MovieChat Forums > Bathory (2008) Discussion > Basic Facts on the Countess

Basic Facts on the Countess

posted 16 years ago by tonedeaftalent
25 replies | jump to latest

Since it seems there is allot of confusion about the woman, I thought I'd share what I've learned through research on her (I'm talking about 8 years of research, not a 5 minute pro)

-Erzsébet (Modern terms:Elizabeth)Báthory was born in 1560 to Anna and George Báthory in Hungary.

-Through her mothers side, she was related to Stephen Báthory, King of Poland

-In 1575, she married Ferencz Nádasdy. There marriage made them the most powerful and influncial couple in Hungary. Their wealth surpassed that of the King of Hungary.

-Ferencz Nádasdy was an impressive warrior and became known as "The Black Cloud of Hungary"

-Despite popular belief, Elizabeth adored her husband and the power that came with being married to him, even though he could be gone for up to 10 months any given year fighting the Turks.

-Ferencz and Elizabeth had 4 children. Two died in infancy, Andrew and Ursula, while two children Survived, Anna and Paul. Anna died later at the age of 23, shortly after being married.

-There is allegedly a diary in the records in Budapest that Elizabeth wrote detailing all of the crimes against the girls she committed. However, very few are allowed to see it as there are strict requirements to access the diary and it is written in old Hungarian so translation is difficult.

-In the time Elizabeth ruled and lived, Hungarian nobles were allowed to punish their servants by whatever means they saw fit, even death. They were not punished for any of it. Even György Thurzó, the man who later arrested and tried Elizabeth's servants, punished his servants however he saw fit and was known to beat his servants to the point of death.

-Elizabeth was never actually put on trial. Thurzó knew that if he did, she'd have the power on her side due to her power and wealth. He instead tried her servants, after obtaining confessions through torture, and 3 of the 4 of them were sentenced to death. Two had their fingers torn out with Pincers and thrown on the fire alive. Ficko escaped the pincers and was decapitated before being thrown onto the fire. Only one escaped the death penalty, her fate is not known or documented.

-Elizabeth remained under house arrest, confined to one room for 3-4 years, having food shoved through a hole in the wall. She die on the floor of this room at the age of 54.

-All testimony given about the countess' crimes were rumor, hearsay and confessions from tortured servants.

-Thurzó said when he raided the castle, he witnessed the countess beating a girl to death over stealing a pear and claimed he had two witnesses with him. However, his witnesses were in other parts of Hungary during the raid on the castle.

These are some of the basic facts on the countess. I went into the research believing she was guilty and now believe she didn't commit these crimes. If she did, she did it because of her nobility that allowed her to do it. However, other Hungarian nobility did the same to their servants, if not worse.
I also would like to point out that is nearly impossible to fill a bathtub with blood. By the time you got it filled, the blood would have coagulated (meaning that the plasma has separated from the red blood cells.) The odds of her bathing in the blood as described is nearly impossible.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] maritsa120 15 years ago

"I also would like to point out that is nearly impossible to fill a bathtub with blood. By the time you got it filled, the blood would have coagulated (meaning that the plasma has separated from the red blood cells.) The odds of her bathing in the blood as described is nearly impossible. "

I don't think it would be impossible bath in it. When making blood sausage, we have to buy buckets of blood and yes the blood clots but there is still a lot of the liquid. The clots can be broken down.

I do have questions though. I'm no expert and have done no research but I have a few books written about the live of the countess and they state that she killed some serving girls and a few noble girls. In the research you did, were any bodies found or were ther any records of bodies being found? I also read some where that her husband was very sadistic and his favorite past time was covering a young girl in honey and letting loose angry bees to kill her. Is there any truth to this?

You'll have nothing and like it!
Double Farts!!!

[–] Master_X_3_1_1 15 years ago

If she was a ruler in that time period, I would guarantee that she is guilty of something.

"No man is just a number"

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pery-1 10 years ago

Leave out "in that time period" to be more accurate!

[–] shannonphoenix 15 years ago

I have not researched Elizabeth Bathory, though I think it is an interesting topic. No one will REALLY ever know what she did or didn't do as far as any "crime" she may have committed, all we really know is there were rumors and hearsay just like the OP said.

Now, I am not so quick to say that it is very possible that some things are true. Americans have never really had a royal family or nobility, at least not since the Paris Peace Treedy of 1782 that allowed us to break away from The Crown and we became sovereigns where (contrary to what politicians and former presidents would like us to believe) the government is owned by the citizens. Also, politicians are corrupt and anyone, especially a woman, with a lot of power is going to be heavily scrutinized.

I am mostly talking about the time in which she lived, the 16th and 17th century. Unless you were queen, and even then, a woman with the connections she had may have been viewed as a threat to many men. If you look at it, her accusers where men and it could be very possible that she was set up and history was written by the men of the time. This is not a sexist statement, but back then any woman who posed a threat could be done away with in one way or another and I believe it was very possible in her case.

The "legend" makes quite a story and I have not said that none of it is true. However, 700 victims? I think the legend has surpassed any fact that says otherwise. To take one piece of the anything and run with it is very dangerous.

Aren't there some who believe the Holocaust never happened? Or, that we never landed on the moon? Who shot JFK? I bet the shooters don't even know. What about Vietnam and how that was handled? People questioned what they were hearing and what they were seeing because they were two different things.

If you really want to think about it, look in history and some of the bull that is written because history is written by people with an agenda.

I think this is a very interesting take on Elizabeth Bathory. Think of the Salem Witch trials and the European Witch trials and the Spanish Inquisition. I am sure they were very accurate, no corruption there right5?

[–] drPelvis 15 years ago

Uhm, my head's a wee bit mushy today, but did you just imply that the holocaust may not have happened?

[–] Tenebrae8 15 years ago

No, he didn't. He implied that there are people who believe the Holocaust didn't happen. Read it again when your head isn't mushy.

[–] paisley1 12 years ago

Shannon:

I agree with a lot of what you wrote. Even my English Lit Professor said once that history itself is often written and remembered by the victor of a battle or situation one finds themselves in yet wins with their life intact. If you view history with a microscope against what is literally possible versus what is impossible or even improbable you will find many instances where the supposed facts simply are too massive to be the work of a true account and most likely padded with information and superstitions that defy the validity of the historic events as written in history books.

Think of the power the church had and what someone like Joan of Arc did for France and then how in the end when the church became upset due to many things but one of the top points that angered them was the idea that Joan felt she was conversing with the god when according to the men who changed and omitted many books of what later became the King James bible is left out. Joan was burned at the stake for heresy yet she swore she never spoke or conversed the devil; she heard (supposedly & documented) and responded with god or angels or some other entity on god's behalf to do what she did and she managed some amazing feats that have never been matched by a man born and raised with so little as Joan did. They thought they were shutting up the power of women when all they did was make a martyr out of her and giving young girls and women a female figure to admire and want to learn more about as well as someone they can point to and say, "she did these amazing acts that can only be imagined by women today but she did them and it was a woman, not a man but a woman who surpassed all these obstacles to save her country."

It gives everyone something to ponder when looking at historical events.

"My stories propel mundane lives into magical worlds where all is possible." -Paisley

[–] el_puma 15 years ago

Only a few historians tell that she is victim of a conspiracy and this movie is boring and a waste of time. When finally we could see a good film about the bloody countess?

[–] libormortis 15 years ago

gues the movie would be a little boring if she dident kill anything in this film.

[–] ehaas-3 11 years ago

gues the movie would be a little boring if she dident kill anything in this film.

There were some fairly good battle scenes.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Chops-4 13 years ago

Considering how many lies have been perpetrated as historical fact in the last century, it's easily conceivable that the rumors about Bathory could be distorted in one direction or another.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] marudd50 11 years ago

Is English your second (or third or etc.)? If so, I congratulate you on your use of the language. However, if English is your first language, I must ask how you can expect anyone to take your research seriously when you spell so poorly. I have often see "a lot" written as "alot" but you have surpassed that by writing "allot." That is a totally different word. And you confuse "there, their and they're." I don't mean to seem snooty, but these are things you should have learned in high school.