Infamous Lady: The True Story of Countess Erzsébet Báthory

by Craft, Kimberly

  Csákvár, February 12, 1611

  Illustrissimae Dominationis vestrae servitor addictissimus

  Nicolaus de Zrínyi (m.p.)

  NÁDASDY’S LETTER TO THURZÓ

  FEBRUARY 23, 1611

  I wish Your Grace and my Lady, as well as your beloved children, all the best from God, as you yourself desire. I took from your letter what His Majesty has ordered you to do to my miserable mother. I have your response to His Majesty, and realize how often you are well disposed toward me and my sisters. God grant that we, I and my sisters and brothers-in-law, can reward your kindness by obedience from a pure heart throughout our entire lives. It is true, as you wrote to His Majesty, that the Citatio (court summons) should have been issued sooner and that it is now inappropriate, because Your Grace, as the country's Chief Justice, has already done enough extentio. It is no longer necessary to continue, since the present punishment of my poor mother is worse than death, and not necessary to proceed according to the command of His Majesty since a judgment on her life has already been made. Turning now to her property, there is no need to fear, because before her arrest, she turned it all over to the three of us. Nevertheless, we, the relatives and humble subjects of His Majesty, wish to ask that your use of legal force against my mother not impose eternal shame on our family. However, we do not want to act without the knowledge and advice of Your Grace; it is not fitting. I therefore implore you, please, write us your opinion on how my sisters and I should proceed with our intercession to His Majesty so as not to cause Your Grace any grief; indeed, as we learned from your letter, which we have kept secret. I await a favorable response from you, as my beloved father and Lord. God grant you many years in good health. Castle Keresztúr, February 23, 1611.

  Count Paulus de Nádasd manu propria.

  MÁTYÁS’ LETTER TO THURZÓ

  FEBRUARY 26, 1611

  Venerable and distinguished one, our sincerely devoted, loyal subject. What you shared with us in writing regarding Mrs. Nádasdy’s case, namely, those urgent reasons and considerations for which you are not accountable and that which can be brought before the court, we have heard favorably. However, we do not want you to conceal your loyalty—that it has become known to us that nothing precludes nor should prevent said woman from appearing in court, so that we can be assured she receives her sentence. Indeed, clarification on the matter, including the gathering of testimony to show evidence of what happened, makes it possible to show the soundness of judging her before a court known to be competent, which would then enable a proper punishment to be imposed in light of her crimes. We ask firmly, that you handle this Nádasdy complaint no differently and that you proceed according to the way of the law, despite any above-mentioned concerns or other important reasons. What is uppermost in mind and consideration is that, hereafter, we expect your loyal and immediate response. We do not doubt your assurance that the appropriate time and due effort will not be neglected and, in particular, that you will act in the pursuit of the conventions and expectations of the law. We remain under leave of our royal grace and benevolent affection. Given in our City of Vienna, on the 26th Day of February, the year of the Lord 1611.

  Mátyás

  MÁTYÁS’ LETTER TO THURZÓ

  MARCH 18, 1611

  Respected and magnanimous one, our faithful, sincere and valuable subject. Regarding the necessary and obvious common sense reasons why it is necessary to re-open the case of the noble and dignified Lady Nádasdy, and why we desire to and must bring this case to court, we provided such details in our previous letter dated the 26th of February. In addition, the observance of divine law and its compliance now require us to proceed according to the laws and customs of the Father, to carefully weigh, and to investigate and conclude the matter by judicial review. In order for the meeting of judges to take place with you in Bratislava on the agreed date and time, we have instructed our Hungarian Court Chamber with seriousness and vigor, under application of the royal legal authority, to proceed immediately in this case with the proposed process and, to ensure compliance, in accordance with the laws of the Father. We also do not doubt your devotion, to which we seriously and zealously urge all of this, and to which you are called to do in the interest of the laws and statutes of the Kingdom, such being necessary to fulfill your duty and responsibility to us. We will continue to weigh all other respects in your favor, with our affections sympathetic toward you. Given in our City of Jihlava (Iglau), the 18th Day of March, the year of the Lord 1611.

  Mátyás

  Valentinus Leepes, Bishop of Nitra

  Laurentinus Ferencz

  THURZÓ’S LETTER TO MÁTYÁS

  MARCH 30, 1611

  Many factors in the case of the well-known and noble Lady Nádasdy were reviewed in a rather narrow time period and were neither settled nor brought about for all the various reasons in the world, because neither could the witness statements be gathered in due time, nor were they made available during the prisoners’ stay in the dungeon when they were sentenced to death. Moreover, I received Your Majesty’s order only yesterday evening after the court had already resumed from the holiday due to the failure of the sitting judge of the kingdom. But that Your Majesty can be satisfied, based on known considerations, with the perpetual prison sentence, may Your Majesty graciously receive the unanimous ruling by the Council of Lords and sitting judge from my letter dated the 23rd of the current month. There is also no risk that complaints about her innocence should reach the ears of Your Benevolent Majesty, since when, in this matter, the judicial investigation of the Council of Lords and sitting judge prompted by Your Majesty became necessary as a result of the horror of the atrocities perpetrated which demanded divine punishment, I, as chief judge next to Your Majesty, arranged her imprisonment after careful deliberation with the common consent of her relatives and her sons-in-law. The same Council of Lords and sitting judge confirmed for me today that I have taken the correct approach. The difficulty in this case, when weighing justice, is that it very rarely happens that highly regarded women of our time, as a result of their way of life, find themselves in such a highly alarming situation that the death penalty should be imposed on them, as well as to ask, what benefit would the government (treasury) receive in this case. Your Majesty will receive a full report on everything contained in this message upon the return of the sublime and dignified (Magnificus ac generosus) noble directors and their associated Council of Lords of the Court Chamber of Pressburg (Bratislava). Nevertheless, I leave everything to the gracious decision of Your Majesty; to decide what is incumbent on the Treasury of your Majesty and the director causarum regalium (royal administrator of the goods); in accordance with the law in this matter, I will act as judge and justiciary and not deviate from my duty.

  Bratislava, 30 March 1611

  Count György Thurzó

  HUNGARIAN COURT CHAMBER’S LETTER TO MÁTYÁS MARCH 31, 1611

  Sacred Royal Majesty, our gracious Lord!

  As loyal servants who humbly receive the grace of Your Holy Royal Majesty, we subjects take note of the benevolent command of our Sacred Royal Majesty issued on the 19th of this month, regarding the accused Lady Nádasdy. As to which causes and by which means this matter can and must proceed and be encouraged through the royal officials of your Majesty, the both of us diligently, faithfully and sensibly discussed and considered the matter in careful negotiations with the Assembly of the Chamber of Your Royal Majesty and, as before, simultaneously with the designated Council of Lords of your Majesty, and also with the master notaries. But because of the occurrence of very many difficulties involving the jurisdiction and legal traditions of the Kingdom, we note that this process has not been treated with appropriate or sufficient care by said officials of Your Majesty for a number of reasons, but most especially because of the following: Because when the original, commissioned master notaries of record began taking witness testimonies, public knowledge regarding the case became known; however, they had not yet concluded the matter, thus rende
ring the state action ineffective. In the situation in which one has committed murder, such as in the case of persons of low birth accusing the noble of commiting a crime, which ordinarily would result in the death penalty at the court of your Majesty, it is a matter for the parties to settle amongst themselves and not for the State to decide, since it is feared that the relatives of the deceased would not feel as though they were bound to the judicial decision; thus, it is easier for them to agree with one another than would be possible with the State. And, although in this case, the state would be allowed to impose the death penalty against her, nevertheless, no major advantage can be hoped for as only the third portion of the property, according to the usual estimate, of the one condemned to death, goes to the Kingdom, which, strictly speaking, is only after deducting the respective portions of the remaining sons and daughters, under the laws of the Kingdom, Part 2, Title 60, of which those two parts of this estimate will be discussed by the illustrious Lord Palatine, as judge of this case in accordance with the ancient customs of the Kingdom and in accordance with Part 2, Title 57. Indeed, it seems that the Treasury of Your Majesty will not even receive this benefit because, a few years ago, the above-mentioned Mrs. Nádasdy transferred all her possessions over to her sons, including her total and complete rights to it, so that the now-incarcerated prisoner has nothing to be found in the way of property. From there it follows that, even if convicted, nothing could be confiscated by the Treasury, nor could the Treasury take possession of anything. Thus, any trouble and expense which would arise would be entirely in vain. Nevertheless, however, as to the remaining matter, it would be what Your Majesty graciously determines as to how to proceed against her; if we may suggest, she is already a prisoner of those in power over her after previous approval, but not confirmation, of the first general council of the Parliament of the Kingdom and publicly presented as, so to speak, caught red-handed, and so the favor of a guilty sentence will be deemed worthy, with the consent of the Parliament, whether it be a mild sentence or the death penalty, in accordance with the aforementioned laws of the Kingdom, Part 2 Title 75. Ultimately, however, we have no suggestion regarding a method by which to bring her to justice, both because of time constraints, and also because the witness interviews against her have not yet been reported or even completed by the master notaries of record. However, since nearly all of the judges of the Kingdom and Assessor of the Royal Court are so inclined and, thus, since we hardly have to do anything to secure a ruling, I recommend a mild verdict on the part of Your Majesty in consideration of the gracious, faithful and useful services of the deceased husband of this woman and her minor sons and daughter, one of whom is married to the illustrious and glorious Lord Count Nicolaus de Zrínyi, the other to Lord György Homonnay, both important nobles and Your Holy Majesty’s faithful servants and useful and good citizens of your country, who are against the extreme punishment of putting this woman to death, but rather beseech you to decide her punishment so as to effectively remain at life-long imprisonment, respectively. We ask for the royal instruction of your gracious Majesty in the near future; which in the grace of God always be in full glow and receive a happy reign.

  Pressburg, March 31, 1611.

  Your Royal Majesty's faithful and devoted servants, directors and associates of the Council of the Hungarian Chamber,

  Tomás Vizkelety

  Franciscus Leranth

  ANDRÁS OF KERESZTÚR’S REPORT TO MÁTYÁS II

  (224 WITNESS STAEMENTS)

  JULY 28, 1611

  After this message was issued and delivered to him, said notary of record proceeded to faithfully fulfill his duty on behalf of our Royal Majesty, and in furtherance of this faithful endeavor, on the third day of the week after the Sunday Sexagesima (February 9, 1611) and the days following, initially in the city of Kosztolány, and thereafter in the cities of Csejthe and Beckov, the testimony below was taken under the heavily-weighted penalty of 16 marks, as stated under general decree, only after the following were called and gathered in his presence, in order to discover, from the clergy in the purity of their conscience, while the people in their faith in God and conscious of their loyalty to our Holy Majesty and the Crown of our said Kingdom of Hungary, whether the magnanimous and noble Lady Erzsébet Báthory, widow of the illustrious and famous, late Ferenc Nádasdy, Stable Master, who with disregard of her reverence for God and man, as with animal savagery directed and driven by devilish sense, cruelly killed numerous innocent virgins, nobles as well as lower-class maids alike without the slightest blame upon them, their bodies mutilated and burned with hot iron, pieces of flesh torn from them, roasted in the fire and given to them to eat, in order to discover the truth, to inquire, to learn and to know.

  And the first was the venerable Michael Fabri, pastor in the city of Kosztolány, who was questioned in the purity of his conscience; he said that he heard freely and, in general, far and wide of the alleged cruelty of said Mrs. Erzsébet Báthory; but whether all that is said regarding Lady Erzsébet Báthory is true is certainly not known to him. But he does know well that after the wedding celebration of the illustrious György Homonnay, two dead girls were brought from Csejthe to Kosztolány and were buried there without funeral ceremonies; he had also heard from others that, in previous years, while this woman Erzsébet Báthory was on a trip from Csejthe to Kosztolány, a virgin was undressed in winter here in the city of Kosztolány, submerged in the frozen stream that flows through the city after the ice was removed, and finally killed; they had also buried her here in Kosztolány.

  The 2nd witness was the honorable Tamás Jaworka, Judge of the City of Kosztolány, about 40 years old, sworn and interrogated; he spoke of the cruelty of the woman Erzsébet Báthory in the same way as the previous witness, the Pastor of Kosztolány; regarding the virgins, however, at the time of György Homonnay’s wedding celebration in winter in the stream where they were submerged and died, he added to the pastor’s report that after the death of these two girls, the two women were released after the arrest of this woman and handed over to the illustrious Palatine. The judge of Kosztolány said, in addition, that he had heard from some young servants of the said Mrs. Erzsébet Báthory how extremely cruel this woman was with her maids; namely, that she burned some of them on the abdomen with a red-hot iron; others she seated in a large, earthen tank and poured boiling water over them and scalded the skin, in this way causing them to suffer; the same witness had also frequently seen the appearances of the virgins in her retinue disfigured and covered with blue spots from numerous blows.

  The 3rd witness was the honorable Michael Kwryo, about 30 years old, sworn and interrogated; he said, regarding the two maidens, that they had died at the time of György Homonnay’s wedding celebration, the same as the previous witness, the judge of the city of Kosztolány; he knew nothing of burns but only what is generally recounted on the matter.

  The 4th witness was the honorable Michael Palenyk, 45 years old, sworn and interrogated; he said, he knew nothing more regarding the questions, except that, 13 years ago when said Mrs. Erzsébet Báthory stayed in the city of Kosztolány, a girl from amongst her maids died and was buried here, and that the witness himself saw that the body of the dead girl was covered with bruises and black and blue marks.

  The 5th witness was the honorable Stephenus Kressko, about 43 years old, sworn and interrogated; he said—-as the 3rd Witness-—he had heard very much regarding the cutting out, frying, and eating of human flesh.

  The 6th witness was the honorable Janós Mraz, about 50 years old, sworn and interrogated; he spoke on all things the same as the judge of Kosztolány.

  The 7th witness was the honorable Georgius Markowych, about 50 years old, sworn and interrogated; he spoke of the cruelty of the Lady Widow the same as the judge from Kosztolány; he had heard the least regarding the virgins who died at the time of the wedding celebration of György Homonnay; however, he had seen the girl that was forced to bathe in winter in a frozen river, then carried away bound; the next day s
he was dead.

  The 8th witness was the honorable Paulus Jeczko, 33 years old, sworn and interrogated; he said the same as the first witness regarding the two maidens who were buried in Kosztolány.

  The 9th witness was the honorable Janós Palenyk, 30 years old, sworn and interrogated; he said the same as the 1st witness and added that he himself saw that the bodies of girls who died at the time of the wedding celebration of György Homonnay were covered with horrible wounds, their faces crushed, burned and full of blue spots; and he had also heard from many that the Lady Widow inflicted various sufferings upon her maids and tore off their body parts with forceps.