Contentious, but her point about the Gilles de Rais memorial is a telling one
http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/wcwe/wcweapp4.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/wcwe/wcweapp4.htm
The case for the defence
Born 1404 Executed 1440 Exonerated 1992 It is now widely accepted that the trial of Gilles de Rais was a miscarriage of justice. He was a great war hero on the French side; his judges were pro-English and had an interest in blackening his name and, possibly, by association, that of Jehanne d'Arc. His confession was obtained under threat of torture and also excommunication, which he dreaded. A close examination of the testimony of his associates, in particular that of Poitou and Henriet, reveals that they are almost identical and were clearly extracted by means of torture. Even the statements of outsiders, alleging the disappearance of children, mostly boil down to hearsay; the very few cases where named children have vanished can be traced back to the testimony of just eight witnesses. There was no physical evidence to back up this testimony, not a body or even a fragment of bone. His judges also stood to gain from his death: in fact, Jean V Duke of Brittany, who enabled his prosecution, disposed of his share of the loot before de Rais was even arrested.In France, the subject of his probable innocence is far more freely discussed than it is in the English-speaking world. In 1992 a Vendéen author named Gilbert Prouteau was hired by the Breton tourist board to write a new biography. Prouteau was not quite the tame biographer that was wanted and his book, Gilles de Rais ou la gueule du loup, argued that Gilles de Rais was not guilty. Moreover, he summoned a special court to re-try the case, which sensationally resulted in an acquittal. As of 1992, Gilles de Rais is an innocent man.In the mid-1920s he was even put forward for beatification, by persons unknown. He was certainly not the basis for Bluebeard, this is a very old story which appears all over the world in different forms.It is now very widely supposed that the trial of Gilles de Rais was a miscarriage of justice. He was a great war hero on the French side; his judges were pro-English and had an interest in blackening his name and, possibly, by association, that of Jehanne d'Arc. His confession was obtained under threat of torture and also excommunication, which he dreaded. A close examination of the testimony of his associates, in particular that of Poitou and Henriet, reveals that they are almost identical and... (read more)- Le 3 janvier 1443... le roi de France dénonçait le verdict du tribunal piloté par l'Inquisition.
Charles VII adressait au duc de Bretagne les lettres patentes dénonçant la machination du procès du maréchal: "Indûment condamné", tranche le souverain. Cette démarche a été finalement étouffée par l'Inquisition et les intrigues des grands féodaux. (Gilbert Prouteau) - Two years after the execution the King granted letters of rehabilitation for that 'the said Gilles, unduly and without cause, was condemned and put to death'. (Margaret Murray)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Your citation of this text works AGAINST your claim that Gilles was a good Christian and did NOT commit the atrocities attributed to him! You seem to have MISSED an extremely odd and important detail in Murray's account of her connection of Gilles to Jeanne de Arc as BOTH being WITCHES that she stated at her trial "I sometimes put a CROSS as a SIGN for those of my party to whom I wrote so that they SHOULD NOT DO as the letters said"!!! Murray herself admitted "Though the mark was merely a code-signal to the recipient of the letter, it seems hardly probable that a CHRISTIAN of that date would have used the symbol of the Faith for such a purpose." In other words, by doing so, Jeanne was COUNTERVAILING her commands as DECEPTIONS (apparently to deceive the enemy in case the messages were captured) and thereby BLASPHEMING the Sign of the Cross by duplicity or lack of integrity. So she was USING the Sign of CHRIST the "Lord of TRUTH" as the Mark of DEVIL, the "Deceiver and Father of LIES"!!
ReplyDeleteThe connection with Gilles is thus important for establishing his GUILT, because THERE IS such corroboration! I have noted in viewing the aerial GOOGLE Satellite maps imagery of his castelle of Tiffauges that SMACK CENTER in it there is an entrance to a peculiar tunnel system that contains at various ends small caverns like "lairs" that Huysman in his novel questioned the practical purpose of. What is MOST SIGnificant is that judging from the roof-vent openings in the ground beside the opposite subterranean entrances, the tunnels seem to traverse the CENTER of the CROSSroads of the castelle's field!! IF these "lairs" were where Gilles committed his Satanically sacreligious atrocities, then he was COVERTLY (and, appropriately, SUBterraneously) DEFILING and BLASPHEMING the "Sign of the Cross" ABOVE him as represented by the CROSSroads!!
Then again, the DEVIL was always said to be MEET at the CROSSroads!!
Delete