# An Examen of Witches/Chapter 59

Layout 2
Chapter LIX.
Continuation of the Replies of Rollande du Vernois; and of her Condemnation.
When this woman was delivered of her demons, and was again examined, she gave the following answers:
    1. She confirmed her first and second confessions, except in the matter of having been ​carnally known by the Devil; for this she retracted.
    2. She added that, when she was at the Sabbat, she had offered candles to the Devil, and together with the rest had kissed him on the hinder parts.
    3. That she had helped to cause the last hailstorm which fell in the district of Moussieres.
    4. That, besides Groz-Jacques and Françoise Secretain, she had also seen at the Sabbat Clauda Coirieres, Guillaume Vuillermoz known as le Baillu, and a brother of his.
    5. That she had been to the Sabbat only three weeks before she was put in prison.
She was again examined on the 3rd of November; and after having repeated her first, second and third statements, confessed further:
    1. That the Devil, in the form of a black cat with horns, appeared to her at the place of the Croya on the same night that she went to the Sabbat, which was about six months before she was put in prison.
    2. That after a long struggle she gave herself to Satan, and renounced God, Chrism and Baptism.
    3. That she then at once went on foot to the Sabbat near the village of Coirieres, with Groz-Jacques and Françoise Secretain.
    4. That when she went to the Sabbat she was already possessed.
    5. That she had only been there once.
Upon this it was pointed out to her that she was mistaken in saying that she had only once been to the Sabbat, since it was apparent from her answers that she had been there twice. For first she had confessed that she had been there three weeks before her imprisonment, and then that ​about six months before she was put in prison the Devil had appeared to her at the place of the Croya in the form of a cat, and that she had been to the Sabbat the same night. She answered that she had not properly understood the question on this last point, and that she thought she had been asked whether she had long been possessed before she was put in prison. Yet the question had been put to her very clearly.
Some days later she was again examined; and after repeating her first, second, third and fourth statements, said:
    1. That she knew Pierre Vuillermoz, le Baillu’s son, and Christofle of Aranthon, but that she had never seen them at the Sabbat.
    2. That she had several times quarrelled with Perrenette, the wife of Claude Panisset; and that in the course of these Perrenette had reproached her with a rumour that she was a Vaudoise; saying that if she were certain of this she would have nothing to do with her, but that she could not believe it.
    3. That more than three years before her imprisonment all the villagers of Prel had reproached her with being a Vaudoise and a witch, but that she did not know the reason for this.
    4. That she had several times helped Clauda Coirieres to gather her hemp.
    5. That when the Devil appeared to her in the form of a black cat at the place of the Croya, she had been of perfectly sound mind, and not at all troubled.
    6. That before her imprisonment she did not know that she was possessed; but only felt that there was something which moved in her belly, ​and that her sight troubled her at times, and that she sometimes had words with her sister Jeanne; but that this only happened intermittently, and not continuously.
    7. That she went to the Sabbat with Groz-Jacques and Françoise Secretain, and that she met them near the place where the Sabbat was held.
    8. That, when he appeared to her, the Devil told her where the Sabbat was held.
    9. That she did not know by what means she went there.
After these confessions, she was confronted with Pierre Vuillermoz and Christofle of Aranthon, who stoutly maintained that they had seen her at the Sabbat near Coirieres twice, and two years before her imprisonment. But she denied all this.
Upon this the Judge ordered her to undergo torture in order to draw the truth from her concerning certain points. She then lodged an appeal; but the Court declared this null and void, together with the order for her torture; and by a fresh and just sentence condemned the appellant to be led by the executor of High Justice to the Tartre, and there to be tied to a stake and burned. This was carried out on the seventh of September in the year 1600.
But as they took her from the prison, the air at once became darkened by very dense clouds, which burst into such abundant and furious rain that it was with great difficulty that the fire could be lit to burn her. It is probable that this sudden rain was caused by Satan, who may have given Rollande an assurance that she would not be burned, or at least that she would not feel the ​flames and the heat of the fire. For he usually makes this promise to witches, so as to keep them in the coils of his net, and that they may lose the opportunity to repent. So it happened to this witch, for she died obstinate; and when she was exhorted to repent and turn to the immense mercy of God, she only answered that she had a good master.
In my opinion the principal reasons for her condemnation were these:
    1. That it was evident, both from her replies and from her confrontation with Françoise Secretain and Pierre Vuillermoz and Christofle of Aranthon, that she had given herself to the Devil, and had been to the Sabbat long before she was possessed. Moreover, this was also affirmed by Groz-Jacques, in whose word the more faith was put because, dying contrite and repentant, he had prayed the Officers to do justice upon her, saying that if they let her escape she would spoil all.
    2. Her consorting and familiarity with Groz-Jacques and Clauda Coirieres, who had been burned a few days before for the crime of witchcraft.
    3. The discrepancies found in her answers.
    4. The common rumour which had long been against her, which she herself admitted, saying that all the people of Prel had accused her three years before her imprisonment of being a Vaudoise and a witch.
    5. That she had never shed any tears, although she had often tried her hardest to weep.
    6. That those whom she had accused of having been to the Sabbat with her were all suspected ​of the crime of witchcraft, so that some of them had been burned, some tortured, and others had died in prison.
    7. Finally, many things were noticed about her which could not be simply attributed to a demoniac. Namely, that she shed no tears; that she had been carnally known by the Devil; and lastly, that she had been to the Sabbat and had there caused it to hail. All these are deeds that cannot be attributed to mere possession by a devil.
For these reasons little notice was taken of her plea as an excuse that she was possessed when she went to the Sabbat, and that if she had confessed anything which told against her, it was not she who confessed, but the demons which possessed her, speaking through her mouth. For this was clearly proved to be false by what we have just said.
And although she retracted certain points, that could not be held to be of any consequence; for, as we have shown elsewhere, not too much reliance is to be set upon a witch’s first confession. Moreover, she did not make it apparent that there was any mistake in her confessions.
One thing I shall add concerning this woman. It has been a matter of wonder that she should have been possessed when she was already a witch; for there are those who have held that witches are not easily possessed by demons. This point is fully argued by Thyraeus in his “Treatise upon Demoniacs.”