Interrogated as to whether he went to Florence on his own initiative, to go about his own business, or was solicited by the said Gilles, the accused, to go there and seek conjurors of demons, he responded that he went there on his own business, which he explained to the said Gilles, who requested that in the said regions he seek a man skilled in the art of alchemy and learned in the invocation of demons, and that he send such a man, for which Gilles would compensate the witness. That is why he, the witness, upon arrival, remembered what the said Gilles had told him and sought very diligently for a man practicing the said arts; finally, through the agency of Master Guillaume de Montepulciano, he met François, the preceding witness; he associated with him and offered him abundant wine and food in order to do business with him, and to that end he explained many things to him, without concerning himself with what the other expounded to him, provided that he was able to bring the same François to the said Gilles, the accused; and thus, through his agency, as abovesaid, the same François arrived in this land at the castle of the said Gilles.
Item, interrogated as to whether, before bringing the said François, he knew that he was familiar with the highly criminal art of invoking demons and performing invocations, he responded yes, the said François having assured him of it in answer to his question.
Item, interrogated as to whether, by order of the said Gilles, the accused, he had sought other conjurors or had them sent to him, he responded yes, namely Master Jean de La Rivière, doctor, who knew how to perform the said invocations, as he asserted. He sent the said La Rivière, by order and at the request of the said Gilles, from Poitiers to Pouzauges, where subsequently he performed invocations on behalf of the said Gilles. One night, clad in white armor, with a sword and other weapons, he arrived in a wood situated near the said place of Pouzauges; and the said accused, the men named Étienne Corrillaut, Henriet, and himself, the witness, accompanied him as far as the wood; and the said La Rivière left the aforenamed behind at the entrance to the wood and entered it alone to work the said invocations, thus he himself asserted, and he, the witness, and the others waited; and to the best of his belief, he, the witness, heard the said La Rivière striking his sword against the said armor that he was wearing, or in some fashion striking it with terrible might, making noises as if he were in combat. Then the said La Rivière left the wood and came toward the place where he had left the said Gilles, the accused, and the others; and the said Gilles immediately asked him what he had seen, and whether it were of any consequence: and the said La Rivière, as if frightened and troubled, said he had seen a demon in the appearance of a leopard, which passed close by him while disdaining his presence and refusing to speak with him or tell him anything whatever: why, this same La Rivière did not indicate to Gilles, the accused.
Then the said Gilles, La Rivière, and the others went to Pouzauges, where they gave themselves over to merry-making and where they slept, and, on the following day, the said La Rivière claimed to need certain things necessary for the said invocations, and the said Gilles, the accused, gave him twenty gold crowns or royals, and told him to procure what was needed and return without delay, which he promised to do. And he left and never returned again to the said Gilles, insofar as the witness could tell or had heard.
Interrogated as to whether he, the witness, had been at any one of the invocations practiced by the said François or others, he responded no, but he did assist in making the circle and characters in the said hall of the castle at Tiffauges, and, likewise, in transporting coal, fire, and other things necessary for the invocations performed by the said François. All that, before the said François began the said invocations, by order of Gilles, the accused, immediately after having witnessed these preparations: he, Gilles de Sillé, Étienne Corrillaut, and Henriet betook themselves to the room of this latter where others were sleeping, and they slept; and the said accused men and François remained alone, performing the said invocations as they intended; and, as he warranted, he does not know if there were any apparitions.
Item, he stated that some time before he’d heard the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, say several times that he intended to amend his wicked life and make a pilgrimage to the Holy Sepulcher, in Jerusalem, in order to ask forgiveness for his sins; and that was as often at Machecoul as at Bourgneuf-en-Rais.
Item, he stated and deposed that once, the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, being at Angers, and lodging at the Lion d’Argent, he, the witness, by express mandate of the said Gilles, found and sent him a goldsmith who professed to be familiar with the art of alchemy, to have practiced it before, and to know how to practice it. To which goldsmith the said Gilles gave a silver mark to perform. Which the said goldsmith promised to do, but shut himself in a room where he got drunk and slept. Which Gilles found him asleep and, indignant, treated him like a drunkard, telling him that he no longer expected what he had looked for from him. Which goldsmith left with the said silver mark, which the accused had wasted.
And such was his deposition, and he knew no more, except the public uproar, which, according to him, agrees with what he has deposed.
Item, he stated and deposed that one day, exactly when he could not say, when he was in the city of Tiffauges, outside the castle of that place, but not when he was staying there — and as he attested, he often went to the castle to meet with clerics and on other business — the said Gilles sent for him to come immediately. And he, the witness, came as requested; and he found the said Gilles in a gallery of the castle, overcome with grief and sadness. Immediately upon his arrival, the said accused told him that he believed François was dead, that he had heard him shouting loudly in his room in the castle, and that he had heard the sound of blows, as if someone were beating a featherbed, but he did not dare to approach or enter the said room; and he begged the witness to go see what had happened. But the witness responded that he did not dare to go in either. However, to please the said Gilles, the witness approached the said room, which he did not enter, but, as the said room had an opening near the top, he called the said François through this aperture, who did not respond; the witness, nonetheless, heard him groaning painfully like a man seriously injured; which he reported to the said Gilles, whom it greatly afflicted. Then the said François, extremely pale, came out, and went to the said Gilles’ room; and he recounted how the devil had beaten him horribly in the said room; as a result of which beating, the said François contracted a fever and was ill for seven or eight days. And the said Gilles, the accused, devoted himself wholly to the said François during the said illness, permitting no one else to nurse him; and he had François confessed, and the said François recovered from his illness.
Item, interrogated as to whether he had known or had heard talk of the cause of that beating, he said that he had heard the said François say that it was because, having previously spoken with the present witness about the invocations of evil spirits that he himself was performing, the present witness had asserted that the said evil spirits were of a vulgar nature and powerless; which, indignant with the said François — and also because the said François was keeping his secrets from the present witness — they had beaten him, so he said. The present witness had heard François say that the said spirits were begotten from material nobler than the Blessed Virgin Mary.
And such was his deposition.
And he was ordered formally not to reveal his deposition to anyone.
3. Étienne Corrillaut, called Poitou. October 17, 1440.
ÉTIENNE CORRILLAUT, also known as Poitou, as he warrants, originally from Pouzauges, in the diocese of Luçon, aged about twenty-two to the best of his belief, a witness already produced in the case, admitted to swear to tell the truth, and excused upon surety, on the aforesaid day and in the year of the aforesaid pontificate and council, submitted to investigation and interrogated on everything contained in the promulgated articles, deposed by order and said that after René de Rais, Lord de La Suze, full brother of the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, had t
aken the castle at Champtocé, in the diocese of Angers, which formerly belonged to the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, the same René, Lord de La Suze, came to Machecoul, in the diocese of Nantes, and also took the castle of that place, two years ago.
Now after the taking of the said castle of Machecoul, the witness heard Milord Charles du Léon, knight, who was with the aforesaid Lord de La Suze in the same castle at Machecoul, say that they had discovered the bodies and bones of two children in the lower part of the tower of the said castle. And the said Milord Charles asked the witness whether he knew anything about this: which witness responded no, and really he did not know anything about it at that time, as he attested, because the said Gilles de Rais had not yet revealed any of his secrets to him, regarding the abduction, lecherous abuses, and murders of the said children, which he revealed to him later, in the manner noted below.
Item, he stated and deposed that, when the said Gilles de Rais had recovered the castle of Champtocé from the said Lord de La Suze, and he went there to hand it and its possession over to the Lord Duke of Brittany, to whom he had already transferred the lordship of the same place, then, for the first time, he had the witness swear not to reveal the secrets he intended to show him, and he commanded Gilles de Sillé, Henriet Griart, Hicquet de Brémont, Robin Romulart, and him, the witness, all of whom were servants of the said Gilles, the accused, to go to the tower of the castle at Champtocé, where the bodies and bones of many dead children were, to take them and put them in a coffer, and bring them to Machecoul, as secretly as possible; and in the said tower they found the bones of thirty-six or forty-six children, which bones were already desiccated, and he said he could not remember their number in any case, and the coffer where they were deposited was bound with cords lest it open and the scandal and iniquity of so egregious a crime should come out.
Interrogated as to the manner by which they determined the number of bodies, he responded that this would be by their head count; but he could not recall their true number, were it not that he knew for sure that there had been thirty-six, or forty-six, and he would have not otherwise recollected.
Item, he stated and deposed that the said bones were brought to Machecoul, into the room of said Gilles, the accused, and burned in the presence of the said Gilles, Gilles de Sillé, Jean Rossignol, André Buchet, Henriet Griart, and him, the witness.
Interrogated as to what was done with the ashes of the said burned bones, he responded that they were thrown into the pits or moats of the castle at Machecoul.
Interrogated as to by whom, he responded: by himself, the witness, and by the said Griart, Buchet, and Rossignol.
Interrogated as to why the bones were not burned at Champtocé, he responded that it could not be done, because after Gilles had recovered possession of the said place, he handed the castle over to the Lord Duke, or had it handed over to him in his name, or by his mandate.
Interrogated as to why the said bones were already desiccated, he responded: because of the length of time since they had been thrown into the said tower, before the taking of the castle, which after its capture Lord de La Suze held for as long as three years106 or thereabouts.
Interrogated as to the person who killed the said children and deposited the bones in the tower, he responded that he did not know, but that before the capture of the castle Milord Roger de Briqueville, knight, and Gilles de Sillé called frequently on the said Gilles and knew his secrets, according to what he had heard, and he believed that they were well aware of it, but he does not know any more than that.
Moreover, the said witness stated and deposed that the said Sillé, Henriet, and he, the witness, found and led to the said Gilles de Rais, the accused, in his room, many boys and girls on whom to practice his lascivious debaucheries, as indicated below in greater detail, and they did so by order of the said Gilles, the accused.
Interrogated as to the number, he said very likely up to forty.
Interrogated as to the place or places to which the children were conveyed, he responded: sometimes to Nantes, sometimes to Machecoul, sometimes to Tiffauges, and elsewhere.
Interrogated as to the number of children that were given to the said Gilles, the accused, in each of the said places by him, the witness, and the said Sillé and Griart, he responded that in Nantes he saw fourteen or fifteen, and at Machecoul, the greater share of the said forty, otherwise he could not state the exact number.
Item, he stated and deposed that in order to practice his unnatural debaucheries and lascivious passions with the said children, boys and girls, the said Gilles de Rais first took his penis or virile member into one or the other of his hands, rubbed it, made it erect, or stretched it, then put it between the thighs or legs of the said boys and girls, bypassing the natural vessel of the said girls, rubbing his said penis or virile member on the bellies of the said boys and girls with great pleasure, passion, and lascivious concupiscence, until sperm was ejaculated on their bellies.
Item, he stated and deposed that before perpetrating his debaucheries on the said boys and girls, to prevent their cries, and so that they would not be heard, the said Gilles de Rais sometimes hung them by his own hand, sometimes had others suspend them by the neck, with ropes or cords, on a peg or small hook in his room; then he let them down or had them let down, cajoled them, assuring them that he did not want to hurt them or do them harm, that, on the contrary, it was to have fun with them, and to this end he prevented them from crying out.
Item, that when the said Gilles de Rais committed his horrible debaucheries and sins of lust on the said boys and girls, he killed them or had them killed thereafter.
Interrogated as to who killed them, he responded that occasionally the said Gilles, the accused, killed them by his own hand, occasionally he had them killed by the said Sillé or Henriet or him, the witness, or by anyone among them, together or separately. Interrogated as to the manner, he responded: sometimes beheading or decapitating them, sometimes cutting their throats, sometimes dismembering them, and sometimes breaking their necks with a cudgel; and that there was a sword dedicated to their execution, commonly called a braquemard.107
Interrogated as to whether the said Gilles de Rais perpetrated his lusts only once or more often on the said children, boys or girls, he answered only once, or twice at most, on each of them.
Item, moreover, he stated and deposed that the said Gilles de Rais sometimes practiced his lusts on the said boys and girls before injuring them, but rarely; other times, and often, after their suspension or before other injuries, sometimes after cutting into a vein in their neck or throat, the blood spurting, or having others make the cut, and other times after their deaths and when their throats had been cut, as long as the bodies were warm.
Item, he stated and deposed that the said Gilles de Rais practiced his lascivious debaucheries on the girls in the same way as he abused the boys, disdaining and bypassing their sex, and that he had heard several people say that he took infinitely greater pleasure in becoming debauched on the said girls thus, as abovesaid, than in using the appropriate vessel in a normal manner.
Interrogated as to what was done with the said boys and girls after their deaths, or with their cadavers, he responded that they were burned with their clothes.
Interrogated as to who made the fire, he responded that he, the witness, and Henriet often did.
Interrogated as to the manner, he responded that it was done on andirons in the room of the said Gilles, with thick pieces of wood, thereafter arranging faggots on the dead bodies, and kindling a large fire; they laid the clothes piece by piece on the fire, where they were consumed, so that they burned more slowly and no one would smell the nasty odor.
Interrogated as to the place where they threw the ashes or dust, he responded: sometimes in the sewers, other times in the pits or moats108 or other hiding places, according to the various spots.
Interrogated as to the place of the murders, he responded as above: sometimes at Machecoul, for the largest share of them, and
sometimes at Tiffauges and elsewhere.
Item, he stated and deposed that the largest part and number of the said boys and girls who had been lasciviously abused by the said Gilles de Rais and killed during the time when he, the witness, was in his service, were taken among the poor asking for alms, as much by the said Gilles as otherwise; that occasionally the said Gilles chose according to his pleasure, and occasionally he had the said Sillé, Henriet and him, the witness, choose, who then brought them secretly to the said Gilles in his room.
Item, he stated and deposed that Catherine, the wife of a painter named Thierry, then living in Nantes, entrusted the said Henriet with her brother, to bring him to the said Gilles de Rais and get him admitted among the children in his chapel, or at least with this hope, according to what the witness had heard this same Henriet claim; the said Henriet led the child to the said Gilles and delivered him to Machecoul. And not long afterwards, the said Gilles carnally and lasciviously soiled the said child and killed him by his own hand.
Interrogated as to how he knew this, he responded that he was there and saw Gilles do it.
Item, the present witness stated and deposed that, by order of the said Gilles, and thinking to merit his recognition thereby, he conducted a young and beautiful boy from La Roche-Bernard, in the diocese of Nantes, to Machecoul and handed him over to the said Gilles, who committed on him his abominable, lascivious crimes; until finally the young boy had his neck cut like the aforesaid others.
Item, he stated and deposed that the said Gilles took possession of a young boy who was the page of Master François Prelati, who was also very beautiful himself; and the said Gilles de Rais, after having abused him lasciviously, killed him or had him killed in the abovesaid manner.