Item, the same Hubert declares that he said to Princé after the loss of his son, he had committed a mortal sin for not having really tended and governed the child: this Princé told him then that it was not his problem, and that he was undoubtedly with a proper gentleman, who would do him much good.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde, Étienne Halouart, Chatau.
AGAICE,154 wife of Denis de Lemion, weaver, of the parish of Notre-Dame-de-Nantes, states that about a year and a half before, her nephew, the son of Colin155 Avril, was living with her and her husband; he was eighteen years old and sometimes frequented La Suze. And that on or about one particular evening while Lord de Rais was living there, one of his servants requested that she entrust him with her child so as to show him the house of the Archdeacon of Merles, promising to give her a round loaf; she accepted, accompanied him, then returned; on the following day the said child returned to the house of La Suze, intending to receive the said round loaf; since then he has not returned, and she has had no news as to what could have become of him.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde, Étienne Halouart, Chatau.
JEANNE, the wife of Guibelet Delit, of Saint-Denis of Nantes, declares that a year ago last Lent she lost one of her children, aged seven, who frequented La Suze, where he had run into a man named Cherpy, cook for Lord de Rais, who was residing at the said place of La Suze when her child disappeared. And Master Jean Briand, who was living there, told her that he had seen the said child busy roasting meat, and according to him, had told the cook he was wrong to let him work in the kitchen like that; she has not seen the child again since nor had any news of him.
Item, she says that three or four months previously, she was complaining to the wife of the said Master Jean Briand, telling her how people were saying that Lord de Rais had small children caught to be killed; but two of the said Lord’s servants, whose names she does not know, arrived as she was speaking, and this Briand’s wife told them that the present witness claimed that the Lord was having small children killed, and the said woman told her that she and the others would regret it. The witness then excused herself to the said Lord’s servants.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde, Étienne Halouard, Chatau.
JEAN TOUTBLANC, of Saint-Étienne-de-Montluc, declares that a year ago last Saint Julian’s Day he went to Saint-Julien-de-Vouvantes, having left a young man of about thirteen at his house; the witness was the tutor of this boy, who lived at his house. But on returning from his trip, he discovered that the latter was gone, and he has not had any news of him since.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
JEAN FOUGERE, of the parish of Saint-Donatien, near Nantes, declares under oath that about two years ago he lost a son, aged about twelve, who was very beautiful; and since then he has been unable to find out what became of him.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
October 2, 1440.
JEAN FEROT, GUILLAUME JACOB, PERRIN BLANCHET, THOMAS BEAUVIS, ÉONNET JEAN, DENIS DE LEMION, of the parish of Notre-Dame-de-Nantes, declare under oath that they knew a son of Jean Hubert’s, a son of Regnaud Donete’s, and a son of Guillaume Avril’s who were living in the said parish of Notre-Dame, and they do not know what happened to these children, but they heard their fathers, their mothers, and their friends complaining bitterly about their disappearance. The witnesses have heard these complaints and verified this disappearance for two and a half years, without having had or heard news of them in these two and a half years, except that a year before they had heard that Lord de Rais and his men were taking children to be killed, and having them taken, and that there is public clamor (common report) on that score.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
NICOLE, the wife of Vincent Bonnereau, PHILIPPE, the wife of Mathis Ernaut, JEANNE, the wife of Guillaume Prieur, of the parish of Sainte-Croix of Nantes, declare under oath that they knew a son of Jean Jenvret and his wife, who was living with Monsieur d’Étampes.156 This child was about nine years old, and they heard his father and mother complaining pitifully about his loss and disappearance. Since then, they have not seen the said child, nor heard any word of him. And they say that for six months they have heard it commonly said that Lord de Rais and his men were having little children taken and killed.
Item, they say that they knew a young boy, the son of the deceased Éonnet de Villeblanche, and heard his mother complaining for three months about his loss and disappearance, and that they have not seen him again since then.
Item, RAOULET DE LAUNAY, tailor, deposes that around last Assumption Day he made a doublet for the said child, who was living with Poitou then. And it was this Poitou, not the said Macée,157 who haggled with him over the execution of this doublet, and who gave him twenty sous; he had not seen the child again.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
October 6, 1440.
JEAN ESTAISSE and MICHELE, the wife of the said Estaisse, of the parish of Saint-Clement, near Nantes, declare under oath that a son of the said Dagaie, named Perrot Dagaie, lived for two years or thereabouts with Master Gatien Ruis, and when he went to live with him, he could very well have been eleven years old. After having lived with him for these two years, he came home to his mother, where he remained one or two days and slept one night, to the witnesses’ knowledge. And since then, that is about two years ago this coming All Saints’ Day, the mother, the witnesses, and several of the neighbors were frightened one day to discover the disappearance of the said child; and to the witnesses’ knowledge, he has never been seen in the said parish or elsewhere. And the witnesses have heard many times that the said child’s mother was asking about him of the said Master Gatien, his men, and a fellow named Linache, living in Angers, lamenting and saying that she did not know what had become of him.
Likewise they have seen her asking about him while bewailing him to Tiphaine, the wife of Éonnet Le Charpentier, butcher, the sister of the said mother of the said child; which Tiphaine declared and reported it in the same manner.
Item, it was put to them whether they had heard it stated or claimed that the said Lord de Rais had taken this child or other children, or had them taken. They responded no, only since the arrest of the said Lord de Rais and his men; they also claim that up to the present, they had no knowledge of the said Tiphaine and Perrine,158 presently held in prison.
October 8, 1440.
JEAN CHIQUET, parchment-maker, living outside the Sauvetout gate, deposes under oath that one month previously, or thereabouts, a man named Mace Drouet, haberdasher, from the vicinity of Chanteloup, near Rennes, came to lodge with him, the witness, and several other haberdashers with him. While they were talking together about the children who had been lost in the Rais region, the witness heard Drouet say that two other haberdashers and he had been to several fairs in the region of Rais, about a year before; he had left two children in the region of Rais, and he has not seen them again since; and he saw their father and mother again, who asked him for news, but he told them that he did not know what had become of the children.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
PIERRE BADIEU, haberdasher, of the said parish of Chanteloup, declares that a year ago, or thereabouts, he saw in the said region of Rais two young children, about nine years old; each had a pack and was going to the fairs, as the witness himself did; they were brothers, and the children of Robin Pavot of the said place. And he has never seen them again. Subsequently, he has been to the region from which they came and spoken to their parents and one of their brothers; these latter asked him for news, and he told them that he has not seen the two children again since having seen them in the said region of Rais. He adds that he heard the brother say that he had gone into various regions in the hope of obtaining some news but could learn nothing.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
JEAN DAREL, of the parish of Saint-Séverin, near Nantes, declares that he has been living in this parish for three years now, or thereabouts; a year or so ago, when he was sick in bed, where he had to remain a long time, a chil
d of his, who lived in the house with him, was picked up off Rue du Marché where he was playing with other children; he does not know who picked him up or whither he was taken, and he has been unable to obtain any news since then, although he has been to many regions hoping to learn something.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
JEANNE, the wife of the said Darel, declares that a year ago Saint Peter’s Day she lost her son, named Olivier, then aged seven or eight, in the city of Nantes. And since that feast, she has not seen him again or had news of what could have become of him.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
JEANNE, the mother of the said wife of Jean Darel, declares that a year ago Saint Peter’s Day, returning from Saint-Pierre-de-Nantes, where she was attending Vespers, she ran into the said child near the pillory and brought him just in front of Saint-Saturnin, thinking to bring him home with her, but lost him in a crowd of men in front of the church; she looked for him and asked in the church, but could not find him; and since then she has never seen him again nor had any news of him.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
ÉONNETTE, the wife of Jean Bremant, living in the market at the house in which the said Darels live, declares that she well knew the said Darels’ child who went by the name of Olivier and was the age indicated above; she says that she is certain that at the time indicated above, the wife of the said Darel told her that she had lost her child and asked her whether she had seen him, and that she responded no; moreover, she says that to her knowledge, since that time the child never appeared in the house of his mother and father; and she has never heard that he had been found.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
NICOLE, the wife of Jean Hubert, of the parish of Saint-Vincent, in Nantes, having sworn to speak the truth, declares under oath that around two years ago last Saint John’s Day she had a son named Jean, aged fourteen, whom she placed with a man named Mainguy, with whom he stayed only a short while because the said Mainguy died. Upon his decease, the said son came to live with her and his father; thereupon Lord de Rais, returning from Angers, came to stay in his house called La Suze, in Nantes. The son of the witness went to this house, where he made the acquaintance of a man named Spadine, who was living with the said Lord. This Spadine gave him a round loaf that the latter brought to the witness, saying that the former had given it to him and that he wanted the said child to live with him and ride in the company of the said Lord de Rais. The witness responded that that was fine. And once again her said son returned to La Suze, whence he returned shortly, bidding the witness goodbye several times, telling her that he was going to live with the said Spadine. And he left immediately, in fact, and since that time the witness has never seen him again nor learned anything whatsoever about what might have befallen him. Furthermore Jean Hubert, the husband of the witness and father of the child, declares that he showed up at La Suze afterwards, asking the said Spadine about his son, who told him twice that he did not know, that he had no choice but to leave and that the child was lost. And such is her deposition.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
JEAN BUREAU and his wife; JEANNE, wife of Thibaut Geffroi, and her daughter; GUILLAUME HEMERI, having sworn to speak the truth, declare under oath that they knew this Hubert and his wife well; also that they knew well the said Jean, their child; that they have seen them living in the parish of Saint-Leonard of Nantes for a long time and that they were still living there around two years before, last Saint John’s Day. At this time the said Jean, their son, was living at home, and before and since that feast they had seen him in the house of his said mother and father. But a short while after this the child left or was led away; they did not know whither or in what direction, and never saw him again; after this, you could see his father and mother asking about him in this town and elsewhere. And such is their deposition.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
LA DEGREPIE, the wife of Regnaud Donete, living in the parish of Notre-Dame-de-Nantes, having sworn to speak the truth, testifies; interrogated, she declares under oath that two years ago last Saint John the Baptist’s Day she and her husband were living in the house where they still live now. And one of their sons was living with them. Her husband hired himself out for a time to a man named Jean Ferot, baker, to learn the trade; and her said son often went with his father to put the bread in the oven. She declares, moreover, that before the designated time this son had met a certain number of Lord de Rais’ men, whom she herself did not know, according to her deposition; as soon as the said Lord came into town, her son frequented his house, but she did not know what he did there. She says, finally, that at the time indicated above, namely two years before, last Saint John’s Day, her son showed up at the house of the said Lord, and she has never seen him again since, and for all she knows he might be dead. As a result she betook herself to many places hoping for news, but has been unable to learn anything.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
JEAN FEROT and his wife declare under oath that two years previously last Saint John’s Day, the now deceased Regnaud Donete had hired himself out to them to learn the baker’s trade; and his son, aged twelve, often came with him to put the bread in the oven. But they noticed several times that after having prepared half an oven, if he saw or knew that the said Lord de Rais was in town, he abandoned the bread and went to the the said Lord’s house, and they did not know what he did there. Now, in the period in question, although they cannot pin down the day, they saw him leave and have never seen him again since, and they do not know what became of him.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
PIERRE BLANCHET and GUILLAUME JACOB declare under oath that they live near the house of Regnaud Donete’s widow; they are certain that two years ago last Saint John’s Day the now deceased Donete and his wife had a child, whom they knew well; and as soon as Lord de Rais was in town he went to his house, and they do not know what he did there. But after this one day when he went there, they never saw him again, and they do not know what has become of him. Such is their deposition.
[Signed:] De Touscheronde.
III
RECORDS OF THE FINAL DAYS
Confessions of Henriet and Poitou
Henriet’s confession159
Let it be known that the said Henriet had been a servant and valet of the said Lord de Rais and that, when the said Lord de La Suze160 took the castle and fortress of Machecoul, the said Henriet heard it said by Milord Charles du Léon that dead children had been found at the bottom of a tower of the said castle; and when the said Milord Charles asked him whether he knew anything about it, he told him no, because he did not know at that time. But he said that when Lord de Rais had recovered the garrison of Champtocé and gone there to give it to the Duke our Sovereign Lord, the said Lord made him take an oath to reveal nothing of the secrets he intended to confide in him. That oath taken, he ordered the said Henriet and Poitou, as well as a fellow named Petit Robin, now deceased, to go into the tower where the said dead children were, take them, and put them in a coffer to be carried to Machecoul. And in the said tower he had discovered thirty-six heads that were put in three trunks, which were bound with cords and taken across the water to the said place of Machecoul, where they were burned, and not in Champtocé, because the said Lord de Rais only stayed there a day or two after having recovered the said place from the said Lord de La Suze, his brother, by handing it over to my said Lord Duke’s possession, to whom he had transferred it; and with that the said Lord de Rais betook himself to Machecoul where the said children were, who were nearly totally putrefied, because they had been killed well before the said Lord de La Suze took the said place; and by diabolical temptation, while he was being conducted to prison in the city of Nantes, the said Henriet considered cutting his throat so as to not divulge what he knew.
Item, the said Henriet declared that the said Gilles de Sillé and Poitou had delivered many little children to the said Lord de Rais in his room, with whom the latter had intercourse, exciting himsel
f and spilling his seed on their bellies; but he did not have his way with them but once or twice. Sometimes the said Lord himself cut their throats, sometimes Gilles de Sillé, Henriet, and Poitou slit them in his room; and they wiped up the blood that ran on the spot; and dead, the children were burned in the said room of the said Lord, after the latter had gone to lie down. The said Lord took greater pleasure in cutting their throats or watching their throats be cut than in knowing them carnally. And this Henriet, Gilles de Sillé, and a man named Rossignol had brought and handed over to him about forty, who were killed and burned in the same fashion. This Henriet nabbed those he delivered while they were begging, and the said Sillé, Poitou, and Rossignol burned them.
Item, the said Lord and Master François Prelati met alone for five weeks in a room at Machecoul to which the said Lord had the key. And the said Henriet heard that a hand of wax and a piece of iron had been found in it.
Trial of Gilles De Rais Page 37
