Gilles de Rais

Early life

Gilles de Rais (or "Retz"),^[a] the eldest son of Marie de Craon and Guy de Laval-Rais, descended from a number of great feudal houses.^[5] Through his mother, he was linked to the House of Craon, a wealthy western family, and through his father to the Laval family,^[6] one of the two most important Breton lineages in the 15th century.^[7] The Laval family's ancestors included, by marriage, the Barons of Retz^[6] (known as the "oldest barons of the Duchy of Brittany")^[8] as well as the prestigious House of Montmorency,^[6] albeit temporarily weakened at the time.^[9]

He was born "in a room called the Black Tower" at Champtocé castle,^[10][8] at an unknown date. His birth has been variably dated between 1396 and 1406, and more frequently towards the end of 1404.^[11] However, he was probably born not before 1405 given the delays caused by the legal procedures before the Parlement of Paris that conditioned his parents' marriage,^[b] according to archivist-paleographer Matei Cazacu, whose interpretation has been accepted by several medievalists.^[c] Furthermore, an archival document indicates Gilles's age ("14 to 15 years old") in February 1422.^[d]

Gilles's younger brother René was probably born in 1414.^[27][28] He obtained the seigneury of La Suze when his elder brother assigned him his share of the inheritance on 25 January 1434, before the ducal court in Nantes.^[27] From then on, René was known as René de La Suze, thus raising the name borne by the youngest branch of the Craon family.^[29]

Gilles and René's mother Marie de Craon died at an unknown date, while her husband Guy de Laval-Rais died after,^[e] at the end of October 1415 in Machecoul, "suffering from a serious bodily infirmity" according to the terms of his will and testament. The cause of Guy de Laval-Rais's death remains unknown, although several authors have mistakenly assumed that he was disembowelled by a wild boar during a hunting accident, a fictional scene initially depicted in a French novel published in 1928.^[f]

The two orphan brothers Gilles and René were raised by their maternal grandfather, Jean de Craon, lord of La Suze and Champtocé. Jean de Craon's son Amaury died at the Battle of Agincourt in October 1415, a confrontation in which several members of his household perished in addition to his sole male successor. This prompted him to take charge of and manage the property of Gilles and René, who had become his sole heirs.^[47][48] In this way, Jean de Craon broke the will and testament of Guy de Laval-Rais, which appointed Jean II Tournemine de la Hunaudaye as "guardian, tutor, protector, defender and legitimate administrator" of the two orphans.^[35][49]

Matrimonial alliances

On 4 January 1417, Jean de Craon betrothed his grandson Gilles de Rais to a wealthy Norman heiress, Jeanne Paynel, daughter of Foulques VI Paynel, lord of Hambye and Bricquebec. However, the Parlement of Paris forbade the marriage until Jeanne Paynel came of age. This marriage project never materialized but not because of Jeanne Paynel's presumed death, as some authors have argued, since she certainly became an abbess of Lisieux's Benedictine convent.^[50][51]

Jean de Craon then betrothed Gilles de Rais to a niece of John V, Duke of Brittany: Béatrice of Rohan, daughter of Alain IX of Rohan and Marguerite of Brittany.^[52] The contract, dated Vannes 28 November 1418, was not followed up for some unknown reason^[53] (maybe Beatrice's death).^[54]

Gilles de Rais eventually became engaged to his third cousin Catherine de Thouars,^[55] daughter of Miles II de Thouars and Béatrice de Montjean. In addition to the obstacle posed by the consanguinity of Gilles de Rais and Catherine de Thouars, who were 4th-degree relatives,^[56] disputes arose between the House of Craon and Miles II de Thouars, lord of Pouzauges and Tiffauges.^[57] Ignoring these constraints and without waiting for an ecclesiastical dispensation, Gilles de Rais abducted Catherine de Thouars and married her in a chapel outside his parish church, without publishing banns of marriage.^[58] Despite a marriage contract drawn up on 30 November 1420,^[59] the two young people had their union annulled and declared incestuous by the Church.^[60]

After the death of Miles II de Thouars, matrimonial alliances brought the houses of Craon and Thouars closer together,^[g] helping to regularize the situation of the couple.^[59] On 24 April 1422, the papal legate approached Hardouin de Bueil, bishop of Angers, asking him to pronounce a sentence of separation against Gilles de Rais and Catherine de Thouars, and to impose a penance before absolving them of the crime of incest and allowing them to marry in due form.^[58] After conducting an investigation, Hardouin de Bueil celebrated their marriage with great pomp and ceremony on 26 June 1422, at Chalonnes-sur-Loire castle.^[61][59] This union strengthened Gilles de Rais's position in Poitou by "linking him to the house of the Viscounts of Thouars, who dominated the Bas-Poitou region as far as the Atlantic."^[62]

Gilles de Rais and Catherine de Thouars's only child, Marie, was born in 1433 or 1434.^[63]

Family disputes

Under Catherine de Thouars's marriage contract, her mother Béatrice de Montjean retained several estates from her late husband Miles II de Thouars as part of her dower, including the castles of Tiffauges and Pouzauges. Jean de Craon and Gilles de Rais intended to recover these Poitevin possessions after Béatrice's death. However, Béatrice's marriage to Jacques Meschin de la Roche-Aireault, a former squire of Miles II de Thouars and chamberlain to King Charles VII of France, complicated their plans. Jean de Craon and his grandson therefore instructed Jean de la Noë, captain of Tiffauges, to abduct Béatrice, who was imprisoned first at Le Loroux-Bottereau and later at Champtocé. Jean de la Noë also captured Jacques Meschin's younger sister. At Champtocé, Gilles de Rais and Jean de Craon threatened to sew Béatrice into a sack and throw her into a river unless she renounced her dower rights.^[64][65]

Jacques Meschin de la Roche-Aireault repeatedly brought Jean de Craon and Gilles de Rais before the Parlement of Paris in an attempt to secure the release of his wife and sister, but without success. He then sent a bailiff to Champtocé, followed by his brother Gilles Meschin, who led a delegation carrying the summons. Jean de Craon imprisoned all the envoys, including Gilles Meschin. At the request of his wife Anne de Sillé, who was also Béatrice's mother, he nevertheless agreed to release Béatrice. The remaining captives were released after ransom payments, but Gilles Meschin died a few days later, probably as a consequence of his imprisonment at Champtocé. Jacques Meschin's younger sister was sent to Brittany and compelled to marry Girard de la Noë, the captain of Tiffauges's son.^[64][65]

Jacques Meschin again appealed to the Parlement of Paris, leading Jean de Craon and Gilles de Rais to reach a settlement with him. Under the agreement ratified by the Parlement, Jacques Meschin retained Pouzauges, while Gilles de Rais kept Tiffauges. Jean de Craon and Gilles de Rais later seized Pouzauges from Jacques Meschin, arguing that Catherine de Thouars, Gilles de Rais's wife, "bears the name [of Pouzauges] in the world". Adam de Cambrai, a councillor of the Parlement of Paris,^[h] travelled to Pouzauges to oversee the implementation of the agreement, but men acting on behalf of Jean de Craon and Gilles de Rais attacked and robbed him. The numerous subsequent judgments against the two men remained unenforced.^[64]

Titles, estates and wealth

Gilles de Rais held the barony of Retz, traditionally considered one of the six oldest baronies in the Duchy of Brittany,^[69] although the claim of its antiquity rests on questionable traditions.^[70] He was one of the most powerful lords in western France, thanks largely to his extensive estates spread across Brittany, Anjou, Poitou, Maine and Angoumois.^[71] Medievalist Philippe Contamine points out that Gilles de Rais was "Breton, Poitevin and Angevin all at once, due to his fiefs".^[72] Moreover, historian Georges Peyronnet specifies that Gilles de Rais's "network of family and feudal relatives" (including the houses of Laval and Craon) covered a large part of the western marchlands, border regions that were difficult to access because of the damp oceanic climate characterizing these bocage lands and the Marais breton ("Breton Marsh"). Hence the importance "as more open transport routes, of the valleys of the Loire and Sèvre Nantaise, (...) controlled by enormous fortresses."^[73] The crossroads position occupied by the barony covering the Pays de Retz "was an undeniable asset for trade, and enabled the Sires de Retz to control flows on the major axis of the Loire for the Breton economy and that of western France more generally", asserts historian Brice Rabot.^[69]

At the "southernmost point of the Duchy of Brittany",^[73] the barony of Retz comprised a "vast group of some forty parishes stretching between the Loire and the common borders of Poitou and Brittany".^[74] Gilles de Rais held Machecoul (the "head of the barony")^[75] as well as the castellanies of Coutumier, Bourgneuf, Prigny and half of the Isle of Bouin, domains bordering the Bay of Bourgneuf.^[76] In the Bay, salt marshes probably provided him with a not inconsiderable share of revenue.^[77][76] In addition, he held an annuity on the Paimpont forest and owned the townhouse named "Hôtel de La Suze" in Nantes plus the lordship of La Bénate "encompassing 26 parishes in the marchlands (13 in Brittany and 13 in Poitou)", among others.^[78]

In the Duchy of Anjou, he inherited the prominent lordships of Champtocé and Ingrandes, a source of significant income from the Loire "traffic" (merchandise trade),^[79][80] as well as the lordships of Blaison and Chemellier, the barony of Briollay, and the lordships of Fontaine-Milon, Grez and Grattecuisse. In Poitou, he held the lordships of Cheneché, de la Voûte, Sigon, Cloué, Chabanais and the land of Breuil-Mingot, in addition to acquiring by marriage and extortion the barony of Pouzauges and the lordship of Tiffauges.^[81] In Maine, he owned the lordships of La Suze, Ambrières and Saint-Aubin-Fosse-Louvain, as well as the land of Précigné.^[82] In Angoumois, the lordships of Confolens, Loubert and Château Morant.^[83]

However, this census only shows Gilles de Rais at the peak of his domanial prosperity, after his marriage to Catherine de Thouars (1422) and following the death of his grandfather Jean de Craon (1432).^[83] In addition to the more or less substantial disposals Gilles de Rais made, gradually reducing his estate, some lands belonged to his wife, others were only bequeathed to him on the death of Jean de Craon, not to mention those he ceded to his brother René de Rais by assigning him his share of the inheritance in 1434.

What's more, his estates were not always of good value, since the income from them could be encumbered in various ways, such as irrevocable alienations granted by previous Barons of Retz in favor of vassals^[85] or the Church;^[86] widows enjoying a dower in accordance with customary law;^[83] presumed beginnings of the saltworks' commercial decline in the Bay of Bourgneuf;^[87][88] annexations or ravages caused by war, whose constant threat necessitated maintaining defensive devices and paying men-at-arms;^[89][90] geographically dispersed estates, resulting in logistical issues^[91]... Therefore, several factors must be taken into account to explain Gilles de Rais's severe financial difficulties, in addition to mismanagement of resources.^[92]

In any case, it's not easy to accurately estimate his assets^[93] due to fragmentary or imprecise records,^[94][95] and in particular the yield of his estates despite their size.^[96] This is a matter of disagreement between historians Jacques Heers [fr] and Matei Cazacu. Jacques Heers minimises Gilles de Rais's wealth and social status,^[97] and denies him the qualifier of "great lord",^[98] arguing that to present him as "one of the richest lords of France is merely a figure of speech."^[99] On the other hand, Matei Cazacu disputes this interpretation^[100] and reaffirms Gilles de Rais's status as a great, powerful and sumptuous lord, with particular reference to a brief drawn up by the latter's heirs around 1461–1462. This legal document attributed to Gilles de Rais an annual income of 50,000 livres tournois, of which around 30,000 came from his estates^[i] and almost 20,000 from his office as Marshal of France. This amount is well below the incomes of contemporary princes (such as the Dukes of Orleans, Burgundy and Berry), but it nevertheless places Gilles de Rais in a high bracket, inaccessible to the vast majority of 15th-century Breton lords.^[103] Whatever the estimate, his fortune proved insufficient to support his opulent lifestyle in the space of just a few years.^[104]

First hypothetical feats of arms

In the decades following the Breton War of Succession (1341–1364), the defeated faction refused to relinquish his claim to rule over the Duchy of Brittany and continued to plot against the Dukes of the House of Montfort. In February 1420, the House of Penthièvre led by Marguerite de Clisson and her two sons, Olivier and John, took Duke John V prisoner in violation of the Treaty of Guérande (1365). The conspirators enjoyed the temporary support of Charles, Dauphin of France and the future King.^[105][106]

Civil war once again engulfed the Duchy of Brittany. At the call of Duchess Joan, wife of John V, the Breton nobility rallied around the House of Montfort, including former supporters of the House of Penthièvre, such as Jean de Craon. On 17 February 1420, the latter went to his suzerain Joan to swear, along with the other lords present, to protect her and deliver John V.^[107] In retaliation, armed Penthièvre bands attacked the strongholds of Jean de Craon and his grandson Gilles de Rais, notably destroying the castle of La Mothe-Achard.^[108][109]

After John V's release, Jean de Craon and Gilles de Rais were rewarded for their "good and notable services" with generous land grants that were converted to monetary gifts.^[106][110] Perhaps young Gilles's first feat of arms was to take part in the last remaining major conflict of the Breton War of Succession, but it remains a matter of historical debate since various authors stress that there is no documentary evidence of any personal military engagement.^[j] It is also possible that Jean de Craon and Gilles de Rais then entered the patronage of Arthur de Richemont, John V's younger brother recently released from English captivity.^[k]

Meanwhile, plagued by both the Armagnac–Burgundian Civil War, and the foreign warfare against the Lancastrian monarchy, the Kingdom of France suffered a succession of political and military disasters during this phase of the Hundred Years' War.^[120] King Henry V of England succeeded in establishing himself as son-in-law and heir to King Charles VI of France, thanks to the ratification of the Treaty of Troyes in May 1420. For his part, having learned of the Dauphin Charles's compromises with his Penthièvre captors, John V nonetheless wavered between the Armagnac faction and the House of Lancaster to preserve the independence of his duchy. However, this seesaw policy did not prevent the Duke of Brittany from finally adhering to the Treaty of Troyes in June 1422.^[121][122]

Once the Dauphin Charles became King of France in October 1422, he continued the war against the English in order to recover his crown lands.^[123] During this dynastic turmoil, Jean de Craon and Gilles de Rais may have taken part in the victory at La Gravelle on 26 September 1423, and the Battle of Verneuil on 17 August 1424, but this is just a supposition.^[l] In any case, the bloody defeat of the Franco-Scottish troops at Verneuil changed the political landscape, completing the military disaster of Agincourt almost ten years earlier.^[125]

Franco-Breton alliance through the House of Valois-Anjou

King Charles VII of France was forced to seek new allies following the Battle of Verneuil. He turned then to his mother-in-law Yolande of Aragon, head of the House of Valois-Anjou, a younger branch of the ruling dynasty of France. She had been working since 1423 to bring the Kingdom of France and the Duchy of Brittany closer together diplomatically, with the help of her vassal Jean de Craon, Gilles de Rais's grandfather.^[126][125] Although Jean de Craon was an important and wealthy Angevin lord with numerous estates in Maine, Anjou, and Brittany, his influence at the ducal court of Anjou seems to have begun only in 1423–1424. Prior to this, he had spent more time in Brittany and had even been involved in legal disputes with the Dukes of Anjou over the county of Brienne and the lands of the counts of Roucy.^[127]

Angevins' politics finally promoted Arthur de Richemont, the Duke of Brittany's brother, to the rank of Constable of France in March 1425. During the meetings and festivities sealing the alliance between the Kingdom of France and the Duchy of Brittany in Saumur in October 1425, Gilles de Rais appeared in the entourage of King Charles VII,^[31] but he might have been introduced to the royal court before this date.^[128] As a matter of fact, in the same month, Charles VII defended Gilles de Rais's interests by asking Arthur de Richemont to return some Breton lands to the young baron, specifically former estates of the late Miles de Thouars, father of Gilles de Rais's wife.^[128]

After the Maine conquest (1424–1425), the House of Lancaster threatened the borders of the Duchy of Anjou.^[129][130] These two French provinces were personally claimed by John, Duke of Bedford.^[131] The estates of the houses of Laval and Craon, Gilles de Rais's relatives,^[132] were directly exposed to English raids. The war went wrong for France, with Arthur de Richemont suffering a crushing defeat at the battle of St. James in 1426. Although mentioned by some researchers, Gilles de Rais's presence at this battle is not corroborated by any source.^[m] In the same vein, it's doubtful that Gilles de Rais and his future judge, Jean de Malestroit, would have hated each other since this military event.^[n]

Georges de La Trémoille, lord of Sully, became Grand Chamberlain of France in June 1427.^[142] He soon gained the upper hand in the Royal Council while a bitter rivalry arose between him and Arthur de Richemont.^[143][125] On 19 June 1427, Yolande of Aragon appointed her advisor Jean de Craon lieutenant general in Anjou and Maine; his nomination coincided almost exactly with the rise of La Trémoille. The latter also came from the house of Craon and, as such, was a distant cousin of Gilles de Rais.^{[144][145][146]} Probably back then, Jean de Craon endowed his grandson Gilles de Rais with a military mentor: Guillaume de la Jumellière, lord of Martigné-Briant, also Yolande of Aragon's advisor at the ducal court of Anjou.^[147] The influence of his family seems to have consolidated Gilles de Rais's commitment to the war against the English garrisons on the edges of Maine, leading to his appointment as captain of Sablé on behalf of Duke Louis III of Anjou.^[148]

As for John V of Brittany, himself under attack from the English, he negotiated in July 1427 with John of Lancaster, Duke of Bedford, English regent of the French realm. Consequently, on 8 September 1427, the Duke of Brittany decided again to shift the alliance to the House of Lancaster, once more recognizing the Treaty of Troyes and ordering his vassals to stop fighting the English troops.^[149][142] Along with Viscount Alain de Rohan, Bishop Guillaume de Montfort and his own Laval relatives, Gilles de Rais was one of the most notable Breton lords to disobey his suzerain by remaining loyal to the King of France.^[150][128]

Weakened by his various military and political failures, especially his brother's defection, Arthur de Richemont fell into disgrace^[143] due to the lack of results from the French–Breton alliance.^[151] Estranged from Charles VII, he retained the office of Constable, but left the French court and entered into armed conflict with La Trémoille, without allying himself with the English.^[152][125]

Guerrilla warfare against English garrisons on the borders of Maine

From the second half of 1427, chronicles began to mention Gilles de Rais's name, along with those of other French captains.^[149] He leads a guerrilla warfare on the borders of the county of Maine, together with Ambroise de Loré and his own relative Jacques de Dinan, lord of Beaumanoir.^[116] This harassment tactic against the English troops enabled the French captains to storm the Ramefort fortress at Gennes. As soon as they had taken control of the stronghold, Gilles de Rais and the other captains kept their promise to spare the English garrison, but had the "French-speaking" men they found there hanged. It may be a sign of "strong national feeling"^[153] against fighters regarded as "disowned French" or "false French" (in other words, French in favour of the dual monarchy of England and France).^[154]

In another assault, the lords of Rais, Loré and Beaumanoir retook the castle of Malicorne from the English.^[155] The captains had the French-speaking besieged executed, as with the capture of Ramefort.^[153] Moreover, at the battle for the Château du Lude, Gilles de Rais killed^[156] or took prisoner the English captain Blackburn,^[157][158] according to conflicting sources.^[159] The confused chronology of medieval chronicles makes it impossible to date these feats of arms precisely.^[160] At the time, fortresses can be successively stormed, lost and recaptured, due to the weakness of their garrisons or "the endless reversals of local lords, who often belonged to competing networks", notes medievalist Boris Bove.^[161]

In the spring of 1428, Gilles de Rais contributed a thousand gold écus to the payment of the enormous ransom for his cousin^[162][163] André de Lohéac, captured by the English on 16 March 1428, during the siege of Laval. The House of Laval (namely Guy XIV, Anne and Jeanne de Laval-Tinténiac, the young captive's brother, mother and grandmother respectively) undertook to reimburse the "very dear and beloved cousins and great friends" who had helped free André de Lohéac.^[164][165]

New English troops landed in the French realm in June 1428, then laid siege to Orléans from October onwards.^[166]

Comrade-in-arms of Joan of Arc

In February 1429, Joan of Arc arrived in Chinon from Vaucouleurs to speak with the King.^[170] Gilles de Rais was then present at the Château de Chinon,^[171] as were the other captains in Charles VII's entourage during the war.^[172][173] A month later, in a letter dated 8 April 1429, signed by himself and sealed with his seal, Gilles de Rais formed an alliance with his cousin, Grand Chamberlain Georges de La Trémoille.^[174][175] The latter thus pursued his strategy of bilateral alliances with members of the French nobility to consolidate his position with the King^[176] and to protect himself against the plots fomented by Constable Arthur de Richemont and his allies.

Gilles de Rais sat on the Royal Council from 1429 to 1434, but only occasionally, held back by his military obligations or for other reasons. His title of King's Counselor may be purely honorary.^[177] He's also referred to as Charles VII's chamberlain.^[178]

As part of a Franco-Breton diplomatic rapprochement, probably supported by La Trémoille,^[179] Gilles de Rais wrote to John V, Duke of Brittany in April 1429, urging him to reinforce the army being assembled in Blois to help the city of Orléans besieged by the English.^[180] At the same time, after being interrogated by French doctors of theology in Chinon and Poitiers, Joan of Arc received authorization to accompany the relief army to Orléans.^[181] On 25 April 1429, the Maid arrived in Blois to find a convoy of food, arms and ammunition ready, as well as an escort of several dozen men-at-arms and archers, commanded by Gilles de Rais and Jean de Brosse, marshal of Boussac. The escort included a company of Angevins and Manceaux soldiers paid by Gilles de Rais, who "appears to be at the heart of this otherwise ... modest operation", affirms medievalist Philippe Contamine.^[182]

Gilles de Rais contributed to the lifting of the siege of Orléans, notably by taking part in the storming of the Saint-Loup bastille on 6 May.^[183] He then took part with Joan of Arc in the Loire Campaign (1429), aimed at recapturing the towns occupied by English garrisons in the region. Gilles de Rais participated in the Battle of Jargeau on 12 June 1429, and the Battle of Patay on 18 June 1429.^[184] On the way to Reims, Gilles de Rais and Jean de Brosse, marshal of Boussac, both commanded the vanguard of the French army.

On 17 July 1429, during the coronation of the French monarch, Gilles de Rais and three other lords were charged with carrying the Holy Ampulla from the Basilica of Saint-Remi in Reims to the Metropolitan Church.^[185] On the same day, Gilles de Rais was elevated to the dignity of Marshal of France, an honour that was granted either in recognition of his military achievements^[186] or owing to the political support of the Grand Chamberlain,^[187] the two interpretations not being mutually exclusive.^[188]

On Monday 15 August 1429, Charles VII entrusted the wings of his army to his two marshals, Jean de Boussac and Gilles de Rais, when royal and Anglo-Burgundian troops faced each other at Montépilloy.^[189] On 8 September 1429, during the siege of Paris, Joan of Arc wanted Gilles de Rais and Raoul de Gaucourt by her side during the assault on the Porte Saint-Honoré.^[190] Gilles de Rais stood by Joan's side all day, among numerous men-at-arms, trying in vain to reach and cross the Parisian wall from a rear ditch. At nightfall, Joan was wounded in the leg by a crossbow bolt. The siege of Paris was quickly lifted, and the "coronation army" withdrew to the Loire before being dismissed at Gien on 21 September 1429.^[191] That same month, Charles VII again honoured Gilles de Rais for his "commendable services" by confirming his title of Marshal and granting him the privilege of adding to his coat of arms a bordure bearing the fleur-de-lis, a royal favour shared only with the Maid.^[192][186]

On an unspecified date, a French military expedition led by Xaintrailles and La Hire left Beauvais and settled in Louviers, a town seven leagues (around 28 kilometres) from Rouen, where Joan of Arc was being held prisoner since 23 December 1430, after her capture at the siege of Compiegne. Medievalist Olivier Bouzy [fr] states that "important figures took part in the Louviers expedition or made an appearance in the town", like the "Bastard of Orléans" and Gilles de Rais, whose presence is attested on 26 December 1430. These troop movements were interpreted by some historians as an attempt to free Joan of Arc^[193][194] but this hypothesis is not proven.^[195][196] Besides, no such delivery attempt appears to have actually taken place.^[197]

Civil wars between La Trémoille and Richemont's allies

In parallel with his fight against the Anglo-Burgundians, Grand Chamberlain Georges de La Trémoille continued his "private war"^[198] against Constable Arthur de Richemont, himself supported by the House of Valois-Anjou. In this conflict, Gilles de Rais supported La Trémoille, his cousin and ally.^[199]

Despite the similar policies pursued towards the Duchy of Brittany and the Burgundian State by the House of Valois-Anjou on the one hand and La Trémoille on the other, the latter ended up serving gradually as a "repellent" by "federating against him the various components" of Charles VII's court, "paradoxically facilitating (...) the strengthening of the Angevins at the French court", says medievalist Laurent Vissière [fr]. The young Charles of Anjou, the future strongman of the Royal Council,^[200] had been a member of this governing body since 30 March 1430, thanks to his mother Yolande of Aragon. On 26 October 1430, as the king's lieutenant general in Anjou and Maine, Charles of Anjou appointed Jean de Bueil captain of the men-at-arms and archers garrisoning the castle and town of Sablé,^[201] a place previously commanded by captain Gilles de Rais^[148] and royal governor Jacques de Dinan, lord of Beaumanoir.^[202]

Civil war broke out again in September 1431 when La Trémoille launched Captain Rodrigo de Villandrando into the duchy of Anjou. In 1432, Jean de Bueil succeeded in defeating the Spanish mercenary; in return, the latter ravaged Bueil's Touraine lands.^[203][204] Eager to seize Château-l'Hermitage, Gilles de Rais imprisoned Bueil in Sablé, according to Le Jouvencel's romanticized account^[205] (which mentions Sablé under the fictitious name of "Crathor").^[206] Still in accordance with this semi-autobiographical story, Bueil succeeded in freeing himself and taking Sablé,^[207][205] but Gilles de Rais recaptured the town in a night attack.^[199][208] In addition, on an unknown date, the garrison of Champtocé castle attacked Yolande of Aragon on her way to Brittany. Gilles de Rais and Jean de Craon's men-at-arms stripped her convoy of numerous horses and baggage.^[209]

Lifting of the siege of Lagny

The war against English forces continued around Paris. In August 1432, Gilles de Rais helped lift the siege of Lagny, undoubtedly one of his most famous feats of arms along with the lifting of the siege of Orléans.^[195] Assisted by the mercenary captain Rodrigo de Villandrando, he crossed the Marne "upstream, before La Ferté-sous-Jouarre", while other French troops led by Raoul de Gaucourt and the "Bastard of Orléans" managed to enter Lagny through a poorly-guarded point. Medievalist Françoise Michaud-Fréjaville notes that, thanks to this "double movement of troops", the town "was delivered practically without a battle. (...) Faced with the threat, the English abandoned the bastilles and bridge they held downstream from Lagny, leaving much of their equipment behind." On this military episode, Michaud-Fréjaville refers to the "not always very reliable account" of the chronicler Jean Chartier.^[206]

In addition, Jean Chartier's chronicle mentions the presence of Gilles de Sillé, cousin of Gilles de Rais, among the French troops engaged in skirmishes the day after the siege of Lagny was lifted. According to Chartier, Gilles de Sillé was taken prisoner on this occasion, unless the chronicler is confusing him with Michel de Sillé, another member of this old house related to Gilles de Rais.^[p] Eight years later, during the latter's trial, the testimony of the families of the missing children, as well as the confessions of the accused, cast a shadow over Gilles de Sillé, who was on the run at the time. What's more, according to certain witnesses at the trial, a rumour was spread by Michel de Sillé's servants in an attempt to explain the children's disappearances: the English had supposedly demanded twenty-four young hostages as part of the ransom "of the said sire Michel",^[212] a pretext deemed "absurd" and "implausible" by medievalists Noël Valois and Olivier Bouzy, in accordance with the customs governing prisoners of war at the time.^[210][213]

Reduction of military commitments

Jean de Craon, Gilles's grandfather, died in November 1432.^[144] Gilles de Rais inherited the numerous estates and castles of his grandfather, to which were added the Hôtel de La Suze in Nantes and Belle-Poigne in Angers. He likely devoted the year 1433 to organizing this vast patrimony and fully assuming his role as the new head of the House of Rais. During this time spent on his lands, alongside his wife Catherine de Thouars, their daughter was born, named Marie after the child's paternal grandmother.^[215]

At the end of June 1433, in Chinon, an umpteenth plot was hatched against Georges de la Trémoille, who was eventually removed from power. At the Estates General held in Tours in September 1433, Charles VII ratified the fall of his former Grand Chamberlain. The House of Valois-Anjou regained all its influence at court, the young Charles of Anjou became the key man in the Royal Council, and the accomplices in La Trémoille's kidnapping (including Jean de Bueil, Gilles de Rais's enemy) acquired "great government and authority" with the sovereign.^[216] Gilbert Motier de La Fayette regained his title of Marshal after losing it to Gilles de Rais in 1429, a dismissal probably intended by La Trémoille at the time.^[217]

In February 1434, the English threatened the Maine town of Sillé, which was the fiefdom of Anne de Sillé, widow of Jean de Craon. In response, the heads of the House of Laval (brothers Guy XIV de Laval and André de Lohéac) along with their cousin Gilles de Rais took part in a military expedition commanded by Constable Arthur de Richemont. The vanguard of the army was under the command of Marshals Pierre de Rieux and Gilles de Rais. The latter, despite his lavish troop contingent, appeared isolated among the lords present (the Constable first and foremost, along with Prigent VII de Coëtivy, Jean de Bueil, Charles of Anjou and John II, Duke of Alençon), most of whom belonged to the coalition of La Trémoille's enemies. The company arrived in front of Sillé, and faced the English, but the two armies separated without fighting.^{[218][219][220]}

By mid-1434, despite his forced absence from the court, La Trémoille was still urging Gilles de Rais to continue the war against Burgundians. But, probably already ruined by his expenses, Gilles de Rais made little attempt to prevent Philip the Good's troops from seizing Grancey. After the fall of this city in August 1434, King Charles VII summoned Gilles de Rais and threatened to strip him of his office of marshal.^{[221][222][223]} Gilles de Rais "was probably replaced by André de Laval-Lohéac", assumes Philippe Contamine.^[224]

On 2 July 1435, Charles VII proclaimed Gilles de Rais to be under interdict, following complaints from his family,^{[225][226][227]} namely his brother René de La Suze and the House of Laval.^[228]

Occult involvement

According to testimony at his trial by the priest Eustache Blanchet and the Tuscan cleric François Prelati,^[239] Gilles de Rais sent out Blanchet to seek individuals who knew alchemy.^[240] Blanchet is said to have recruited Prelati in 1438, during a trip to Florence.^[241]

In addition to this search for the philosopher's stone, Prelati claimed to have attempted to summon a demon named "Barron" at the castle at Tiffauges, in the presence of Gilles de Rais.^[242] The cleric also claimed to have interrogated Barron in a meadow near Josselin, not far from the castle where Duke John V of Brittany met Gilles de Rais on July 1440.^[243]

Gilles de Rais provided a contract with the demon for riches that Prelati was to give to the demon later.^{[citation needed]} As no demon manifested after three tries, Gilles de Rais grew frustrated with the lack of results. Prelati said Barron was angry and required the offering of parts of a child. Gilles de Rais provided these remnants in a glass vessel at a later evocation, but to no avail, and the occult experiments left him bitter and his wealth severely depleted.^[244]

Child murders

In his confession, Gilles de Rais said he committed his first assaults on children between spring 1432 and spring 1433.^[245]

Act of force in Saint-Étienne-de-Mer-Morte

After entrusting the castellany of Saint-Étienne-de-Mer-Morte to René de La Suze in 1434, Gilles de Rais changed his mind and reclaimed it in an act of force, managing to keep his property by reaching a subsequent agreement with his younger brother in Nantes on 15 January 1439.^[246] But Gilles de Rais again alienated Saint-Étienne-de-Mer-Morte following a transaction with Geoffroy Le Ferron, treasurer and trusted servant of John V, Duke of Brittany. This ducal officer then entrusted the administration of the castellany to his brother Jean Le Ferron, a high-ranking tonsured cleric. Gilles de Rais tried once more to reclaim the castle, this time to sell it to his cousin, the Sire de Vieillevigne, but Jean Le Ferron resisted.^[247]

In retaliation, on Pentecost or the day after, 15 or 16 May 1440, Gilles de Rais ambushed a troop of fifty to sixty men in a wood near Saint-Étienne-de-Mer-Morte. He entered the parish church armed and interrupted the mass of the religious officiant Jean Le Ferron, insulting the latter and threatening to kill him with a guisarme if he did not leave the sanctuary.^[248] Frightened, the cleric followed in the footsteps of Marquis Lenano de Ceva, a Piemontese captain in Gilles de Rais's service. After opening the gates of the Saint-Étienne-de-Mer-Morte castle to his assailants, Jean Le Ferron was imprisoned there. Gilles de Rais also had other ducal agents, such as Jean Rousseau, sergeant-general of the duchy of Brittany, roughed up or arrested.^{[249][250][251]}

In doing so, Gilles de Rais undermined both divine and ducal majesties at once. He committed sacrilege by violating ecclesiastical immunities and challenged ducal authority by laying hands on the Duke's servants,^[252] all within the diocese of Nantes, whose bishop, Jean de Malestroit,^[253] was the influential chancellor of Brittany. As historian Joël Cornette [fr] notes, Malestroit was "the man actually responsible for the duchy's political direction."^[254]

John V condemned his vassal to return the stronghold to Jean Le Ferron, under penalty of a fine of 50,000 gold écus.^[255][256] Gilles de Rais then had his prisoners taken to Tiffauges, a fortress outside Brittany's jurisdiction,^[257] as it fell within Poitou.^[258] In July 1440, he went to Josselin to meet his suzerain John V, but the content of their discussions remains unknown. According to François Prelati's later confession, Gilles de Rais wished then to guarantee his own freedom before risking an interview with the Duke of Brittany. Gilles would have asked his Italian invoker to repeatedly summon the "devil named Barron" in a meadow near Josselin, to question the evil spirit about John V's intentions.^[259]

Ecclesiastical and secular investigations

Probably shortly after the act of force in Saint-Étienne-de-Mer-Morte, a secret investigation (inquisitio infamiae) was opened by the ecclesiastical justice system.^[260] The inquisitorial system proceedings usually began with an information phase aimed at gathering testimony on a person's fama, in other words, on his reputation established by rumour^[261][262] within a legal framework.^[263] As a result, the Bishop Jean de Malestroit made a pastoral visit to his diocese of Nantes, starting with the parish of Notre-Dame, home to the Hôtel de la Suze, Gilles de Rais's residence.^[260] The Bishop wanted to find out more about the infamous rumours of missing children in the vicinity of the baron's residences. The results of the ecclesiastical investigation were published on 29 July 1440 in the form of letters patent by Malestroit: Gilles de Rais was accused by public rumour of raping and murdering numerous children, as well as of demonic invocations and pacts.^[264] At the same time, the secular justice system proceeded to hear the same witnesses^[265] as part of the investigation conducted by the cleric Jean de Touscheronde on behalf of Pierre de L'Hôpital, universal Judge of Brittany.^[266]

On 24 August 1440, Duke John V held talks in Vannes with his brother Arthur de Richemont, Constable of France. Compromised in the Praguerie against King Charles VII in the spring of 1440, the Duke of Brittany wanted to obtain a promise of mutual assistance from Richemont, a great royal officer. To this end, John V granted his brother the land of Bourgneuf-en-Retz, owned by Gilles de Rais.^[267] Richemont then returned to the crown lands of France and seized Tiffauges, freeing the hostage Jean Le Ferron.^[268]

Gilles de Rais was summoned to appear before the ecclesiastical court of Nantes, on charges of "murdering children, sodomy, invoking demons, offending the Divine Majesty and heresy".^[265] Two days later, on 15 September 1440, he was arrested at his Machecoul castle [fr] by Jean Labbé, a captain in arms in the service of the Duke of Brittany.^[269] Among the accused were cleric François Prelati, priest Eustache Blanchet, servants Henriet Griart and Étienne Corillaut, known as "Poitou", as well as Tiphaine Branchu and Perrine Martin, known as "la Meffraye", two women accused of being child providers. Probably already on the run, Gilles de Sillé and Roger de Briqueville were not apprehended.^[266] Gilles de Rais was imprisoned in the Château des ducs de Bretagne in the city of Nantes.^[270]

Trial and execution

Gilles de Rais was prosecuted in both secular and ecclesiastical courts^[271] on charges that included murder, sodomy, and heresy.^[272]

The extensive witness testimony convinced the judges that there were adequate grounds to establish the guilt of the accused. After Gilles de Rais admitted to the charges on 21 October,^[273] the court cancelled a plan to torture him into confessing.^[274] Peasants of neighbouring villages had earlier begun to make accusations that their children had entered Gilles de Rais's castle begging for food and were never seen again.^[275][276]

On 23 October 1440, the secular court heard the confessions of Poitou and Henriet and condemned them both to death,^[277] followed by Gilles de Rais's death sentence on 25 October.^[277] The sentence of the ecclesiastical court imputes to him the murders of "one hundred and forty children, or more"^[278] while the sentence of the secular court did not give an exact number of victims, mentioning the murders of "several small children."^[279] Gilles de Rais was allowed to make a confession,^[277] and his request to be buried in the church of the monastery of Notre-Dame des Carmes in Nantes was granted.^[280]

Execution by hanging and burning was set for Wednesday 26 October. At nine o‘clock, Gilles de Rais and his two accomplices proceeded to the place of execution on the Ile de Biesse.^[281] Gilles de Rais is said to have addressed the crowd with contrite piety and exhorted Henriet and Poitou to die bravely and think only of salvation.^[280] His request to be the first to die had been granted the day before.^[277] At eleven o'clock, the brush at the platform was set afire and Gilles de Rais was hanged. His body was cut down before being consumed by the flames and claimed by "four ladies of high rank" for burial.^[280][282] Henriet and Poitou were executed in similar fashion but their bodies were reduced to ashes in the flames and then scattered.^{[280][282][283]}

Doubts about the verdict in the Age of Enlightenment tradition

In his Essai sur les mœurs et l'esprit des nations (1756), Voltaire referred laconically to Gilles de Rais as a supplicant who had been "accused of magic, and of having slit the throats of children to use their blood for alleged enchantments." Although he expressed reservations about Gilles de Rais's guilt, Voltaire avoided taking a definitive position on the matter. His brief mention of the trial of October 1440, among other medieval trials for heresy and witchcraft, essentially allowed the French philosophe to vilify "fanaticism composed of superstition and ignorance", a flaw he considered to be of all times, but which particularly characterized his conception of obscurantist Middle Ages as opposed to the Age of Enlightenment.^[284]

In a short passage from their work L'art de vérifier les dates des faits historiques, des chartes, des chroniques et autres anciens monuments, depuis la naissance de Notre-Seigneur... (1784), Benedictines from the Congregation of Saint Maur seemed to concur with Voltaire's opinion, also proposing superstition as a plausible cause of Gilles de Rais's execution. These monks initially asserted that Gilles de Rais "disgraced himself in Brittany by infamous deeds that aroused the public's cries against him." But then, abandoning the affirmative tone, they used terms similar to Voltairean prose when they evoked the procession of "alleged soothsayers and magicians" possibly responsible for the "horrors" imputed to Gilles de Rais, "horrors of which he was perhaps not guilty."^[284]

Between 1902 and 1912, Gilles de Rais's innocence was proclaimed by Salomon Reinach, a French archaeologist and historian of religion. His thesis was developed "in a particular context, where debates on the religious question, the memory of the Dreyfus Affair, and the reassurance of the scientific spirit are pushing for a 'rehabilitation' in line with the zeitgeist," explained historian Pierre Savy. Back then, Reinach's assertions were "sternly criticized" by historian Noël Valois in 1912.^[285][286]

In the Voltairean tradition, French poet and writer Fernand Fleuret [fr] followed in Reinach's footsteps with the same anti-clerical interpretation to defend Gilles de Rais's innocence in 1921.^[287][288] For the occasion, Fleuret adopted the pseudonym "Dr. Ludovico Hernandez" to give his essay scientific credence.^[289]

Occultist interpretations

In the 20th century, anthropologist Margaret Murray and occultist Aleister Crowley questioned the involvement of the ecclesiastic and secular authorities in the case. During a conference (known as the "Forbidden Conference") held in Oxford in 1930, Crowley argued for the innocence of Gilles de Rais, whom he portrayed as a victim of the Catholic Church.^[290] The occultist described him as "in almost every respect ... the male equivalent of Joan of Arc", whose main crime was "the pursuit of knowledge".^[291]

Murray, who propagated the witch-cult hypothesis, speculated in her book The Witch-Cult in Western Europe that Gilles de Rais was really a witch and an adherent of a fertility cult centred on the pagan goddess Diana.^[292][293]

Most historians reject Murray's theory.^{[294][295][296][297][298][299]} Norman Cohn argues that it is inconsistent with what is known of Gilles de Rais's crimes and trial.^[300][301] Historians do not regard Gilles de Rais as a martyr to a pre-Christian religion; other scholars tend to view him as a lapsed Catholic who descended into crime and depravity, and whose real crimes were coincidental to the land forfeitures.^[302][303]

Georges Bataille's interpretations

In 1959, French philosopher and intellectual Georges Bataille co-edited with Pierre Klossowski a modern French translation of the 1440 trial proceedings.^[304] The book included as well an introduction and a lengthy appendix in which Bataille retraced Gilles de Rais's life.^[305]

Bataille argued that Gilles de Rais's sexual crimes are "indubitable" because "15th-century judges could not have devised a plot so complex and exact in its perversity", sums up French historian Yves-Marie Bercé.

For Bataille, understanding such criminal behaviour, and thus being able to affabulate it, remained impossible in medieval times without the later assistance of Marquis de Sade and Sigmund Freud, whose works "explore these abysses" and "force humanity to recognize their existence, to designate, to name these virtualities", adds Bercé. The latter concludes that Bataille's historical approach was probably coupled with a "personal exorcism" linked to his own obsession with transgression and horror.^[306][307] This would explain Bataille's need to believe in Gilles de Rais's guilt, in order "to cope with the vertigo that the twentieth century gave him", says medievalist Jacques Chiffoleau [fr].^[308]

1992 mock re-trial

In 1992, French poet and novelist Gilbert Prouteau published a book imagining a modern re-trial of Gilles de Rais, juxtaposition of narrative texts, excerpts from minutes, romanticized letters and a fictitious diary kept by Gilles de Rais, presented as an alchemical scholar, alcoholic and aesthete apologist for pedophilia.^[309] Prouteau then arranged several publicity events.^[310][311] In November 1992, he organized an unofficial^[310][312] mock trial of Gilles de Rais in the Clemenceau Hall,^[313] a hall set up to host commissions, colloquia and conferences at the Luxembourg Palace,^[314] to re-examine the source material and evidence available at the medieval trial. Prouteau led an informal "Court of Arbitration"^[315] consisting of lawyers, writers, former French ministers, parliament members, a biologist and a medical doctor^{[316][317][318]} before Judge Henri Juramy, who found Gilles de Rais not guilty. Commenters noted several inaccuracies, as none of the participants sought professional advice from qualified medievalists.^{[319][320][321]}

Medievalist Michel Balard [fr] criticized the promoters of the rehabilitation attempt, who sought "the sensational, the pathetic, the sulphurous" to the detriment of scientific history, "less spectacular ... but more respectful of documents and more aware of the possibilities and limits of historical inquiry."^[322] According to medievalist Jean Kerhervé [fr], Prouteau has not appeared to research primary source material, and his knowledge of the history of religion, law, and medieval institutions, particularly in relation to the Duchy of Brittany, is regularly challenged.^[323] Medievalist Olivier Bouzy also points out several other errors and rough approximations, even biased inventions deliberately forged for the purposes of rehabilitation.^[324] For the archivist-paleographer Matei Cazacu, the syllogism brandished to exonerate Gilles de Rais ("The Inquisition persecuted the innocent. One of Gilles de Rais's judges was an inquisitor. So Gilles de Rais was the innocent victim of the Inquisition") is reminiscent of the logician character in Eugène Ionesco's play Rhinoceros.^[325] The journalist Gilbert Philippe of Ouest-France subsequently declared Prouteau "facetious and provocative",^[326] claiming further that Prouteau himself thought the retrial was "a monumental farce" pulled off with some "high-ranking buddies", according to the Vendée writer Jean de Raigniac.^[327]

Contemporary academic views

The "vast majority" of historians "believed in the truth of Gilles de Rais's crimes", notes medievalist Jacques Chiffoleau.^[328] In particular, medievalists Olivier Bouzy^[329] and Jacques Heers,^[330][331] like Matei Cazacu,^[100] are convinced of Gilles de Rais's guilt. Likewise, for medievalist Valérie Toureille, the numerous testimonies of the parents make it impossible to "bank on the innocence of Gilles de Rais" despite the material interests of John V, Duke of Brittany, and his chancellor Jean de Malestroit, Bishop of Nantes.^[332] Medievalist Claude Gauvard also emphasizes that "the historian ... is not a judge. He can only point out certain contradictions in the trial, transformations between the initial depositions of the witnesses and the charges developed by the judges, but he must also affirm that facts are stubborn things. Given the initial witness accounts on which the investigation was based, the abduction of male children is no mere rumour" in spite of the exaggerated number of victims. She adds that historians do not "subscribe to the conspiracy theory that these two trials were a plot" orchestrated by Malestroit and the Duke of Brittany.^[333]

Notwithstanding the realistic and detailed nature of the confessions of Gilles de Rais and his servants, these texts are not accurate shorthand accounts, says Jacques Chiffoleau, but after-the-fact reconstructions written according to the medieval inquisitorial system of "highly regulated interrogations, composed of questions worked out in advance, [transcribing oral depositions in accordance] with the classificatory and scholastic writing of notaries and judges, the eventual use of torture to get to a confession that is most often no more than a homologation of what the prosecution proposes."^[334]

With these clarifications made, Jacques Chiffoleau insists that he is not trying to prove Gilles de Rais's innocence or guilt, but rather to explain "the weight of the proceedings" and the judges' "strong views" on lese-majesty offence.^[335] In the Breton magistrates' eyes, the criminal charges against John V's treacherous vassal constituted "a very old triptych that closely entwined" rebellion against the established order (which stemmed from the divine order), deal with the Devil and "unnatural relations" such as sodomy.^[336]

Similarly, Claude Gauvard stresses that confessions were shaped by the expectations of judges, whose imagination was imbued with the "fear of a demonological epidemic" contemporary with the beginnings of the witch hunts in the Late Middle Ages. Gauvard, therefore, considers it "difficult, if not impossible" to "distinguish between what is fantasy" in these confessions, since "the description of the facts is insidiously rooted in reality."^[337]

However, Jacques Chiffoleau admits to being puzzled by certain vivid passages from Étienne Corrillaut's confession of 17 October 1440, in which Gilles de Rais's servant detailed some assassination methods.^[q] These descriptions of bloody and orgasmic rituals have no equivalent in every inquisitorial interrogation studied by Chiffoleau, because in this case the trial documents record murders and sadistic pleasures that had never been put down on paper before Marquis de Sade's literary work in the 18th century.^[340][341]

Psychopathological and Criminological Interpretations

Late Nineteenth-Century Medico-Moral Interpretations

During the nineteenth century, several authors, notably Jules Michelet, referred to Gilles de Rais as a "vampire",^{[354][355][356]} a term then used in the sense of "necrophile".^[357] The designation "vampire" tended to eclipse "necrophile" within "a specific cultural context shaped by the influence of crime reporting, a fascination with criminal and sexual deviance, and sensibilities drawn to the macabre and the fantastique," as researcher Amandine Malivin notes.^[358]

Alongside this literary and cultural assimilation, the final decades of the nineteenth century witnessed the rapid development of sexual psychopathology in Europe and a flourishing body of scholarly literature devoted to the clinical classification of "sexual perversions", whether considered benign or criminal.^[359] Medievalist Zrinka Stahuljak observes that "preoccupations with criminality, criminal responsibility, and penal law brought to the surface the links between madness and crime".^[360] The most influential work of this period was German-Austrian psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing's Psychopathia Sexualis (1886), whose chapter on sexual sadism invokes Gilles de Rais. The book had a profound influence on subsequent scholarship concerning him.^[361][362]

By the late nineteenth century, the medical taxonomies of cruelty, obsession, and perversion helped reshape contemporary understandings of recidivism and, more broadly, contributed to the emergence of a new category of criminal that foreshadowed the modern concept of the "serial killer".^[363] In Vacher l'Éventreur et les crimes sadiques (1899), French criminologist Alexandre Lacassagne identified the "great sadists" who committed "repeated crimes", among whom he included Jack the Ripper, Joseph Vacher, and Gilles de Rais.^{[364][365][366]} The image of the rebellious fifteenth-century heretic gave way to that of the sadistic criminal, a transformation shaped by scientific and journalistic narratives at this pivotal moment in the history of criminology. Gilles de Rais came to be identified with the "monsters" depicted in the crime reports of Le Petit Journal and La Gazette des tribunaux [fr].^[367]

Physicians and historians of medicine sought to establish their discipline as an authoritative means of interpreting the past through the study of prominent historical figures.^[368] Gilles de Rais and Joan of Arc became the subjects of retrospective diagnoses based on the psychiatric theories of the period.^[369] The former was portrayed as a "criminal degenerate",^[370] embodying a supposedly corrupt and decadent medieval aristocracy, whereas the latter, a young peasant woman who claimed to hear voices, was elevated to the status of a popular genius capable of regenerating the nation.^[369]

This approach emerged within the intellectual milieu of the late nineteenth-century French school of forensic medicine, several of whose representatives promoted the possibility of the "physical and moral regeneration" of humanity through public hygiene and eugenics. The pathological contrast drawn between Joan of Arc and Gilles de Rais, closely associating genius with madness, was thus mobilized in support of the theory of degeneration, according to which the history of the French people was shaped by alternating phases of decline and regeneration. Such a medico-moral reading reflected fin de siècle anxieties surrounding national decline and the perceived collapse of civilizations.^[369]

Historian Angus McLaren notes that this body of medical literature was often lacking in scientific rigor. As a result, Gilles de Rais and the cannibal Antoine Léger were frequently grouped indiscriminately with sadists and sexual murderers in superficial and fetishistic collections of clinical cases, presented as brief moralizing biographies.^[371]

Influence of Literature on Medical Interpretations

The original records of the 1440 trial remained difficult to access for a long time, as they were published gradually and only in fragmentary form because of fears of scandal.^[372] Given these circumstances, a number of authors relied uncritically on Paul Lacroix's Curiosités de l'histoire de France (1858), a largely fictionalized account of the trial. This pseudo-historical work, embellished with imaginative details intended to captivate readers, also influenced certain physicians in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.^[373]

Psychiatrists such as Richard von Krafft-Ebing and Albert Moll attributed Gilles de Rais's sadism to his reading of a manuscript of Suetonius,^[374] whose miniatures depicted Roman emperors committing sexual violence against children.^[375] This interpretation, however, stemmed from a literary invention by Paul Lacroix, since no source records the presence of such a manuscript in the baron's library.^[376] The fictional manuscript of Suetonius helped sustain the legend of Gilles de Rais as a cultivated, even learned, nobleman.^[375] As medievalist Zrinka Stahuljak observes, "fiction helped Gilles move from historical discourse into medical discourse": Lacroix's dramatic narrative conveniently provided physicians with a scientific explanation for Gilles de Rais's crimes.^[374]

The medical discourse of the period, fuelled by "excesses of rhetoric and fiction" surrounding fantasies and mystifications about Gilles de Rais's sexuality, thus "contributed to the reification of his ultra-romantic legend" as an exceptional figure, a "superior degenerate" notably glorified by Joris-Karl Huysmans in his novel Là-bas (1891) as a Faustian man of learning, artist, flamboyant mystic and arch-sadist.^[377]

The notion of sadism, popularized during the 1880s and 1890s, enabled certain authors to express, through the lens of belles-lettres, "an elitist disdain for the conventions of middle class and mass society." The literary figure of the pervert was embodied by refined aristocratic libertines such as Marquis de Sade and Des Esseintes, among whom Gilles de Rais was eventually included. Historian Angus McLaren nevertheless notes that individuals medically classified at the time as sadistic criminals, such as Joseph Vacher, generally came from the lower classes so feared by writers of the Decadent movement. McLaren concludes that "the "real" sadists, far from being powerful, sexual supermen, were slaves of their own compulsive behavior."^[371]

Three medical dissertations devoted to Gilles de Rais appeared between 1910 and 1934. "Thin and disappointing", according to medievalist Jacques Chiffoleau [fr], these studies remained heavily influenced by the literary works of Paul Lacroix and Joris-Karl Huysmans. In 1910, Dr. Augustin Cabanès adopted the pseudonym "Rondelet" to sign an article in which he discoursed on Gilles de Rais's facial tics and bluish beard—details born of the fertile imagination of Paul Lacroix. In 1921, poet and writer Fernand Fleuret [fr], in turn, posed as a certain "Dr. Ludovico Hernandez" on the occasion of publishing an essay on Gilles de Rais. Jacques Chiffoleau observes that "this limited erudition and, above all, the frequent use of pseudonyms ... betray in all these physicians (or essayists claiming to be physicians) aims that are less clearly scientific and perhaps a less forthright desire to appeal to collectors of "curiosa" filled with sex and blood under the guise of medical analysis".^[378]

More recently, psychiatrist Marie-Laure Susini [fr], clinical psychologist Nicolas Brémaud, and James Penney, a Canadian professor of cultural studies, have examined the case of Gilles de Rais,^{[379][380][381]} drawing on psychoanalysis in their approach to perversion. Jacques Chiffoleau considers that their attempts may offer interesting analytical perspectives, but their "overly literal reading" of the trial records fails to take into account the fundamental role of inquisitorial procedure in the conditions under which these judicial documents were produced. Moreover, they still rely "on the most fictionalized parts of the narratives of Eugène Bossard [fr], Georges Bataille, or even at times Paul Lacroix, without being wary of what these authors themselves projected into them."^[382]

Gilles de Rais and the Category of the Serial Killer

The association between the modern criminal category of serial killers and the case of Gilles de Rais has occasionally been invoked to refute arguments for the latter's innocence, notably through comparisons with other notorious murderers such as Fritz Haarmann.^{[383][384][385]}

Beyond such comparisons, some scholars have applied contemporary criminological categories to Gilles de Rais. Medievalist Didier Lett, a specialist in the history of childhood and author of a study on pedophilia and child sexual abuse in medieval Bologna,^[386] unequivocally defines Gilles de Rais as a "sadistic child sex offender, sodomite, and serial murderer."^[387]

Historian and archivist Matei Cazacu identifies several characteristics in Gilles de Rais that criminologists associate with serial killers: the relatively young age at which the killings are thought to have begun (between 27 and 31 years old), a preference for a particular type of victim, especially young boys, as well as the alleged commission of "illicit acts" during childhood and adolescence, and a propensity for aggression and violence displayed from an early age. Cazacu also emphasizes the ritualized nature of the crimes, characterized by the repeated use of similar methods of torture and killing, whether carried out directly by Gilles de Rais or by his servants, with the victims treated as mere objects. According to the confessions, these acts included brief hangings followed by a temporary suspension of the abuse under the guise of kindness, neck fractures inflicted with a stick, cuts to the throat or other parts of the body, dismemberment or decapitation with a braquemart, the rape of children who were dying or already dead, a fascination with the display of internal organs following disembowelment, and the contemplation of severed heads.^[388]

Matei Cazacu develops a detailed psychological profile of Gilles de Rais through the lens of modern criminal profiling, drawing on the "analytical framework used by FBI profilers" in a 1990 report and the classification developed by Michel Bénézech, a psychiatrist and professor of forensic medicine at the University of Bordeaux.^[388] According to Cazacu, "modern techniques, when available and able to provide useful insights, should not be disregarded."^[389] Although he acknowledges the criticisms directed at this approach, he rejects the idea that it conflates medieval and modern mentalities.^[340] He nevertheless admits that "the depths of the human psyche always remain unfathomable and (...) Gilles de Rais took his secret to the grave."^[390] Medievalist Claude Gauvard, however, notes that "the historian is not (...) a psychoanalyst, although psychoanalytic insights may help historians understand the content of the confessions and their element of psychotic delusions."^[391]

By contrast, medievalist Jacques Chiffoleau maintains that "the psychology of Gilles de Rais remains forever ... inaccessible to us. Based on the scant evidence available, we can never know whether he would qualify as a serial killer".^[392] Chiffoleau also stresses that "the notion of an almost timeless perverse structure" has only the most distant connection with "the medieval threefold accusation of rebellion, a pact with the Devil, and unnatural relations." Thus, while Gilles de Rais's confessions may appear to "reflect the combination of psychosis and narcissistic perversion characteristic of contemporary serial killers", they are, for Chiffoleau, more illuminating of "the mechanisms of 15th-century political justice and institutional frameworks" than of pedophilia and serial murder in the Late Middle Ages.^[393]

The essayist Michel Meurger [fr] questions the "attempts at legitimization" that lead certain authors "to rely on retrospective interpretations in claiming that the crimes of modern offenders can provide a key to understanding this pre-modern case."^[394] Sociologist and criminologist Aurélien Dyjak likewise maintains that anachronistically applying the modern category of the "serial killer" to historical perpetrators of multiple murders risks obscuring the specific contexts, motivations, and trajectories that shaped their crimes by subsuming them within a reductive analytical framework. In his view, such an approach creates the illusion of a historically continuous phenomenon, turning the serial killer into "a kind of criminological catch-all", even though the category itself is, at least in part, shaped by twentieth-century social and historical developments. Consequently, "by designating Gilles de Rais as a serial killer, we are likely rewriting his history and reinforcing the notion that his crimes were a timeless manifestation of a universal human behavior".^[395]

Historian Anne-Claude Ambroise-Rendu [fr] traces contemporary media representations of child sex offenders to the convergence of two discourses that emerged in the 1990s and 2000s. One of them, which came to dominate public debate in the wake of the Dutroux, Outreau, and Angers cases, centred on child rapist-murderers and pedophile networks; the other focused on the prevalence of sexual violence committed within family, educational, and religious settings. The intersection of these two strands gave rise to the archetype of the "pedophile conflated with the rapist-murderer", a dangerous repeat offender depicted as "a modern-day Gilles de Rais, embodying both the predator and the disturbed individual."^[396] Jacques Chiffoleau observes that the Gilles de Rais case is now largely interpreted through the lens of pedophilia. This shift reflects a change in social sensibilities: the threat no longer concerns collective and political sovereignty, but rather the child and the individual's psychological integrity.^[397]