Gilles and François want to try another invocation by other means, but they give up the attempt for lack of a particular stone (p. 211). They content themselves with repeating the attempts which Gilles no longer attends. Here we should emphasize that in Gilles’ absence the devil does not fail to appear, according to Prelati’s confession. In renewing these invocations, arranged in the same way as the ones at the beginning in the lower hall of Tiffauges, “the devil named Barron” is said to have appeared “as many as ten or twelve times, in the form of a handsome young man about twenty-five years old” (p. 301).
* * *
May to November Prelati beaten by the devil
* * *
Moreover, it is right around the same time that we place another of Prelati’s invocations, where the charlatanism that Gilles apparently never perceived is clearly revealed. In any event, this invocation takes place during the period when, in 1439, Blanchet is staying at the castle of Tiffauges: between Ascension Day (May 14) and All Saints’ Day (November 1). The ecclesiastic, having left that same day, is summoned by his master. He runs to Gilles and finds him in shock. Lord de Rais is convinced: Prelati is dead! In fact, there was a loud noise in Prelati’s room and they heard a great many groans and blows, “as if someone were beating a featherbed.” His horror of the devil is then so great that Gilles is terrified. He does not dare enter the room and weakly asks Blanchet to do it in his stead. The latter trembles no less than his master. Blanchet at last has the courage to look through a kind of interior window rather high up, from which one can peer into the room. Prelati does not respond to the calls; he is content with multiplying his groans. When he finally exits the room, the pitiful man, he recounts how the devil beat him horribly. He is wounded; he will remain ill for a week. Gilles himself nurses him, not letting anyone enter his room. He has him confessed. Prelati thinks that the punishment he has received is due to the anger of the spirits indignant with him for having, in his conversations, held them for demons of little consequence and little power. Doubtless it is for this reason that he attempts a kind of reparation; he had heard it said, so he says anyway, that the said spirits were “begotten from material nobler than the Blessed Virgin Mary” (p. 223).
This comedy gives a fair idea of Gilles’ credulity. It is also necessary to say that sympathy and affection then motivated this credulity. Prelati is twenty-two years old, eleven years younger than his master, who is apparently charmed by Italy and her culture, and fascinated by the Devil and those who can invoke him. In addition, the young Prelati must have had a personal charm, the charm of a rake. In his confession, Gilles will declare that he was clever; he spoke Latin eloquently, was agreeable, and worked zealously at the tasks that his master asked of him (p. 200).
In addition, the two characters understood each other all the better for having the same absence of scruples and the same brutality. Particularly in his violence with Perrine Rondeau (p. 121), Prelati is nothing but a young hooligan; an elegant hooligan, perhaps charming, but a hooligan. At the time of Gilles’ trial, he was able to avoid death. He was only condemned to life in prison, and René d’Anjou obtained his freedom; he still must to die by hanging though (p. 144). Only the farewells that Gilles made to him in the presence of the judges have in their bizarreness something human, something moving or at least paradoxical.
* * *
July-August Journey to Bourges
* * *
François Prelati’s testimony mentions the year when Gilles was away, when he was at Bourges.
Obviously Gilles could not have stayed a full year at Bourges, between Prelati’s arrival at Tiffauges in May 1439, and arrest on September 13, 1440. But these two dates fix the limits of his stay there. To begin with, it seems important to consider that the Estates General convened in that city on February 15, 1440, the sole event that we know could have motivated this journey. The Estates General were called but could not be held; Charles VII was unable to show on account of that princely revolt wherein his son (the Dauphin and future Louis XI) and the Duke of Bourbon played the principal role, and which we know by the name of the Praguerie. A certain number of notables did show at the convocation. But, on the one hand, there is no reason to think that Gilles in disgrace would have been invited to the Estates General in 1440; on the other hand, it is from Tiffauges that he left for Bourges, and to Tiffauges that he returned. In 1439, from Ascension Day to the end of the year, he effectively stays in the castle at Tiffauges; but it is then at Machecoul that he will install himself. In fact, on December 25, 1439, Prelati is at Machecoul and clearly ought to remain there with his master who, from then until his arrest, no longer changes his principal residence; so it is at Machecoul, not Tiffauges, that he resides in February 1440. The stay at Bourges is therefore in 1439. But there is obviously some time between Gilles’ departure for Bourges and Prelati’s arrival at Machecoul. Apparently the stay at Bourges takes place before a relatively brief stay at Bourgneuf, therefore in July or at the beginning of August. It could as well be placed in October or November, but this is when the religious offering of children’s members is supposed to occur. A rapid succession that is not inconceivable; it is, however, improbable (pp. 214-215).
* * *
(1439)
* * *
* * *
August A serpent’s apparition
* * *
Whatever the case, Gilles de Rais, staying at Bourges, left Prelati at Tiffauges, entrusting him with continuing the invocations in his absence. Prelati keeps him current; he writes him cryptic notes. With Gilles at Bourges, Barron is supposed to have appeared to Prelati and given him a “black powder, on a piece of state,” in order that it be conveyed to his master. This gift from the infernal spirit is supposed to have been actually transmitted to Bourges; Gilles is supposed to have worn it several days from his neck in a silver box, but he got rid of it, “discovering that it was not doing him any good” (pp. 199 and 214-215). Gilles having returned from Bourges to Tiffauges, Prelati performs an invocation in which the devil, or Barron, is supposed to have appeared to him in a human form. Prelati asks him for riches on Gilles’ behalf. Whereupon he is supposed to have seen “a large quantity of gold” in a room. At first he is forbidden to touch them, but Gilles wants to see this mass of gold. The two of them approach the room. François is once again at the entrance when “a huge, winged, and vigorous snake, as big as a dog” appears to him. He cries to Gilles not to enter; he just saw a serpent! Gilles runs for cover … he returns. He has fortified himself with a crucifix containing a splinter of the Holy Rood. Thus armed, he presents himself at the room’s entrance. François tells him that it is not a good idea introducing the “blessed cross” into this business. François strives to prevent his entering with the cross; it goes on like this until finally Gilles approaches a fake ingot; all he finds there, he says, is a “sort of foil,” a worthless sheet of brass, which he does not touch (pp. 199 and 215).
The invocation thus concluded is one of three invocations by Prelati that the Marshal personally attended. The first is the solemn invocation attempted in June or July in the large lower hall of Tiffauges. This is the great invocation of Tiffauges. The second is the invocation of the serpent, which we have just given an account of, whose location Gilles forgot. The third is the invocation of Bourgneuf, which evidently occurred toward the end of August (pp. 198-199 and 212-213).
* * *
Around August Murder of Guillaume Avril’s son
* * *
Guillaume Avril’s son, the nephew of Denis de Lemion, a weaver of the parish of Notre-Dame-de-Nantes, disappeared “one morning in August 1439, or thereabouts.” He is “of small build and pale complexion,” having a mark on the ear “similar to a small ear.” Colin’s aunt, Agathe, Denis de Lemion’s wife, had been asked by one of Lord de Rais’ men to loan him the child in order to show him “the house of the Archdeacon of Merles”; it was understood that the child would receive a round loaf of bread. Agathe accompanies the child on t
he first day, but on the following day Colin returns to the Hotel de La Suze, where, moreover, he is used to going once in a while under the pretext of returning with a round loaf. He does not return, and nobody has any news of him since. Agathe affirms that Lord de Rais was residing at the Hotel de La Suze then. In his confession, Henriet remembers delivering to his master at the Hotel de La Suze a child named Lemion, with whom Gilles “had intercourse” and who was “killed and burned” (pp. 155, 160- 161, 266-267, 268-269).
* * *
August Meeting of Jean V and Gilles de Rais at Bourgneuf
* * *
At Bourgneuf-en-Rais Gilles has come to see the Duke, who is passing through and whose assistance he certainly needs. He wants Jean V to take him into his good graces. No doubt he has understood that the Duke, no longer expecting anything from him, is tired of him. He is unable to ignore his partner’s natural duplicity and indifference. He knows the rumors which he is the object of; he knows he is penniless, vulnerable. He had expected gold in abundance from the demon; he is reduced to begging him for the favor of a few coins. It is with this humiliating intention that he asks Prelati to invoke this Barron in his presence, who had never deigned to appear to him. Therefore he tries a second time to confront the entity who makes him tremble. Once again, he will be abandoned to his fear; the evil one scorns him (pp. 174, 214 and 277).
* * *
(1439)
* * *
* * *
Around August 25 Murder of Bernard Le Camus
* * *
Deceived by the Devil, Gilles returns to his criminal debauchery. Perhaps he had an inconclusive interview with Jean V … His men escort a young, “very beautiful and smart” boy, fifteen years old, into his room in the convent where he is staying at Bourgneuf. The boy, originally from Brest, lives with Guillaume Rodigo, originally from Guérande. A Breton from Brittany, Bernard Le Camus is in Bourgneauf to learn French. The testimonies taken as a whole incriminate Poitou, and that of Rodigo himself accuses Blanchet as well. The child speaks with Poitou and leaves. He leaves Rodigo’s house for Gilles de Rais’ room on the evening of August 25th (St. Bartholomew’s Eve), about six o’clock; he has forewarned the chambermaid, Marguerite Sorin. Poitou had spoken in a low voice to the child in front of the chambermaid. The chambermaid wanted Bernard to tell her what Poitou had told him. Poitou, the boy said, had not told him anything. He leaves without saying where he was going, leaving his robe, his shoes, and his hood behind. We are assured by the confessions of Gilles, Henriet, and Poitou that the child died. Gilles says he killed him with Henriet. Henriet claims to have not assisted in the death. All three criminals agree in reporting that the body was burned at Machecoul (pp. 175-176, 200, 228, 235-237, 277 and 281-282).
In any event, Gilles founders; the pleasure which he has attained is sinister. He is more than ever susceptible to remorse. He speaks of his intention to change his life. Eustache Blanchet testifies how “some time ago” he repeatedly heard him saying, as much at Machecoul as at Bourgneuf-en-Rais, “that he intended to amend his wicked life and make a pilgrimage to the Holy Sepulcher, in Jerusalem, in order to ask forgiveness of his sins.”
He does not reform himself, but lets remorse overcome him now and then (pp. 124, 177, 202, 215-216 and 222).
* * *
August 28
* * *
Jean Toutblanc of Saint-Étienne-de-Montluc, having left at home on August 28, 1439 a thirteen-year-old boy, whom he was the tutor of, no longer finds him on his return. Since then, “a year ago last Saint Julian’s Day,” he has had no more news of him (p. 269).
Of all the testimonies concerning the murders, this is the most negligible, Saint-Étienne-de-Montluc being too far away from Tiffauges.
* * *
Autumn
* * *
Two sons of Robin Pavot, of Chanteloup near Rennes, both of them approximately nine years old, used to frequent the fairs in the region of Rais, carrying their bales of notions; Pierre Badieu, a haberdasher in the same village, no longer saw them there after October 1439 — or thereabouts — where he usually used to see them, he testifies before the judges of Nantes. For their part, their father and mother, not seeing them return, try vainly to make inquiries. One of their brothers even travels to “various regions in the hope of obtaining some news,” but learns nothing (pp. 271-272).
The connection of this double disappearance to Gilles de Rais is no less doubtful.
Prelati alleged that the devil Barron had stipulated during one of his appearances that Gilles “would provide a meal to three people on three solemn feasts.” Gilles does it once only, on the feast of All Saints of 1439. According to Prelati, “this was why the same Barron refused to appear in the said Gilles’ presence” (pp. 175-176 and 215-216).
* * *
November 1
* * *
All Saints’ Day of 1439 is the day on which Eustache Blanchet leaves Tiffauges after an argument with Gilles’ companion and accomplice, Robin Romulart; the diabolical invocations are supposed to have generated the disagreement. Blanchet goes to stay at Mortagne with an innkeeper named Bouchard-Menard. He will stay there seven weeks (pp. 217-218).
* * *
November 2
* * *
King Charles VII issues the great ordinance of 1439 following a meeting of the Estates General of Orléans, held in October. This essential text points to the continual progress, in spite of overwhelming disorder, of administration and law over arbitrariness and violence. Its purpose is to put an end to “the tremendous excesses and pillages” that are desolating the realm. It seeks above all to substitute a regular army based on discipline and military hierarchy for the bands of brigands commanded by lords or captains who are themselves brigand chiefs. This ordinance, dictated by reason, marks the birth of a modern world, a bourgeois world, where the unrestrained violence of a Gilles de Rais will find no place.40
What is our Gilles de Rais at this time?
* * *
Gilles de Rais in 1439
* * *
His title of Marshal, in 1439, is not justified by any legal act. Nobody asks anything of him, nobody thinks of him. He is useless; the permanent army, created by the ordinance of 1439, is the antithesis of this naive brigand, inebriated on wine or blood, who never stopped believing himself above the law. The little we know of his military role in this period bears evidence of sporadic activity, wherein he leads companies of men analogous to all the companies of mercenaries and extortioners infesting the country, some fighting for the King, some against him. He is nothing else in 1439 than a brigand chief, in many respects analogous to those whose ferocity made them notorious. He is not the least ferocious; he is ferocious in another manner; he does not possess that sly realism of famous brigand chiefs, and they do not possess his shame. But he does belong to the same horrible world.
* * *
(1439)
* * *
We know in particular that Jean de Siquenville is one of these men. It is with him that sometime around June Gilles replaces the false Maid, whom he had charged with fighting on his behalf. But Jean de Siquenville is without a doubt one of these brigand chiefs; there is no difference in this era between the captain of a warring company, in the service of whoever needs him, and a brigand chief. This Jean de Siquenville and his men lived on spoils: they pillaged villages, violating, burning, and, if necessary, torturing and killing. Before the end of the year, the Dauphin finds him at Tiffauges. Having him arrested, he has him imprisoned in the castle at Montaigu. Siquenville, on the verge of being hanged, escapes.41
The life of a Siquenville evokes the world where Gilles, during his last years, led the battle against his neighbor, the castellan of Montaigu, Jean de Harpedenne,42 or against the captain of Palluau (pp. 200 and 215). But we know practically nothing of the circumstances or episodes of those feudal battles at a time when, little by little, their anachronism is becoming flagrant.
* * *
Around the begi
nning of December The public rumor
* * *
Jean Mercier, castellan of La Roche-sur-Yon, traveling to Mortagne, stays at the hotel of Blanchet’s landlord; this latter asks him for news in the regions of Nantes and Clisson. Here is what Blanchet reports: according to Mercier, public rumor in these regions accuses Gilles de Rais of killing, and causing to be killed, a large number of children … he was writing a book in his own hand with their blood. This book finished, he expects to seize all the fortresses he wants … From then on nobody will be able to harm him (p. 218).
Lord de Rais’ emissary, the goldsmith Jean Petit, then working at Tiffauges with Prelati, arrives at Mortagne on the following day. He is charged with leading Eustache Blanchet back, but Blanchet refuses. Blanchet is supposed to have told Petit that Gilles and the Italian should stop: it was not good to commit these crimes, and public rumor was growing against them. According to Blanchet, Gilles threw the goldsmith into the prison of Saint-Étienne-de-Mermorte on his return. He is supposed to have stayed there a long time … (p. 218).