Darya Nikolayevna Saltykova was an 18th-century Russian noblewoman notorious for the systematic torture and killing of her serfs; her abuses became widely known during the mid-1700s. Her case prompted a rare imperial intervention by Empress Catherine II and remains a frequently cited example of violence within the serfdom system.

Key Facts

• She was convicted of murdering 38 female serfs in a formal judicial proceeding.
• Contemporary and later accounts accused her of causing the deaths of many more, with some claims exceeding one hundred victims.
• In Russian sources she is often referred to by the popular nickname associated with her cruelty.
• Her arrest and public examination were ordered after relatives of victims petitioned Empress Catherine II.
• As part of her punishment she was publicly displayed with a placard reading “This woman has tortured and murdered”.
• Following the trial she was sentenced to life imprisonment.
• Her crimes occurred during the mid-18th century, in the period of entrenched serfdom in Russia.
• Most of the violence took place on her estates and involved repeated physical abuse and neglect of serfs under her control.
• She died in 1801 while still confined.

Crimes and Victims

Saltykova’s documented crimes consisted of prolonged and systematic abuse of female serfs who lived on her properties. Judicial records and witness statements collected at the time describe repeated beatings, deprivation, and treatment that led to a large number of deaths.

Official proceedings established the murders of 38 women, while petitioners and some contemporary commentators attributed many additional unexplained deaths to her actions. The victims were predominantly women in servile positions who lacked legal protections and avenues to escape mistreatment.

Capture and Trial

Investigations that led to Saltykova’s arrest began after relatives of suspected victims brought petitions to the imperial court, prompting Empress Catherine II to order an inquiry. The decision to hold a public trial reflected both the seriousness of the accusations and the exceptional nature of prosecuting a member of the nobility.

During the proceedings she was found guilty and subjected to public shaming, including being chained on a platform with a placard stating “This woman has tortured and murdered”. She was subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment, a punishment that combined corporal display with long-term confinement.

Psychology and Motives

Historians and commentators have debated Saltykova’s motives, suggesting a range of factors from personal cruelty to a desire to maintain absolute control over those she enslaved. Contemporary sources and later accounts sometimes describe sadistic behavior, but psychiatric interpretation is necessarily speculative given the limits of the historical record.

The broader social context of serfdom, which normalized harsh treatment and placed landowners above effective oversight, is frequently cited as an enabling factor. Scholars emphasize that structural impunity and lack of accountability made it possible for severe abuses to continue for years before intervention occurred.

Background / Early Life

Saltykova belonged to the Russian landed nobility of the 18th century and held estates with numerous serfs under her authority. Her social and economic position provided substantial local power and autonomy typical of provincial aristocrats of the time.

Marriage and family connections further consolidated her status, and the legal framework of serfdom gave estate owners extensive control over the daily lives of their dependents. That status both facilitated the commission of abuses and delayed effective official response.

Legacy and Media Coverage

Saltykova’s case became one of the most notorious examples of aristocratic violence in the history of Russian serfdom and is frequently cited in discussions of the system’s abuses. Her trial and punishment were widely reported in contemporary sources and have been recounted in historical works since the 18th century.

Over time her story has been the subject of both scholarly study and sensationalized retellings, with some accounts emphasizing extreme victim counts and lurid detail. Modern historians caution against uncritical acceptance of all contemporary claims while acknowledging the case’s enduring importance in debates about power, law, and social reform in imperial Russia.