Yup. And apparently the myth that Bathory bathed in the blood of virgins to keep her youth (which I guess was later twisted into her being a vampire) was spread by male aristocrats at the time/after her death because it was unusual for a woman to have as much wealth and power as she did. And also because she was really, really rich and they wanted some of that money for themselves. The original 'cancel culture'?
There are accounts of her kidnapping (or hiring) and torturing young girls to death - including one tale of her forcing one to cook and eat her own flesh
.
Unless every single other account of the horrors she commited were also made up (as well as the execution of some of her servants, and her eventual imprisonment), the rumor of her bathing in blood is fairly moot either way
.
I haven't seen any clean-up evidence that the rumors were made-up in their entirety, merely speculation. There are purportedly letters written by Thurzo to his wife talking about the dealings with the Bathory case, as well as a letter written by a priest documenting some of her cruelties, however.
.
And if they truly wanted to strip her of her power it seems an odd choice to proceed without putting her on trial. Without a trial or conviction her children still were permitted to inherit her wealth.
Some Hungarian historians believe that these accounts were actually people coerced (aka tortured until they said what was needed) by Bathory's rivals. The "physical evidence" was also apparently exaggerated, with unrelated deaths in the area being attributed to Bathory. They say that maybe she was abusive towards her servants, which wouldn't be unusual from a wealthy and powerful aristocrat, but likely not a serial killer. As for the trial part – a trial was held, without Bathory present and therefore unable to defend against these accusations. I mean, back then people were convicted for much lesser things with much less evidence, y'know, like witchcraft. I would be careful about believing politically motivated trials especially from 17th century Hungary, which was marked by tumultuous political and religious conflict and a really 'cutthroat' aristocracy.
You're right, it's speculation mainly based on the historical context and trustworthiness (or rather lack thereof) of the evidence and accounts. And in my opinion both possibilities are equally likely. Cutthroat aristocrats existed, and horrendous serial killers as well. We have examples of killers like Ted Bundy or Myra Hindley who did terrible stuff to their victims, it's not difficult to believe someone would do equally fucked up stuff 400 years ago. Especially in a time when people publicly cheered for and during public executions.
Anyway I just wanted to provide an alternative perspective, as I said I don't really lean either way. It's an interesting conversation to have but I think at this point there isn't much more evidence to uncover so we have to rely on the materials we have and make up our mind on whether or not they're trustworthy.
It was a trial for her servants if I remember correctly. Bathory wasn't put on an official trial in the typical context from my understanding, either as part of whatever conspiracy, or simply because she was too powerful and it would have been embarrassing
.
The servants were all convicted and executed, bathory herself condemned to her castle
.
It's possible Thurzo and the rest were conspiring against her, but it seems like there would be far more clear-cut ways to go about it than claiming she had been abusing servants (which no one really cared about) and then only later escalating it to aristocrat daughters
.
But, as you say, accounts are few and far between, and the castle itself is largely in shambles. I'm not invested enough to think I can uncover truth where the other historians have not. I'd wager it lies somewhere in the middle anyway. Which would still be horrifying to me
Good points indeed. I've looked it up again and apparently there were two trials held (in the span of like 5 days), so it's possible we're each talking about a different one. Some sources say she was present but not allowed to speak (or for that matter, nobody else was allowed to speak on her behalf), some say she wasn't, so idk.
I'm not familiar enough with Hungarian aristocracy at the time to comment on what possibilities they had and why they would potentially take the course of action they did. Spreading rumors that escalated into a trial (or rather using already existing rumors that stemmed from reality, ie. her being abusive towards her servants) seems like *a* way of doing it, though I don't know if it was the most practical one.
And yes, even if only a half of the current cultural perception of her is true, that's still terrifying.
.
Unless every single other account of the horrors she commited were also made up (as well as the execution of some of her servants, and her eventual imprisonment), the rumor of her bathing in blood is fairly moot either way
.
I haven't seen any clean-up evidence that the rumors were made-up in their entirety, merely speculation. There are purportedly letters written by Thurzo to his wife talking about the dealings with the Bathory case, as well as a letter written by a priest documenting some of her cruelties, however.
.
And if they truly wanted to strip her of her power it seems an odd choice to proceed without putting her on trial. Without a trial or conviction her children still were permitted to inherit her wealth.
Anyway I just wanted to provide an alternative perspective, as I said I don't really lean either way. It's an interesting conversation to have but I think at this point there isn't much more evidence to uncover so we have to rely on the materials we have and make up our mind on whether or not they're trustworthy.
.
The servants were all convicted and executed, bathory herself condemned to her castle
.
It's possible Thurzo and the rest were conspiring against her, but it seems like there would be far more clear-cut ways to go about it than claiming she had been abusing servants (which no one really cared about) and then only later escalating it to aristocrat daughters
.
But, as you say, accounts are few and far between, and the castle itself is largely in shambles. I'm not invested enough to think I can uncover truth where the other historians have not. I'd wager it lies somewhere in the middle anyway. Which would still be horrifying to me
I'm not familiar enough with Hungarian aristocracy at the time to comment on what possibilities they had and why they would potentially take the course of action they did. Spreading rumors that escalated into a trial (or rather using already existing rumors that stemmed from reality, ie. her being abusive towards her servants) seems like *a* way of doing it, though I don't know if it was the most practical one.
And yes, even if only a half of the current cultural perception of her is true, that's still terrifying.