4 ms·
Some bold assertions made here (eg no witnesses and no victims) directly contradict those on Wikipedia. Further, I fail to see a movement. The article is mostly
by TL_DR 9y ago
Some bold assertions made here (eg no witnesses and no victims) directly contradict those on Wikipedia. Further, I fail to see a movement. The article is mostly about a book author who was so "intrigued" by ""one of the blackest sorcerers in history"" as a teenager that reading about his retrail was the ""greatest adrenaline jolt of [her] life"" and "who calls herself “Gilles de Rais’ representative on Earth”". The other relevant person being the researcher that brought about the retrail.
- civilian 9y agoNo shit wikipedia contradicts what Margot Juby is saying. Wikipedia would just be repeating the official (and potentially fabricated?) narrative from a kangaroo court. Juby is trying to update that official record. I think your "hierarchy of sources" is out of wack.
- killin_dan 9y agoIt's on Wikipedia so it must be true! /s
- hossbeast 9y agoMaybe you don't know how Wikipedia works
- MargotK 9y agoWell, the article does also reference Salomon Reinach, Fernand Fleuret & Jean-Pierre Bayard, plus Revolutionary pamphleteer Joseph La Vallée. As soon as the trial record was published in translation, there was a definite movement towards doubting the verdict of the trial; certain biographers, notably Bataille and Gabory, were very aware of this & attempted to defend the status quo with attacks on Reinach's credibility. Prouteau was not a researcher, he was a novelist; his case rested very heavily on twentieth century writers. So, yes, I AM Gilles de Rais' representative on earth, but I'm not the first in line & nor will I be the last.