after having heard his own proper\n    confession made spontaneously in our presence, and after having\n    weighed and considered these and all other reasons which can\n    affect our determination, we pronounce, we decide, we declare,\n    that thou, Gilles de Retz, cited before our tribunal, art\n    shamefully culpable of heresy, apostacy, invocation of demons;\n    that for these crimes, thou hast incurred the sentence of\n    excommunication and all the other punishments determined by\n    right and by law; and, finally, thou oughtest to be punished\n    and corrected according to the will of the law and the\n    exigencies of the holy canons, as an heretic, apostate, and\n    invocator of demons.\u201d\n\nThe second sentence was in similar language, concluding, however, as\nfollows:\n\n    \u201cThou, Gilles de Retz, hast shamefully committed crimes with\n    infants of one or the other sex; thou hast committed sacrilege;\n    hast violated the immunities of the Church; by these crimes,\n    thou hast incurred the sentence of excommunication and all\n    other punishments fixed by law; and thou art, by consequence,\n    to be punished and corrected according to thy salvation and the\n    will and exigencies of law and the holy canons.\u201d\n\nAll Gilles\u2019s fears returned when he realised that he was to be\nconvicted of heresy and condemned to excommunication. Falling on his\nknees, tears in his eyes, trembling, he humbly pleaded and begged the\njudges to lift from his life, now so near ended and so worthless, this\nexcommunication. After consultation together, it was determined by the\nBishop and the Vice-Inquisitor to grant this prayer, and the decree of\nexcommunication was annulled in the usual form. Gilles was admitted to\nthe administration of the Holy Sacraments, and permission given him to\ncommune with the faithful. Gilles immediately demanded the appointment\nof a priest to hear him in confession, that he might profess his\npenitence and receive absolution from his sins, and the Fr\u00e8re Jean\nJuvenal, a Carmelite of Plouarmel, was designated for that purpose.\n\nSo terminated the ecclesiastical trial of Gilles de Retz. It commenced\non the 17th of September and lasted one month and eight days. It ended\nin his conviction of the only crimes of which the ecclesiastical court\nhad jurisdiction, to wit, heresy, apostacy, and invocation of demons.\nThe sentence was excommunication, which, we have seen, was lifted, and\nthe final outcome of this trial was the repentance of Gilles de Retz.\n\nNow we turn to the process instituted by the civil tribunal for the\ntrial of Gilles upon other charges than those of which he was convicted\nby the ecclesiastical court. The usual close of the sentence of an\necclesiastical court, wherein the accused was charged with other crimes\nthan those with which the court had jurisdiction, would be: \u201cGo in\npeace, the Church can no longer defend thee, she delivers thee to the\nsecular arm\u201d (_bras s\u00e9culier_). But this declaration was not made; it\nwas useless, for it was well known to the judges that the civil court\nhad already been organised and had taken cognisance and jurisdiction\nof the various crimes of Gilles, such as had been charged and so well\nproved before the ecclesiastical court.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nTHE TRIAL BEFORE THE CIVIL COURT\n\n  _Trial before the Civil Court--Depositions--Conviction and Sentence_\n\n\nUpon the arrest of Gilles and his henchmen, and during their trial\nbefore the ecclesiastical court, the army of retainers which had been\nemployed by him, including his chapel and all his familiars, fled as\nwould a flock of young chickens on the approach of a hawk. Fran\u00e7ois\nPrelati, Eustache Blanchet, Henriet Griard, and Poitou seem to have\nbeen all who were arrested with Gilles. Gilles de Sill\u00e9 and Roger\nde Briqueville had fled to the south before the blow fell. The rest\ngot under cover as quickly as possible; instead of standing by their\nmaster, they got as far away from him as they could. Gilles was the\nonly one tried by the ecclesiastical tribunal. No particular reason\nhas been given why Fran\u00e7ois and Blanchet were not tried with him, for\nthey were undoubtedly guilty, equally with Gilles, of the charges of\nsorcery and invocation of demons; but they were priests, one of them an\nItalian priest, and whether they were promised freedom in consideration\nof their testimony against Gilles, is now unknown.\n\nWhen, on the 19th of October, it had been decided by the ecclesiastical\ncourt to apply the torture to Gilles, it was done on the confessions of\nhis accomplices. Why Fran\u00e7ois Prelati and Eustache Blanchet had been\nexcused or overlooked is, as has been said, unknown; but Henriet Griard\nand Poitou were then delivered to the civil court for trial. This civil\ncourt was presided over by Pierre de l\u2019Hospital, who, as has been\nseen, had assisted in the ecclesiastical court, and was necessarily\nofficially cognisant of the developments. Pierre de l\u2019Hospital was the\nchief justice of the duchy of Brittany, and the civil courts were under\nhis authority; so immediately after the confessions of Henriet and\nPoitou, they were transferred to the civil authorities, and Pierre de\nl\u2019Hospital, as supreme judge, brought them before the court on the 20th\nor 21st of October. The civil court held its session at the Bouffay,\nthen, and until 1848, the _Palais de Justice_. The Bouffay had been a\ncastle, but had been reconstructed and used as the _Palais de Justice_\nduring many centuries. It was in proximity to the Ch\u00e2teau de Nantes. It\nwas enclosed in a high wall, possibly to make a jail-yard, and occupied\nthe present Place, or Market, Bouffay.\n\nIt was within this palace yard that the celebrated trial by duel took\nplace, by direction or authority of the Duke of Brittany, between Count\nRobert Beaumanoir and Sieur Pierre Tournemine, on a charge of murder\nmade by the former against the latter.\n\nThe castle, or palace, has been destroyed, as well as the wall, and it\nnow stands all open. One side of the Place abuts on the river Loire,\nadjoining the Bridge de la Poissonerie, over which the prisoners were\ntaken to the Prairie Madeleine, the place of execution.\n\nThe proceedings of the civil court need not be followed in their\ndetails. Preparing for the trial, as is the custom of criminal courts\nin France, the prosecutor called the witnesses before him, and took\ndown their depositions, and it is worth our while to pause and\nexamine the record as it appears in the archives of the department of\nLoire-Inf\u00e9rieure.\n\nThe records of the two trials, the ecclesiastical and the civil, on\nfile in the Departmental Archives, are unequal in the extent and detail\nwith which they have been respectively reported. It is to be explained\nthat it is a considerable work, and scarcely possible to have been\ncompleted in all its parts as the trial progressed, without immense\nlabour on the part of the clerks and notaries. The proceedings of the\necclesiastical court, reported in Latin, comprise three hundred and\neight pages, of which the photograph on page 137 of this memoir is\na sample. The proceedings of the civil court, in French, comprise a\nhundred and nine pages, the two together making four hundred and twenty\npages in parchment, without including the sentence, which was in Latin,\nmuch mixed with French. The sentence is about the size of the original\nDeclaration of Independence of the United States. It is said to have\nbeen written in its entirety in a single night, and an inspection of it\ncorroborates the story, for it bears evidence, by way of erasures and\ninterlineations, of haste and rapid work.\n\nThe report of the evidence in the ecclesiastical trial is not nearly\nso satisfactory, nor has it been recorded so clearly, or with so much\ndetail, as was that in the civil court. It is also much more convenient\nto render that of the civil trial, and the author has, therefore, used\nit in making a transcript. (Appendix D.)\n\nIt must not be forgotten that the evidence was taken by deposition, out\nof court; that it was rendered, not in the language of the witness,\nbut of the scribe. The depositions were not signed by the witnesses,\nbut were reported to the court under the signature of the notary or\ncommissioner. Eighty-six witnesses were examined, and their testimony\nappears to have been reduced to writing by Jean Colin, and certified\nto by Jean de Touscheronde. The dates of the various sessions are\nnot given, but each witness, or each batch of witnesses, appears to\nhave been examined independently and certified to separately. This\nexamination of witnesses in the civil court seems to have begun about\nas early as did that in the ecclesiastical trial, for the first record\nis under date of September 18, 1440. For the purpose of showing the\nstyle of the French language in use at that time, that it may be\ncompared with modern French, and the changes noted, the heading of\nthese depositions is here reproduced textually:\n\n                        \u201cSeptember 18, 1440.\n\n    \u201cInformacion et enqueste a trouver, se estre peut, que le sire\n    de Rais, ses gens et complices, out prins et fait prandre\n    pluseurs petiz enffans et autres gens, et les murtriz et occiis\n    pour en avoir le sang, le cueur, le faye et autres parties\n    d\u2019elx, pour en faire sacrifice au deable, et autres malefices,\n    de quoy il est grant clamour. Celle enqueste faite par Jehan de\n    Touscheronde, commissaire de duc, nostre souverain seigneur, en\n    ceste matere, appell\u00e9 Jehan Colin, pour le prouchain tesmoign\n    que eust en sa compaignie, le xviii^e jour de septembre, l\u2019an\n    mil IIII C quarante.\u201d\n\nBefore reporting the testimony in the depositions against Gilles de\nRetz, and that it may be better understood, it should be explained that\nthere were two methods pursued by Gilles in the abduction of children:\none, the secret and forcible abduction, and the other the hiring of the\nchild for service as a page, or his being taken with the consent of\nthe parents on a pretended duty, by which he should be attached to the\nretinue of the Baron. Both systems were pursued, and, it is believed,\nalways by the followers and \u201cfamiliars\u201d of the Baron, for it does not\nappear that he was ever personally engaged in either. The demand\nof the parent for the presence of the child was always put off by\nindefinite statements: the boy was at another ch\u00e2teau, or he had gone\nwith the masters, or men-at-arms, and would be absent for an indefinite\ntime; sometimes, that he had gone to a distant province; other times,\nthat he had fled and was a fugitive, and they knew not his whereabouts.\nThese were all equivocal responses, and far from satisfactory to the\ndemanders; but out of them there grew the reports circulated through\nthe country, as set forth in the first pages of Chapter IV.\n\nOn the trial, Henriet Griart and Poitou made no defence, but pleaded\nguilty. They confessed openly their crime, and being pushed to detail,\nthey admitted that they had been concerned in the abduction of more\nthan fifty children, and Henriet added that during his last trip to\nJocelyn with Gilles de Retz, he had captured three of them with his own\nhands.\n\nThe confession of Henriet and of Corrillaud called Poitou, appears in\nthe records, and following it, on October 23d, is the condemnation by\nthe civil court under Pierre de l\u2019Hospital, as follows:\n\n    \u201cAfter the confession of the aforesaid Henriet and Poitou, and\n    on the advice of the assistants, advocates and others, heard\n    in the case, and considering all the facts, it was adjudged\n    and declared by the aforesaid seignior the President, that the\n    aforesaid Henriet and Poitou should, and ought to be, hung and\n    burned\u201d (_penduz et ars_).\n\nBut the execution of the sentence was postponed to await the conclusion\nof the trial of Gilles before the ecclesiastical court.\n\nOn the 25th of October, Gilles\u2019s sentence was passed upon him by\nthe ecclesiastical court, and he was turned over to the civil court\n(_bras s\u00e9culeir_). He was delivered to the prison at the Bouffay on\nthe same evening, and the next morning was brought before the civil\ncourt with Pierre de l\u2019Hospital as supreme judge. All hope of escape\nwas lost to Gilles, and, like his accomplices, he seemed to be more\ninterested for the salvation of his soul than care for his body. He\nmade no defence,--indeed defence was useless, for the trial was only a\nformality. Being charged with the crime of murder and interrogated as\nto the facts, he repeated his confession of guilt.\n\nIn the consultation of the court as to the sentence, there were some\ndifferences of opinion among the judges. That he merited death, there\nwas no question, and that appears to have been accepted by all. But as\nto the manner of death and the degree of odium to be attached thereto,\nthere was some debate. However, as he had been excommunicated by the\nChurch, as his accomplices had already been sentenced _penduz et ars_,\nand as the crime shocked all the world who knew of it, the argument\nprevailed that, as Gilles had been the chief promoter, and as he and\nhis two accomplices had been together in their crimes they should not\nbe separated in their punishments, and therefore first, a fine should\nbe upon him of fifty thousand pounds; and second, that he should be\nhung and burned alive on the gibbet of Piesse.\n\nPiesse was a little open prairie on the island of La Madeleine in the\nriver opposite, forming part of the city of Nantes. It was reached by\ntwo bridges communicating with the Place Bouffay.\n\nPierre de l\u2019Hospital in pronouncing the sentence upon Gilles, concluded:\n\n    \u201cYou have naught to rely upon now but the mercy of God; I ask\n    you so to dispose yourself as to die in good state, and to seek\n    repentance for having committed such great crimes. To-morrow,\n    at one o\u2019clock, the sentence against you will be carried into\n    effect.\u201d\n\nGilles preferred three petitions, through the judge, to the Bishop.\nOne, that the execution of the three, himself and his two servants,\nshould be at one and the same time, to the end that he might comfort\nand aid them by his presence upon that dread occasion; that they should\nsee that his execution actually took place, and should not be tormented\nwith the thought that either his wealth or power could procure the\npostponement of the execution, and finally, or possibly, a pardon.\nThe second was, that his ashes might be buried in consecrated ground;\nand when this prayer was granted, he chose the Carmelite church at\nNantes. The third was, that on the day of the execution, a procession\nof litany, such as was common in that country, should be organised to\nmake prayers to God for him and his two servants, that they might be\nsustained and supported in their repentance, and that their salvation\nmight be assured. Accordingly, on the morrow, at nine o\u2019clock, this\nprocession was organised and marched through the streets of the city in\nthe most solemn manner, headed by the clergy of all ranks, reciting the\nprayers for the dead.\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nTHE EXECUTION\n\n\nOn October 26, 1440, at eleven o\u2019clock, the time fixed, the procession\napproached the prison Bouffay; Gilles, Henriet, and Poitou were brought\nout, and with this long procession for an escort, were conducted\nacross the two bridges to the place of execution. The two courts,\necclesiastical and civil, were present, and it has been said that the\nDuke of Brittany was also present. Three gibbets had been erected with\ntheir cross-arms, and at the foot of each a pile of wood and fagots\n(_bucher_) was laid. It is needless to describe the details of the\nexecution. Some of them may be apocryphal; they were not recorded\nat the time, and they may have been made for the occasion; in any\nevent, they add nothing to the strength of the story. It seems\nagreed, however, that at the given signal the three malefactors were\nsuspended by ropes from the gibbets, that the wood was fired, and\nthat they were hung and burned at the same time; that they died with\nwords of repentance upon their lips, expressions of hope for pardon\nfrom the God whom they had offended, and stating their hopes and\nbeliefs of salvation. There was no sermon, no reading of sentences, no\nprolongation of agony. Prayers for the dead were continually recited,\nbut the execution proceeded with as much rapidity as possible.\n\nThe historians of the day, Monstrelet, Chartier, Argentr\u00e9, all agree\nthat the body of Gilles was rescued from the flames before it was\nburned to ashes, and enclosed in a coffin and carried to the church of\nthe Carmelites at Nantes, where it was buried privately and without\nceremony, while the ashes of the two accomplices were scattered to the\nwinds of heaven and the waves of the Loire.\n\n[Illustration: Grotto of Bonne Vierge de Cr\u00e9e-Lait.\n\nExpiatory altar of Gilles, erected by his daughter.]\n\nThis was the punishment of Gilles de Retz, and this the expiation of\nhis crimes. It is curious to remark its effect on human nature, and\nhow it was regarded by the people. If Gilles de Retz had escaped the\npunishment of his crimes, the whole country would have been in arms,\nand he would have been denounced in the fiercest terms, as the most\nexecrable of human beings. But, after having suffered this terrible\npunishment before the eyes of all men, and it was thus made known\nthroughout the country, the spirit of hate and vengeance seems to have\nturned to pity, and sorrow and grief seem to have taken their places.\n\nIn commemoration of his sufferings, an altar was erected in his memory\nand to his name, upon the spot where he died. A niche was made for the\nreception of a statue, though none appears to have been erected, and,\nunexplainable as it is,--almost marvellous,--it came in after years to\nbe called the altar of the \u201cBonne Vierge de Cr\u00e9\u00e9-Lait.\u201d The spot where\nwas executed this man, who had decimated Brittany by the abduction and\nmurder of its infants, came in a superstitious manner to be esteemed as\na place of value in furnishing milk for nursing mothers. Offerings of\nflowers and similar objects were frequently placed upon the altar to\nsecure the good offices of Saint Anne, who was supposed to have it in\ncharge. This is evidence, not only of the instability of the judgment\nof the multitude and the changeableness of the public, but the\nelusiveness of and want of dependence in tradition.\n\nThe family of Gilles seem to have made no demonstration, not even an\nappearance, during this trying time. No record or mention is made of\ntheir presence at the trial, or of any interest therein. His widow\nmarried within the year, and his daughter Marie, then about fifteen\nyears of age, married within two years, after his death. His widow\nmarried Jean de Vend\u00f4me, and the daughter\u2019s first husband was Pr\u00e9gent\nde Co\u00e9tivy, Admiral of France. These united in a _M\u00e9moire_ addressed\nto the King of France, to save the property that had belonged to\nGilles de Retz from confiscation by the Duke of Brittany. Pr\u00e9gent de\nCo\u00e9tivy was killed on June 20, 1450, during the siege of Cherbourg,\nby a cannon-shot. His widow (Gilles\u2019s daughter) married, for a second\nhusband, Andr\u00e9 de Laval, her cousin. She died, without issue, November\n1, 1457, and was buried in the Church of Notre Dame, at Vitr\u00e9. Ren\u00e9\nde la Suze, brother of Gilles, married Anne de Champagne. He left\na daughter, Jeanne de Retz, who married Fran\u00e7ois de Chauvigny, the\nPrince of Deol, April 11, 1446. They had one child, a son, Andr\u00e9 de\nChauvigny, who died, unmarried, in 1502. And thus, within sixty-two\nyears after the death of Gilles de Retz, his family became extinct.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nAPPENDIX A\n\nMOTHER GOOSE PUBLICATIONS\n\n\nNearly every publisher in France, and many of those in England and the\nUnited States, have issued editions of Mother Goose stories. Most of\nthose from France have been reprints, with variation, of the originals\nby Perrault: Boussod; B. Bernardin; Biblioth. Nat.; MM. Chavery; Dentu;\nFlammarion; Boulanger; Lemerre; Bornemann; Cattier; Duploy\u00e9; Fayard; E.\nGu\u00e9rin; Hachette; G. Delarue; Garnier Fr\u00e8res; Magnin.\n\nThe editions of Mother Goose fairy tales and nursery rhymes in England\nand the United States are given in the publishers\u2019 catalogues with\nessays on the same subject as follows:\n\n_MOTHER GOOSE:_\n\n    _The Original Mother Goose\u2019s Melodies as First Issued about\n    1760._ W.\u00a0H. WHITMORE. 1890. Munsell.\n\n    ---- _Fairy Tales of Mother Goose_, first collected by\n    Perrault, 1696. 1892. Damrell.\n\n    _Favourite Rhymes from Mother Goose._ MAUD HUMPHREY. 1891\u20131893.\n    Stokes.\n\n    _Nursery Rhymes, Tales, and Jingles._ 1890. Routledge.\n\n    _Contes des f\u00e9es_, with notes and vocabulary. 1884. Macmillan.\n\n    _Fairy Tales._ 1877\u20131882. Routledge.\n\n    _Tales from Perrault_, translated by J.\u00a0R. Planche, 1860. 1891.\n    Routledge.\n\n    _Mother Goose, or the Old Nursery Rhymes._ Illustrated by K.\n    Greenaway, 1881. Routledge.\n\n    _Mother Goose Goslings._ E.\u00a0W. TALBOT. Cassell, P., G. & Co.\n\n    _Mother Goose Rhymes_, with silhouette illustrations by J.\u00a0F.\n    Goodrich, 1877. 1879. Lee & Shepard.\n\n    _Mother Goose Masquerades._ Mrs. E.\u00a0D. KENDALL. Lee & Shepard.\n\n    _Mother Goose Melodies._ Illustrated. 1879. Lippincott.\n\n    _Mother Goose Melodies, with Chimes, Rhymes, and Jingles_, with\n    pictures designed by Billings and engraved by Hartwell. 1878.\n\n    _Mother Goose Set to Music._ New edition. Illustrated. 8\u00b0.\n    1877. McLoughlin.\n\n    _Mother Goose Fairy Tales_, illustrated by eminent artists.\n    1877. New edition, 1882. Routledge.\n\n    _Mother Goose Melodies, or Songs for the Nursery._ Illustrated\n    in color by A. Kappes. 1879. Houghton, Osgood & Co.\n\n    _Mother Goose\u2019s Nursery Rhymes._ Collection of alphabets,\n    rhymes, tales, and jingles. Illustrated. 1876. New edition,\n    1882. Routledge.\n\n    _Mother Goose\u2019s Nursery Rhymes._ Illustrated. 1877. McLoughlin.\n\n    _Mother Goose\u2019s Nursery Rhymes and Fairy Tales._ Illustrated.\n    1877. Routledge.\n\n    _Nursery Rhymes and Fairy Tales._ 1891. Routledge.\n\n    _Nursery Rhymes and Fairy Tales._ 1892\u20131896. Nister.\n\n    \u201cMother Goose\u2019s Melodies.\u201d JOEL BENTON. New York _Times,\n    Saturday Review_, Feb. 5, 1899.\n\n    \u201cWho Was Mother Goose?\u201d THOMAS WILSON. _St. Nicholas._\n\nAn investigation of the foregoing volumes will show a series of\nMother Goose stories other than those written by Perrault. These are\nwell-known rhymes and jingles principally from England, and are of\nindefinite and undetermined age.\n\nThe edition above mentioned by W.\u00a0H. Whitmore, gives its history of\nthe English and American Mother Goose. The collection was first made\nfor and by John Newbery of London, about A.D. 1760. Its popularity was\ndue to the Boston editions of Monroe & Francis, A.D. 1824\u20131860.\n\nThe first rhyme in these editions was styled \u201cA Love Song\u201d:\n\n   \u201cThere was a little man,\n      Who wooed a little maid;\n    And he said, \u2018Little maid,\n      Will you wed, wed, wed?\u2019\u201d\n\nMr. Whitmore examines the claim made for the first time in 1856 that\nthe origin of these melodies was due to Mrs. Elizabeth Goose, or\nVergoose, of Boston, and that her son-in-law, Thomas Fleet, published\na volume containing them in 1719, and pronounces the claim without\nfoundation.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nAPPENDIX B\n\nBLUEBEARD STORIES\n\n\nThe story of Bluebeard has permeated modern literature. Reference is\nmade to some of its publications.\n\nIt appeared as a comedy with three acts, under the name of\n_Barbe-Bleue_. The music was by Gr\u00e9try, and it was presented for the\nfirst time at Paris in the Th\u00e9\u00e2tre des Italiens in 1789.\n\nAnother was an opera bouffe written by MM. Henry Meilhac and Ludovic\nHal\u00e9vy, music by Offenbach, presented for the first time at Paris in\nthe Th\u00e9\u00e2tre des Vari\u00e9t\u00e9s in 1866.\n\nMonsieur Charles Lemire published, in 1894, a lyric representation\nwith music, dances, etc., in four parts and ten scenes, entitled\n_Barbe-Bleue_ (Le sire de Rais). Some of the scenes represented the\ninterior of the H\u00f4tel de la Suze, the public square at Nantes, the\nCh\u00e2teau de Tiffauges, the gate of Machecoul (the arrest), Ch\u00e2teau de\nNantes (the trial), Prairie Piesse (the execution), ending with an\nallegoric apotheosis.\n\nA Picardy romance of Comte Ory was rendered by Scribe and Rossini into\nan opera in which the characteristics of Gilles de Retz were presented\nin the hero.\n\nWalkenaer has investigated, with marvellous patience, the tradition\nof Bluebeard, and has sought to trace it throughout its various\nramifications in literature.\n\nLa Rousse in his _Great French Dictionary of the XIXth Century_,\nunder the title of _Barbe-Bleue_, introduces quotations from French\nlitt\u00e9rateurs who have referred to Bluebeard: J. Sandeau, Toussenel, H.\nde Balzac, Ch. Nadar, Max. du Camp, Oct. Feuillet.\n\nEssays or volumes on Bluebeard have appeared either separately or in\nmagazines or newspapers as shown in the following list:\n\n    \u201cBluebeard.\u201d E. VIZELLY. _Gentlemen\u2019s Magazine_, N.\u00a0S., vol.\n    xxii., p. 368.\n\n    ---- T.\u00a0C. WOOLSEY. _Lakeside_, vol. v., p. 314.\n\n    ---- Origin of Story of. W.\u00a0C. TAYLOR. _Bentley_, vol. xxiii.,\n    p. 136.\n\n    ---- Original. _Once a Week_, vol. xviii., p. 15.\n\n    ---- Rehabilitated, Verses. W.\u00a0H. HARRISON. _Dub. Univ._, vol.\n    xc, p. 728.\n\n    \u201cBluebeard\u2019s Ghost.\u201d W.\u00a0M. THACKERAY. _Fraser_, vol. xxviii.,\n    p. 413.\n\n    \u201cBluebeard\u2019s Keys.\u201d _Cornn._, vol. xxiii., pp. 192, 688. Same\n    article _Living Age_, vol. cviii., p. 685; vol. cx., p. 139.\n\n    \u201cBluebeard.\u201d H.\u00a0C. LEA. _Nation_, vol. xliii., p. 377.\n\n    \u201cGilles de Retz, Baron de: Original Bluebeard.\u201d L. FRECHETTE.\n    _Arena_, vol. i., p. 141.\n\n    \u201cBluebeard, Case of.\u201d P. EDWARDS. _Green Bag_, vol. v., p. 543D.\n\n    \u201cMar\u00e9chal de Retz.\u201d _Belgra_, vol. lxxx., p. 58.\n\n    _Gilles de Retz (Barbe-Bleue)._ L\u2019ABB\u00c9 EUGENE BOSSARD. 1886. H.\n    Champion.\n\n    _Barbe-Bleue, de la L\u00e9gende et de l\u2019Histoire._ CH. LEMIRE.\n    1886. Ernest Leroux.\n\nThe works of Abb\u00e9 Bossard and M. Charles Lemire have been issued since\nthe author left Nantes. Much of the matter in this paper was prepared\nbefore these volumes were issued. But the author has not scrupled to\nuse them, as he has those of Michelet, Monstrelet, or Gu\u00e9pin, or to\nverify from them what he has written, especially their later rendition\nof the archives. He had access to these records equally with these\ngentlemen, but he freely acknowledges the aid received from the printed\ncopy of ancient manuscripts, the difficulties of which will be apparent\non an examination of the photographic copy on page 137.\n\nM. Paul Sauni\u00e8re published in the _Publicit\u00e9_ at Nantes, a feuilleton\nentitled _Barbe-Bleue_, and a novel entitled _The Black Douglas_, by\nS.\u00a0R. Crockett, lately published, and a book entitled _La Bas_, by\nHuysmanns, all deal with Gilles de Retz.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nAPPENDIX C\n\nMYSTERY OF THE SIEGE OF ORLEANS\n\n\nAbb\u00e9 Bossard is authority for the statement that the unique and\noriginal manuscript of the _Mystery of Orleans_ in modern times is in\nthe library of the Vatican, No. 1022, registered under _de la reine de\nSu\u00e8de_ (Queen of Sweden). This copy came from the library de Fleury\nor of Saint-Henoit-sur-Loire. It was written, he says, in the second\nhalf of the sixteenth century, and made a quarto volume of 509 leaves\nwith 20,529 lines, and its author is unknown. It was published for\nthe first time (from the manuscript in the Vatican library in 1862),\nby MM. Guessard et de Certain, and forms part of the great collection\nof _documents in\u00e9dits de l\u2019histoire de France_. Quicherat says that\nthe first author in modern times to mention the _Mystery of the Siege\nof Orleans_ was M. Paul Lacroix in his _Dissertation sur quelques\npoints curieux de l\u2019histoire de France_ (Paris, 1839). M. Adelbert\nKeller in his _Ronvart_ (Mannheim, 1844), gave a more extended notice\nwith extracts. M. Salmon, a student in the _\u00c9cole des Chartes_,\nmade elaborate notes of the Vatican MSS., which notes fell into the\nhands of M. Quicherat while writing his _Proc\u00e8s de condemnation et\nr\u00e9habilitation de Jeanne d\u2019Arc_.\n\n\n_Extracts from the \u201cMystery of the Siege of Orleans\u201d as acted by Gilles\nde Retz_\n\nAccording to this drama, it was Gilles de Retz, with Ambroise de Lor\u00e9,\nwho were charged by the king to conduct and act as guards for Joan of\nArc from Blois to Orleans.\n\nThere is in the drama or poem the following speech made by the King to\nthe Maid, directing her to go to Orleans:\n\n   \u201cEt pour vous conduire voz gens\n    Aurez le mar\u00e9chal de Rais,\n    Et ung gentilhomme vaillant\n    Ambroise de Lor\u00e9 ar\u00e9s;\n    Esquelz je commande expr\u00e8s\n    Ou il vous plaisa vous conduisent,\n    En quelque lieu, soit loing, soit pr\u00e8s.\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe Marshal de Retz says to the Maid:\n\n   \u201cDame, que vous plaist il de faire?\n    Nous sommes au plus pr\u00e8s de Blois;\n    Se vous y voulez point retraire\n    Et reposer deux jours ou trois,\n    Pour savoir o\u00f9 sont les Anglois,\n    Aussi pour rafrachir vos gens,\n    Ou se vous aymez mieulx ain\u00e7ois\n    Aller droict jusques \u00e0 Orl\u00e9ans?\u201d\n\nTo which the Maid responded:\n\n   \u201cMonseigneur, je suis bien contans\n    Que \u00e0 Blois donques nous allons,\n    Pour noz gens la contre atmendans;\n    Ce pendant, aussi penserons\n    De noz affaires, et manderons\n    Es Anglais que devant Orl\u00e9ans\n    S\u2019en voisent, ou combatuz seront,\n    En mon Dieu, de moy et mes gens.\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe Marshal to the Maid:\n\n   \u201cMadame, tout incontinant,\n    Vostre vouloir acomplirons;\n    Nous ferons assembler noz gens,\n    Et presentement partirons.\n    Droit \u00e0 Orleans, nous nous menrons,\n    Dame Jehanne, sans plus atendre.\u201d\n\nThe Maid responded:\n\n   \u201cJe vous empry, faictes le dont,\n    Et vous pry y vueillez entendre.\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nA discussion took place as to the proper route to follow. The Marshal\nthus expressed himself:\n\n   \u201cJe doute aller par la Beausse:\n    Le plus fort des Anglois y est,\n    Toute leur puissance et force,\n    Et tout le pays \u00e0 eulx est.\n    Y nous pourroient donner arrest,\n    S\u2019i savoyent nostre venue,\n    Et peut estre grant int\u00e9rest\n    Seroit a nostre survenue.\n    Si me semble que vauldroit mieulx\n    Y aller devers la Sauloigne:\n    Le dangier n\u2019est pas si perilleux\n    Et n\u2019y a pas fort grant esloigne.\n    Mieulx vault faire nostre besoigne,\n    Et le dangier passer ainsi,\n    Entret par la porte Bourgoigne,\n    Et yrons passer \u00e0 Checy.\u201d\n\nAmbroise de Lor\u00e9 responds:\n\n   \u201cVous avez tr\u00e8s bien devis\u00e9,\n    A Checy, nous y fault aller;\n    Et est a vous bien advis\u00e9:\n    Vous ne pourriez mieulx conseiller.\n    Si n\u2019en conviendra point parler\n    A la Pucelle nullement;\n    Si non que on la veult mener\n    Droit \u00e0 Orleans, tant seullement.\u201d\n\nThis resolution being taken, Jean de Metz asked if it was not time\nto notify the Maid; to whom Gilles expressed his readiness to depart\ninstantly:\n\n   \u201cJe suis prest aussi, par mon \u00e2me,\n    A aller quant elle vouldra.\n    Dame, se il vous plaist partir.\n    Voicy en point trestouz vos gens,\n    Pour vostre vouloir accomplir\n    A vous convoyer \u00e0 Orl\u00e9ans.\u201d\n\nThe Maid responded:\n\n   \u201cEn mon Dieu, croy que il est tant\n    Et avons beaucoup demeur\u00e9,\n    Que, ainsi comme je l\u2019entend,\n    Orl\u00e9ans a beaucoup endur\u00e9.\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe Marshal to the Maid on their arrival at Checy:\n\n   \u201cDame Jehanne, la Dieu mercy,\n    Vous estes bien icy venue,\n    En ceste ville de Checy,\n    Sans nulle fortune avoir eue.\n    Vous n\u2019estes pas que \u00e0 une lieue\n    D\u2019Orl\u00e9ans, comme je puis entendre;\n    Ferons icy une repeue,\n    Puis \u00e0 Orl\u00e9ans yrons descendre.\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe English are put to flight; the Maid, about to return to the King,\nsays to her companions in arms:\n\n   \u201cSi est le baron de Colonnes,\n    Viendra avecq moy, si luy plaist.\n    De par moy luy prie et denonces\n    Que luy et ses gens soient prest,\n    Avecques le sire de Rais,\n    Se c\u2019est son plaisir y venir.\n    Je les en supplie par exprest\n    Compaignie me veullent tenir.\u201d\n\nThe Sire of Colonnes accepts the invitation, as does the Baron de Retz,\nwho says:\n\n   \u201cAussi moy, dame, ne doubtez.\n    Faire vueil ce qui vous plaira;\n    Mes aliez et depputez,\n    Dame, sachez, tout y vendra.\n    Et vostre voloir on fera\n    Du tout en tout, \u00e0 vostre guise,\n    Et quand vouldrez on partira,\n    En faisant \u00e0 vostre devise.\u201d\n\nThe Maid to both:\n\n   \u201cMes bons seigneurs, je vous mercie,\n    Tant comme faire je le puis,\n    De vostre haulte courtoisie.\n    Nobles, vaillans princes gentilz\n    Quant ainsi vous estes soubmis\n    A mes bons voloirs acomplir.\n    Je vous en rens cinq cens mercis\n    Qu\u2019i vous plaist cest honneur m\u2019offrir.\u201d\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nAPPENDIX D\n\nDEPOSITIONS AGAINST GILLES\n\n_The Depositions in the Civil Court_\n\n\nPeronne Loessart of Rochebernart, makes oath that the Baron de Retz,\non returning from Vannes with his retinue, stopped in her town, at\nthe Hotel of Jean Colin, in the immediate neighbourhood of her house.\nShe had a son ten years of age then going to school whom one of the\nretinue of Gilles, called Poitou, desired to obtain as his page. It was\nagreed that he should have four pounds (_livres_) for his services,\nand Peronne, _cent souls_ (_sous_), five francs, for a dress, and\nPoitou should continue the boy at school. A pony was bought from the\nhotel-keeper for the boy to ride, and he departed on the morrow in the\ncompany. She talked with Gilles de Retz, and he commended her wisdom in\nplacing the boy, and assured her it would be for her and his advantage.\nShe had never seen her son afterwards, though this had taken place two\nyears before. On a future journey, she had met the servants of Gilles,\nand on demanding news of her son, was informed that he was either at\nTiffauges or Pouzauges.\n\n                        (Signed)\u00a0\u00a0DE TOUSCHERONDE.[5]\n\n    [5] The depositions were all signed by Touscheronde and some\n        other.\n\nJean Colin, his wife Olive, and her mother, support Peronne, and Colin\nsays that he sold Poitou a pony for the sum of LX s., on which the boy\nwas mounted and departed with the rest of the company.\n\nJean le Meignen, his wife, Allain Dulis, Perrot Dupouez, Guillaume\nGanton, Guillaume Portuys, Jean le Fevre, clerc, all of Saint \u00c9tienne\nde Montluc (Loire-Inf\u00e9rieure) depose on their oaths that since about\nthree years ago they had known a Guillaume Brice of their parish. He\nwas a mendicant and had a son about eight or nine years of age named\nJamet; that the father was now dead about one year; that last Saint\nJohn\u2019s day the said child disappeared and had never been heard of since\nin the neighbourhood. No one knew what had become of him. He was last\nseen near the wood of Saint \u00c9tienne, and Dupouez says that about the\nsame time he met a woman of fifty or sixty years, hardened and strong,\nwith a visage _vermaill\u00e9_ (bronzed), supposed to be _la Meffraye_, who,\nit was believed, had abducted the boy. She was making her way towards\nNantes.\n\nGuillaume Fouraige, his wife Jehanne, the wife of Jean le Flou,\nRicharde, wife of Jean Gaudeau, from the Port de Launay near Coueron\n(Loire-Inf\u00e9rieure), record on their oaths the loss of the son, an\ninfant of about twelve years, of Jean Bernart, their neighbour; that\nhe started in the direction of Machecoul to ask alms (on a begging\nexpedition) from which he had never returned, nor had anybody in their\nneighbourhood ever received news of him. The woman, Fouraige, told\nof meeting or seeing an old woman with a gray gown and black bonnet\n(supposed to be _Meffraye_) with a young boy in her company, who said\nshe was on her way to Machecoul. In two or three days she returned\nalone. Being asked what had become of the child, she responded that she\nhad placed him to live with a good master.\n\n\n                        28, 29, and 30 September, 1440.\n\nAndr\u00e9 Barbe, shoemaker, living at Machecoul, says that since Easter he\nhas heard that the son of Georget le Barbier has been lost; that he\n(the witness) had seen the boy on a certain day gathering apples in the\nrear of the hotel Rondeau, and since that time he had never been seen\nin the neighbourhood; that the mothers of the neighbourhood had great\nfear for the loss of their children and guarded them very closely. He\nhad been at Saint Jean d\u2019Angely where some of the residents demanded\nwhence he came, and when he said \u201cfrom Machecoul,\u201d they responded,\n\u201cThat is the place where they eat the small children.\u201d He recounts\nthe loss of several other children from his neighbourhood: Guillaume\nJeudon, Jehannot Roucin, Alexandre Chastelier. He had heard at the\nchurch of Trinity de Machecoul, a stranger in search of his child of\nseven years, who had been gone for eight months or more.\n\nJehannet, wife of Guillaume Sergent, of Saint Croix de Machecoul, said\nthat during the Pentecost a year before, she and her husband went to\ndig the field to sow hemp, leaving in their house a son of eight years\nto care for a baby one and a-half years. On their return the boy was\ngone and has never been heard of seen since.\n\nGeorget le Barbier, living near the gates of the Ch\u00e2teau de Machecoul,\ndeposed that he had a son named Guillaume, of the age of eighteen\nyears, that about the f\u00eate of Saint Barnabas he went after dinner to\nMachecoul to play _pelote_; that since vespers of the day on which\nhe had played _pelote_ he had never been seen or heard of, although\nhe, the father, had made every investigation and demand possible. He\nfurther says it is notorious and the people murmur, saying that infants\nare murdered in the said ch\u00e2teau. He has also heard that the boy who\nwas page of Monsieur Fran\u00e7ois Prelati, and who lived with him, was also\nlost.\n\nGuillaume Hylairet, and his wife Jehanne, living at Machecoul, have\nheard say that the son of the said Georget le Barbier had been lost,\nand no one knew where he was or what had become of him. They say,\nfurther, that about eight or seven years ago they had living with them\na child of twelve years, the son of Jean Jeudon, as an apprentice to\nlearn the trade of furrier; that Gilles de Sill\u00e9, accompanied by Roger\nde Briqueville, had asked to send the boy to the ch\u00e2teau of Machecoul\nwith a message, which was accordingly done; that the boy never returned\nand was never seen or heard of in the neighbourhood; that upon his\ndemand, made to Sill\u00e9 and Briqueville, as to what had become of the\nboy, they responded that he was possibly at Tiffauges, but thought\nsome of the _larrons_ (thieves) had carried him off to be their page;\nthat he, the witness, knew of the loss of the infants of Jehannet\nRoucin and Alexandre Chastelier; that he had heard the parents complain\nof their loss _doloreusement_. Guillaume says that about five years\nsince he heard a man, Jean du Jardin, then living with Monsieur Roger\nde Briqueville, say that they had found at the castle of Champtoc\u00e9 a\ncaskful, _toute plaine_, of the bodies of dead infants; that it was\ncommon and notorious talk that these infants were murdered at the\nch\u00e2teau of Machecoul; that he has heard the same complaint made by\nothers, of the _perdicion d\u2019autres enffants_.\n\nJehan Thipholoz, Sr., Jehan Thifoloz, Jr., Jouhan Aubin, Clemens Dor\u00e9,\nof Tonaye (Charente-Inf\u00e9rieure) have heard the complaints of Mathelin\nThouars, of the same parish, for about half a year, that his son, a\nchild about twelve years, had been lost, and that he had no knowledge\nof his whereabouts, nor could he obtain any news of him.\n\nJehan Roucin, of Machecoul, says that about nine years ago his son,\na child then about nine years of age, was in the field guarding the\ncattle; at night he did not return, and has never returned, nor have\nthey ever had any news of him. They were told by a neighbour, since\ndead, that she had seen Gilles de Sill\u00e9 with a tabart and an estamine\n(a sort of cloak and veil) going to and speaking with the child, whom\nhe conducted to the postern-gate of the ch\u00e2teau; that the complaints of\ntheir neighbours, especially Jeudon, of the loss of their infants, are\nnotorious.\n\nJohanne, widow of Hemery Edelin, and previous wife of Jehan Bonneau,\nof Machecoul, says that she had a son of the age of eight years, going\nto school; that he lived with his grandmother near the ch\u00e2teau. About\neight years ago her child was lost and has never been heard of since;\nthat she knew the boy Roucin, and another of Geudon, which were lost;\nthat about fifteen days after, another child, that of Mac\u00e9 Sorin,\nwas also lost; that this created a great clamour, upon which it was\nexplained that these children, with others, had been captured to serve\nas hostages with the English, for the deliverance of Monsieur Michel\nde Sill\u00e9, then prisoner, and it was said that the ransom of the said\nMichel had been fixed by the English at twenty-four male infants.\nAbout two or three years before, the witness had seen, at Machecoul,\na stranger from Saint Mesme, near Chinon, who was crying piteously,\ncomplaining of the _perdicion_ of his child, but no news had ever\nbeen heard. She had heard the same complaint from a couple named Ais\u00e9\nor d\u2019Ays\u00e9e. She had also heard of the loss of many other infants in\nBrittany, of which great complaint had been made; that seven alone had\nbeen lost from Tiffauges; that they had all been taken from the fields\nwhile guarding the cattle, and no one knew what had become of them or\nwhat to do about finding them.\n\nMac\u00e9 Sorin and his wife recount the loss of several of the foregoing,\nof whom nothing had ever been heard, and that it was presumed that they\nhad been taken by the English for the ransom and deliverance of Michel\nde Sill\u00e9, prisoner.\n\nPerrine, the wife of Clemens Rondeau, of Machecoul, declared that\nMonsieur Fran\u00e7ois Prelati, and the Marquis de Ceva, while part of the\nretinue of the Baron de Retz, were lodged in a chamber of her house;\nthat she heard the Marquis say to Fran\u00e7ois that he had found a handsome\npage at Dieppe, at which Fran\u00e7ois was joyful; that the page came to\nlive with the said Fran\u00e7ois, and was there for about fifteen days.\nUpon her demand of Fran\u00e7ois as to where the boy had gone, and what had\nbecome of him, Fran\u00e7ois responded that he had been deceived in him and\nhad sent him away. That Fran\u00e7ois and Eustache Blanchet also occupied\nanother small house in the neighbourhood belonging to Perrot Cahn; that\non the descent of Jean l\u2019Abb\u00e9 there had been found in the chamber the\npowdered bones of an infant, or infants, and she had seen an infant\u2019s\nbloody chemise, which gave forth a bad odour.\n\nAndr\u00e9 Brechet, of the Parish of Saint Croix de Machecoul, says that\nabout a year and half before he was a watchman, or was watching at the\ncastle of Machecoul, and after midnight he fell asleep; he was awakened\nby a contest on the wall in which a large man had his naked dagger, and\nsaid to the little one by his side, \u201cYou are dead\u201d (_Tu est mort_);\nthat he, the witness, was filled with great fear and quietly escaped.\n\nYsabeau, wife of Guillaume Hamelin, makes oath that about seven days\nbefore the end of the past year, she sent her two sons--one fifteen\nyears, the other seven, or thereabouts--to the town of Machecoul\nto purchase bread, giving them the money therefor; that they never\nreturned, and she has never had any news of or from them. She reports\nhaving heard a similar story from Micheau Bouer and his wife, who had\nalso lost one of their infants, who had never since been seen. She was\nsupported in the testimony of her loss by Perrot Pasqueteau, Jehan\nSoreau, Katerine de Grepie, Guillaume Garnier, Perrine wife of Jehan\nCaeffin, Jehanne wife of Estienne Landays, and Perrot Soudan.\n\nGuillemete, wife of Micheau Bouer, declares upon her oath that seven\ndays after Easter last, her son of eight years, a beautiful white\ninfant, _bel enffant et blanc_, went to Machecoul; that he never\nreturned and they have never received any news, however many searches\nshe and her husband have made. That on the day after they had given\ncharity at Machecoul for the deceased Mah\u00e9 Le Breton, she, who was\nguarding the cattle as they grazed, was approached by a large man, in\nblack, who, among other things, asked of her where were the children\nwho usually guarded the cattle. She said that they had gone to\nMachecoul, when he departed in that direction.\n\nGuillaume Rodigo, living at Bourgneuf-en-Rais, testifies to the loss\nof his apprentice, aged fifteen years. Marguerite Sorin, chambermaid\nfor Rodigo, tells how, as she and the boy were playing some games\ntogether in the house after supper, Poitou came and, taking the boy\napart, talked to him in a low voice. On his departure she interrogated\nthe boy as to what was said, but he refused to tell. Soon after he left\nthe house in his doublet without saying where he was going. Since then\nshe has never seen him or heard any news of him. They were supported by\nGuillaume Plumet and his wife, and Michel Gerart.\n\nThomas Ays\u00e9e and his wife, living at Machecoul, declare that at the\nlast f\u00eate of Pentecost they sent their son of ten years to ask alms at\nthe castle, and that they have never seen their son since; he has never\nreturned. They heard, from a girl, that she had seen the son at the\nch\u00e2teau, along with others who were also asking alms; that alms were\ngiven first to the girls and then to the boys; that this girl said she\nhad heard one of the men of the castle say to this boy that he had not\nhad any meat (that is, to eat), and invite him into the castle to be\nfed, whereupon both entered and the boy was seen no more.\n\nJannette, the wife of Eucasse (Eustache?) Douret, of Saint Ligier,\ndeclares on oath that about fifteen days before Christmas last, having\nheard that the Baron de Retz would give alms, according to the custom\nin her own town, she sent her two boys, one of ten years, the other of\nseven, and though some of her neighbours had seen them on the way, and\nat the town of Machecoul, she had never seen them since, and although\nshe and her husband had made every search, they had obtained no news.\n\n\n                        October 2, 1440.\n\nJehan de Grepie, Regnaud Don\u00e9t\u00e9, of the parish of Notre Dame of Nantes,\nsays under oath, that about Saint John\u2019s day, two years past, she\nlost a child of about twelve years while on his way to school, and\nsince then she had never seen him. The only news had been that Perrine\nMartin, a prisoner in Nantes, had confessed that she had taken the said\nchild to the Baron de Retz in his chamber, at his H\u00f4tel de la Suze in\nNantes; that the said Baron had commanded her to take the child to\nMachecoul and deliver him to the porter, and this she had done. That\nshe had heard Jean Hubert and Denis de Lemyon, acquaintances of his,\ncomplain each one of having lost a son; that at the time of the loss of\nhis son, Gilles de Retz was at his H\u00f4tel de la Suze in Nantes, and that\nthe said Perrine lived near him. The witness made complaint to various\nof the servants and followers of Gilles at his said house (H\u00f4tel de la\nSuze) and she was always told that they thought his son had gone to\nMachecoul to become a page.\n\nJean Jenvret and his wife, of Nantes, declare their loss of a son of\nnine years in the same way, and by the same person as told by Don\u00e9t\u00e9.\n\nJean Hubert and his wife, of Saint Leonart, in Nantes, declare that on\nThursday after Saint John\u2019s day last, two years ago, they lost their\nson, fourteen years of age; that he made the acquaintance of some\nof the men servants, or followers of Gilles de Retz; that he talked\nwith his mother of the promises they had made if he would enter the\nservice with them. He recounted how he had seen the Baron de Retz in\nhis chamber and waited upon him, for which he had received a present of\nsome cake which he had brought to his mother; that after his permanent\nentry into the service of the Baron, and his departure from Nantes,\nthey had never seen or heard of him more.\n\nAgaice, wife of Denis de Lemion, says that about a year and a half\nbefore, her nephew of the age of eighteen years, who frequented the\nH\u00f4tel de la Suze, where resided the Baron de Retz, was approached by\none of his men, or servants, with an offer to enter the service of the\nBaron, which he did, and has never returned or been heard of since.\n\nJehanne, wife of Guibelet Delit, declares that during the Easter\nholidays, she lost a child of seven years; that he frequented la Suze,\nwhere a man named Cherpy had persuaded him to join the service of the\nBaron de Retz. This done, she had never seen or had news of her child.\n\nJehan Toutblanc, of Saint \u00c9tienne de Montluc, records that at Saint\nJulian a year ago, on departing from his house, he left it in charge of\na young ward of fourteen years, named Jean also, for whom he was tutor.\nOn his return from his journey, he could not find the boy, has never\nseen him, nor heard any news from him.\n\nJean Fougere, of Saint Donacien, near Nantes, records that about two\nyears since he lost his son of twelve years, a well-favoured boy, and\nthat since that time he has had no news as to what became of him.\n\nJean Ferot, Guillaume Jacob, Perrin Blanchet, Thomas Beauvis, Eonnet\nJehan, Denis de Lemyon, of the parish of Notre Dame, of Nantes, record\nunder their oaths, their knowledge concerning the loss of the sons of\nJean Hubert, R\u00e9gnaud Don\u00e9t\u00e9, and Guillaume Avril, that complaints and\npublic clamour have been heard by these witnesses for two years and a\nhalf; that for one year past it has been commonly said that the Baron\nde Retz abducts infants in order to slay them.\n\nNicole, wife of Vincent Bonnereau; Philipe, wife of Mathis Ernaut;\nJehanne, wife of Guillaume Prieur, all of the parish of Saint Croix of\nNantes, support the claim of Jean Jenvret and his wife as to the loss\nof their son of nine years, and that for a year and a half they have\nheard by common report that _le sire de Retz_ and his men capture and\nkill small children. They have also heard of the loss of the young son\nof Eonnet de Villeblanche, and that for three months past he has not\nbeen seen in his neighbourhood nor heard from.\n\n\n                        October 6, 1440.\n\nJean Estaisse and Michele, his wife, testify to the loss of a boy of\nthe age of eleven years named Perrot Dagaie. Relate the notoriety of\nthe rumour that the Baron de Retz and his men capture and kill infants.\n\nJean Chiquet, parchment-maker, testifies to the evil reputation of the\nBaron de Retz and his men in abducting children.\n\nPierre Badieu, cloth merchant of Chanteloup, testifies to the abduction\nof two children aged about nine years, the infants of Robin Pavot.\n\nJean Darel describes his son, who, while the father was sick in bed,\nwas captured in the Rue du Mercheil, where he was playing with other\nchildren; that he has no knowledge by whom or where he was taken; that\nhe has never seen or heard of him since.\n\nJehanne, wife of Darel, says that on the day of Saint P\u00e8re (or Pierre)\nJune 29th, one year ago, there was abducted from her place in the\ncity of Nantes, her son, Olivier, seven or eight years of age, since\nwhich time she has never seen him nor had any news of him. Her mother\ndescribes the abduction by saying that she was coming from vespers,\nleading the child; that near the church of Saint Saturnine, when in\nthe crowd, somebody made away with the child; that she and all his\nrelatives sought for him in every direction, but they have never seen\nor heard of him since.\n\nEonnette, wife of Jean Bremant, supports the foregoing witnesses as to\nthe abduction of Olivier.\n\nNichole, wife of Jean Hubert, of the parish of Saint Vincent, had a\nson named Jean of fourteen years of age, who was lost or abducted as\ndescribed by her husband aforesaid. She sustains him in his testimony.\n\nJean Bureau and his wife, Johanne, Thebault Geoffroi and her daughter,\nand Guillaume Hemeri, support the claim of the abduction of the Hubert\nchild.\n\nDe la Grepie, R\u00e9gnaud Don\u00e9t\u00e9, Jean Ferot and his wife, Pierres\nBlanchett, and Guillaume Jacob, all support the claim of the abduction\nof the apprentice, Don\u00e9t\u00e9, heretofore described.\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\nINDEX\n\n\n  A\n\n  Abduction of children by Gilles de Retz, chap. iv., 64\u201371, 106, 195\n\n  Aids, assistants, and familiars of Gilles, 71\u201375\n\n  Allegiance to Duke of Brittany, 11\n\n  Ancient buildings, description of, 46, 47;\n    inscriptions on, 47\n\n  Appendix A, Mother Goose publications, 188\n\n  Appendix B, Bluebeard stories, 186\n\n  Appendix C, _Mystery of the Siege of Orleans_, 189\n\n  Appendix D, Depositions in Civil Court against Gilles, 195\n\n  Army service of Gilles, in histories of France, 22, 23\n\n  Arrest of Gilles, 84\u201390\n\n  Attack and capture of Rainefort, 17\n\n\n  B\n\n  Beaumanoir, duel with Tournemine, 169\n\n  Bishop of Nantes, 80\u201384, 93\u201395, 100\u2013116, 122, 127, 139\n\n  Blouyn, Jean, Vice-Inquisitor, 95, 100, 102, 105, 140\n\n  Bluebeard, an infantile classic, ix., xiv.;\n    stories of, Appendix B, 186\n\n  \u201cBonne Vierge de Cr\u00e9\u00e9-Lait,\u201d niche and statue of, 179\n\n  Bouffay, Palais de Justice, 169;\n    duel between Beaumanoir and Tournemine in courtyard of, 169\n\n\n  C\n\n  Cathedral of Nantes, 45\n\n  Ch\u00e2teau of Champtoceaux captured and John V. released, 11\n\n  Ch\u00e2teau of Malicorne captured, 17\n\n  Ch\u00e2teau de Clisson transferred to Gilles, 12\n\n  Ch\u00e2teau de Nantes, 90\u201392 (frontispiece);\n    Edict of Nantes signed by Henry IV. in, 91;\n    prisoners in: Cardinal of Retz, Minister Fouch\u00e9, Madam Sevign\u00e9, and\n          Duchess of Berry, 92\n\n  Citation to Gilles, 82\u201384\n\n  Confession of Gilles, 135\u2013159\n\n  Coronation of the King, 20;\n    Gilles guard for the Sainte Ampoule at, 20\n\n  Court, officers of, 94\u201397, 130;\n    opening of, 100;\n    presided over by Bishop of Nantes and assistants, 93;\n    records of, 98\u2013101, 105\u2013108;\n    Appendix D, 195\n\n  Craon, Marie de, mother of Gilles, 3\n\n  Crimes of Gilles, chap. iv., 64\u201393\n\n  Criminal law in France and other countries, history of, 96\n\n  Criminal practice in France, 131\u2013133\n\n\n  D\n\n  Declaration of infamy against Gilles, 80\u201382\n\n  Decree of excommunication, 124, 164;\n    revoked, 126, 165;\n    in writing, 129\n\n  Depositions against Gilles, 105;\n    Appendix D, 195\n\n  Duel between Beaumanoir and Tournemine, 169\n\n  DUKE OF BRITTANY:\n    Alliance of, with France, 15\u201316\n    l\u2019Abb\u00e9, Jean, captain in service of, arrests Gilles, 84, 90\n    Blois, family of, John V., 9\n    Decree of King against Gilles refused by, 60\n    Defeat of Blois, peace with Montfort, 9\n    Favors bishop against Gilles, 84, 85\n    France, alliance with and war for, 15, 16;\n      history of, 13\u201323\n    Gilles\u2019s father and family on side of Blois, 9\n    Imprisonment of, in Ch\u00e2teau de Champtoceaux, 11;\n      release of, 11, 15\n    Montfort against Penthi\u00e8vres and Blois, 9\n    Nantes, ch\u00e2teau of, castle for the Duke, 90, 92\n    Penthi\u00e8vres and Blois condemned and banished, 12, 13\n    Son of a younger son _vs._ daughter of an elder son, 9\n    War for the succession of, 9, 11\n\n\n  E\n\n  Education of Gilles, 6\u20138\n\n  Espousal of cause of King of France by Gilles, 15\n\n  Evidence against Gilles, 105;\n    Appendix D, 195\n\n  Excommunication of Gilles, 124, 126, 129, 165\n\n  Execution of Gilles, x., chap. vii., 177\n\n  Expenses greater than income, resorts to magic, 62, 63\n\n  Extravagance of Gilles, 39, 40, 50\u201353, 55, 57, 60\n\n\n  F\n\n  Family of Gilles, _see_ Gilles de Retz\n\n  Folly and ambition of Gilles, 39, 40\n\n  France, alliance with Brittany, 15, 16;\n    history of, 13\u201323\n\n  Friends and companions of Gilles, 17\n\n\n  G\n\n  GILLES DE RETZ:\n    Abduction of children by, 64, 71, 106, 195\n    Aids and assistants, familiars of: Eustache Blanchet, Henriet\n          Griart, Jean Roussignol, Gilles de Sill\u00e9, Perrin Martin\n          _alias_ LaMeffraye, Fran\u00e7ois Prelati, Hugues de Bremont,\n          \u00c9tienne Corrilaut _alias_ Poitou, Robin Romulart, 71\u201375\n    Allegiance of, to Duke of Brittany, 11\n    Army service of, in histories of France, 22, 23\n    Arrest of, 84\u201390\n    Attack and capture of Rainefort by, 17;\n      of Lamballe, Guingamp, Broon, Malicorne;\n      Champtoceaux captured and demolished and John V. released by, 11\n    Ch\u00e2teau de Clisson transferred to, 12\n    Citation to, 82\u201384\n    Coronation of the King, guard for the Sainte Ampoule at, 20\n    Crimes of, chap. iv., 64\u201393\n    Declaration of infamy against, 80, 82\n    Education of, 6\u20138\n    Espouses cause of King of France, 15\n    Expenses greater than income, resorts to magic and philosopher\u2019s\n          stone, 62, 83\n    Family of, (Laval [Montmorency-Laval], Rais [changed to Retz, 1581],\n          Machecoul, Craon), 1\n      Father, Guy, 1\u20133;\n        death of, 4\n      Mother, Marie de Craon, 3;\n        remarriage of, 4\n      Brother, Ren\u00e9 de la Suze, 4\n      Wife, Catherine de Thouars, 5;\n        separated from, 61;\n        remarriage of, 180\n      Daughter, Marie, married, 180;\n        died, 180\n      Grandfather, paternal, Guy Bremor, 2, 10\n      Grandfather, maternal, Jean de Craon, 2, 4\n      Grandmother, a sister of great Du Guesclin, 2\n      Great-grandmother, Jeanne _la Folle_, 2\n      After execution of, 180, 181\n    Folly and ambition of, 39, 40\n    Friends and companions in arms of:\n      Ambroise de Lor\u00e9, Baron Beaumanoir, La Hire, 17\n    Joan of Arc, Gilles is captain of guard for, and in service with,\n          through France, ix., 9, 19, Appendix C, 189\n    Life of, at home in Brittany (1430\u20131439), 24\u201363\n    Life, pleasure, business, etc., of, 27\n    Magic, resorts to, in aid of his failing fortunes, 61\u201363\n    Maison de la Suze, expensive decoration of, 55\n    Marriage of, 6\n      First and second betrothals, fianc\u00e9es both die, 5\n      Married to Catherine de Thouars, 5\n      Wife\u2019s dot, 5\n    Marshal of France, 19\n    Music, fondness for, 27\n    Personal appearance of, 24\u201327\n    Property of, raided by Margaret de Clisson, 12\n      Lands inherited, 2, 5, 28, 29\n      Sales and transfers, 30\u201332\n      Value of, estimated, 30, 39, 41, 50, 53, 55, 56, 60\n    Religious hierarchy of, bishop, chapel, paraphernalia, etc., 27, 28,\n          41, 48, 53, 54, 57, 58\n    Ruinous expenditures of, 39, 40, 50\u201353, 55, 57, 60\n    Search for Elixir of Youth and Philosopher\u2019s stone, x.\n    Siege and capture of Orleans by, 19\n    Signature and rubric of, 22\n    Sixteen years old at commencement of civil war, 10, 13\n    Soldier (1420\u20131429), chap. ii., 19\u201323;\n      for France, 17\n    Spendthrift, 53\n    Submits to arrest, 86, 89, 100\n    Theatre, love for, and indulgence in, 33\u201350\n    Trial and execution of, x., chaps. v.\u2013vii., 93\u2013182\n      Before Ecclesiastical Tribunal, chap. v., 93\u2013166\n    Before Civil Court, chap, v., 167\n    Depositions, Ecclesiastical Court, 105;\n      Civil Court, Appendix D, 195\n    Jean Blouyn, Vice-Inquisitor and aid to Bishop, commission of, 102,\n          103\n    Officers of court, 94, 95, 97, 130\n    Opening of court, 100\n    Presided over by Bishop of Nantes and assistants, 93\n    Records of, 98\u2013101, 105\u2013108, Appendix D, 195\n\n  Guard of honour at coronation of King, 20\n\n\n  I\n\n  Infamy, declaration of, against Gilles, 80\u201382\n\n\n  J\n\n  Joan of Arc, ix., 19, 21\u201323\n\n\n  L\n\n  La Hire, prayer of, before assault on Montargis, 18\n\n  Laval, original family name, changed to Rais by will of Joan la\n          Sage, 3\n\n\n  M\n\n  Machecoul, ch\u00e2teau of, 1, 2, 5, 29\n\n  Magic, resort of Gilles to, to aid his failing fortunes, 61\u201363\n\n  Maison de la Suze, Nantes, 46;\n    decoration of, 55\n\n  Marshal of France, Gilles made, 19\n\n  _M\u00e9moires des H\u00e9ritiers_, 28\n    Gives lists of Gilles\u2019s lands and from what family inherited, 28, 29\n    Inaugurated by his brother and cousin, 28, 29\n    Interdiction of sale or transfer by the King, 55\u201361\n    Sales and transfers of property by Gilles, 30\u201332\n    Sentence of the King under, 55\u201361\n    Value of his property estimated in, 30, 39, 41, 50, 53, 55, 56, 60\n\n  Montargis, siege of, 18\n\n  Mother Goose publications, 183\n\n  Music, Gilles\u2019s fondness for, 27\n\n  _Mystery of the Siege of Orleans_, 41\u201343;\n    Appendix C, 189;\n    of Lord Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary, 43\u201349\n\n\n  N\n\n  Notices, public, made in France by trumpet or drum, 43\u201345, 60\n\n\n  O\n\n  Orleans, expensive visit of Gilles to, 50\u201352\n\n\n  P\n\n  PERRAULT, CHARLES:\n    Author of the story of Bluebeard, xi.\n    Identity of Gilles de Retz with Bluebeard, xiv.\n    Life and history of, xi.\n    Member of Academy of France, xii.\n    Mother Goose stories, first publication of, by, xiii.;\n      names of, xiii.\n    Writings of, xi., xiii.\n\n  Personal appearance of Gilles, 24\u201326\n\n  Pierre de l\u2019Hospital, Chief Justice of Brittany, 93, 135\u2013138, 168,\n          174, 175\n\n  Portraits of Gilles, 24\n\n  Prairie de Piesse, place of execution, 175\n\n  Prelati, Fran\u00e7ois, alchemist, 73, 127, 139, 167, 168\n\n  Property of Gilles:\n    Lands inherited, 2, 5, 28, 29\n    Raided by Margaret de Clisson, 12\n    Sales and transfers of, 30\u201332\n    Value estimated, 30, 39, 41, 50, 53, 55, 56, 60\n\n\n  R\n\n  Records of trial in archives of Loire-Inf\u00e9rieure, 98\u2013100, 170\n\n  Religious hierarchy (pseudo), 27, 28, 41, 48, 53, 54, 57, 58\n\n  Ren\u00e9 de la Suze, brother of Gilles, 4, 28, 29\n\n  Retz changed from Rais in 1581, 1, 3\n\n  Richemont, Count of, Constable of France, 16\n\n\n  S\n\n  Sentence of Henriet and Poitou, 174;\n    of Gilles, 168, 175\n\n  Shahan, Dr. Thomas J., ix., xv.\n\n  Streets, decoration of, custom continued in France, 36, 37\n\n  Suze, Maison de la, 55\n\n\n  T\n\n  Theatre:\n    History of, in France, 32\u201338\n    Mysteries, moralities, dramas, and farces, 35\u201338\n    Religious plays, fostered by the clergy, 33\u201335\n    Streets decorated during, custom in France, 36, 37\n    Travelling shows in small towns in France, 35, 36\n\n  Three languages spoken in Brittany in time of Gilles, 7, 137, 172\n\n  Tiffauges, castle of, 75\u201378;\n    laboratory for magic and black art, used as, 78, 79\n\n  Torture of Gilles, order for, 134\n\n  Tournemine, duel with Beaumanoir, 169\n\n  Trial of Gilles by Ecclesiastical Court, chap. v., 93, 167\n    Address to public, 160\u2013163\n    Acknowledges jurisdiction and admits guilt, 125\n    Bishop of Nantes presiding officer, 93\n    Blouyn, Jean, Vice-Inquisitor, aid to Bishop, 95, 100, 102, 105, 140\n    Confession of Gilles during, 137\u2013159\n    Criminal law in France, history of, 96;\n      practice of, 131\u2013133;\n      torture under, 134\n    Decree of excommunication, 124, 126, 129, 165\n    Depositions, 105\u2013109\n    Excommunication, 124\u2013126, 129, 165\n    Information against Gilles, 116, 123\n    Order for torture of Gilles, 134\n    Plea of \u201cnot guilty\u201d entered, 127\n    Refusal to plead, of Gilles, 110\u2013116, 123, 124\n    Sentence of Court, 163, 164\n    Three languages employed, 137, 172\n    Witnesses against Gilles, 105\u2013109, 127\n\n  Trial of Gilles before Civil Court, chap. vi., 167\u2013177\n    Bouffay, Palais de Justice, 169\n    Depositions, Appendix D, 195\u2013206\n    Henriet, Griart, and Poitou tried with Gilles, 167\n    Palais de Justice, Place Bouffay, 169\n    Pierre de l\u2019Hospital, presiding, 93, 135\u2013138\n    Poitou tried with Henriet and Gilles, 167\n    Record of trial in archives at Nantes, 98\u2013108, Appendix D, 195\n    Sentence of Gilles, Henriet, and Poitou, 174, 175\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber\u2019s Notes\n\n\nItalic text is enclosed in _underscores_; small-caps text has been\nraised to ALL-CAPS; superscripted text is preceded by a caret ^e, and\nenclosed in braces ^{me} when more than one character in length.\n\nPunctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a\npredominant preference was found in the original book; otherwise they\nwere not changed.\n\nSimple typographical errors were corrected; unbalanced quotation\nmarks were remedied when the change was obvious, and otherwise left\nunbalanced.\n\nThe spellings of non-English words were not reviewed by Transcriber.\n\nThe Title page hyphenates \u201cBLUE-BEARD\u201d; the rest of the book does not.\n\nUncaptioned illustrations are decorative headpieces and tailpieces.\n\nThe index was not checked for proper alphabetization or correct page\nreferences.","title":"Blue-beard: A Contribution to History and Folk-lore: Being the history of Gilles de Retz of Brittany, France, who was executed at Nantes in 1440 A.D., and who was the original of Blue-beard in the tales of Mother Goose","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":47776}