[Footnote 2603: Gruel, Chronique d'Arthur de Richemont, p. 81. Vallet de Viriville, in Nouvelle biographie generale. De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. ii, p. 297. E. Cosneau, Le connetable de Richemont, pp. 200, 201.]

The latter left behind him the reputation of having been grasping and indifferent to the welfare of the kingdom. Perhaps his greatest fault was that he governed in a time of war and pillage, when friends and foes alike were devouring the realm. He was charged with the destruction of the Maid, of whom he was said to have been jealous. This accusation proceeds from the House of Alencon, with whom the Lord Chamberlain was not popular.[2604] On the contrary, it must be admitted, that after the Lord Chancellor, La Tremouille was the boldest in employing the Maid, and if later she did thwart his plans there is nothing to prove that it was his intention to have her destroyed by the English. She destroyed herself and was consumed by her own zeal.

[Footnote 2604: Perceval de Cagny, pp. 170, 173, passim.]

Rightly or wrongly, the Lord Chamberlain was held to be a bad man; and, although his successor in the King's favour, the Duc de Richemont, was avaricious, hard, violent, incredibly stupid, surly, malicious, always beaten and always discontented, the exchange appeared to be no loss. The Constable came in a fortunate hour, when the Duke of Burgundy was making peace with the King of France.

In the words of a Carthusian friar, the English who had entered the kingdom by the hole made in Duke John's head on the Bridge of Montereau, only retained their hold on the kingdom by the hand of Duke Philip. They were but few in number, and if the giant were to withdraw his hand a breath of wind would suffice to blow them away. The Regent died of sorrow and wrath, beholding the fulfilment of the horoscope of King Henry VI: "Exeter shall lose what Monmouth hath won."[2605]

[Footnote 2605: Carlier, Histoire des Valois, 1764, in 4to, vol. ii, p. 442. Vallet de Viriville, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. i, p. 307. The Regent also believed in astrology (B.N. MS. 1352).]

On the 13th of April, 1436, the Count of Richemont entered Paris. The nursing mother of Burgundian clerks and Cabochien doctors, the University herself, had helped to mediate peace.[2606]

[Footnote 2606: Gruel, Chronique d'Arthur de Richemont, pp. 120, 121. Dom Felibien, Histoire de Paris, vol. iv, p. 597.]

Now, one month after Paris had returned to her allegiance to King Charles, there appeared in Lorraine a certain damsel. She was about twenty-five years old. Hitherto she had been called Claude; but she now made herself known to divers lords of the town of Metz as being Jeanne the Maid.[2607]

[Footnote 2607: Chronique du doyen de Saint-Thibaud de Metz, in Trial, vol. v, pp. 321, 324. Jacomin Husson, Chronique de Metz, ed. Michelant, Metz, 1870, pp. 64, 65. Cf. Lecoy de la Marche, Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc, in Revue des questions historiques, October, 1871, pp. 562 et seq. Vergniaud-Romagnesi, Des portraits de Jeanne d'Arc et de la fausse Jeanne d'Arc, in Memoires de la Societe d'Agriculture d'Orleans, vol. i (1853), pp. 250, 253. De Puymaigre, La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, in Revue nouvelle d'Alsace-Lorraine, vol. v (1885), pp. 533 et seq. A. France, Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc, in Revue des familles, 15 February, 1891.]

At this time, Jeanne's father and eldest brother were dead.[2608] Isabelle Romee was alive. Her two youngest sons were in the service of the King of France, who had raised them to the rank of nobility and given them the name of Du Lys. Jean, the eldest, called Petit-Jean,[2609] had been appointed Bailie of Vermandois, then Captain of Chartres. About this year, 1436, he was provost and captain of Vaucouleurs.[2610]

[Footnote 2608: Varanius alone says that Jacques d'Arc died of sorrow at the loss of his daughter. Trial, vol. v, p. 85.]

[Footnote 2609: Ibid., p. 280.]

[Footnote 2610: Ibid., pp. 279, 280. G. Lefevre-Pontalis, La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, p. 6, note 1.]

The youngest, Pierre, or Pierrelot, who had fallen into the hands of the Burgundians before Compiegne at the same time as Jeanne, had just been liberated from the prison of the Bastard of Vergy.[2611]

[Footnote 2611: Trial, vol. v, p. 210. Lefevre de Saint-Remy, vol. ii, p. 176.]

Both brothers believed that their sister had been burned at Rouen. But when they were told that she was living and wished to see them, they appointed a meeting at La-Grange-aux-Ormes, a village in the meadows of the Sablon, between the Seille and the Moselle, about two and a half miles south of Metz. They reached this place on the 20th of May. There they saw her and recognised her immediately to be their sister; and she recognised them to be her brothers.[2612]

[Footnote 2612: Trial, vol. v, pp. 321, 324.]

She was accompanied by certain lords of Metz, among whom was a man right noble, Messire Nicole Lowe, who was chamberlain to Charles VII.[2613] By divers tokens these nobles recognised her to be the Maid Jeanne who had taken King Charles to be crowned at Reims. These tokens were certain signs on the skin.[2614] Now there was a prophecy concerning Jeanne which stated her to have a little red mark beneath the ear.[2615] But this prophecy was invented after the events to which it referred. Consequently we may believe the Maid to have been thus marked. Was this the token by which the nobles of Metz recognised her?

[Footnote 2613: Le Metz ancien (Metz, 1856, 2 vol. in folio) by the Baron d'Hannoncelles, which contains the genealogy of Nicole Lowe.]

[Footnote 2614: "And was recognised by divers tokens" (enseignes) (Trial, vol. v, p. 322). M. Lecoy de la Marche (Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc, in Revue des questions historiques, October, 1871, p. 565), and M. Gaston Save (Jehanne des Armoises, Pucelle d'Orleans, Nancy, 1893, p. 11) understand that she was recognised by several officers or ensigns (enseignes). I have interpreted enseignes in the ordinary sense of marks on the skin, birth-marks. (Cf. La Curne.)]

[Footnote 2615: Chronique du doyen de Saint-Thibaud, in Trial, vol. v, p. 322.]

We do not know by what means she claimed to have escaped death; but there is reason to think[2616] that she attributed her deliverance to her holiness. Did she say that an angel had saved her from the fire? It might be read in books how in the ancient amphitheatres lions licked the bare feet of virgins, how boiling oil was as soothing as balm to the bodies of holy martyrs; and how according to many of the old stories nothing short of the sword could take the life of God's maidens. These ancient histories rested on a sure foundation. But if such tales had been related of the fifteenth century they might have appeared less credible. And this damsel does not seem to have employed them to adorn her adventure. She was probably content to say that another woman had been burned in her place.

[Footnote 2616: Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris, p. 354.]

According to a confession she made afterwards, she came from Rome, where, accoutred in harness of war, she had fought valiantly in the service of Pope Eugenius. She may even have told the Lorrainers of the feats of prowess she had there accomplished.

Now Jeanne had prophesied (at least so it was believed) that she would die in battle against the infidel and that her mantle would fall upon a maid of Rome. But such a saying, if it were known to these nobles of Metz, would be more likely to denounce this so-called Jeanne as an imposture than witness to the truth of her mission.[2617] However this might be, they believed what this woman told them.

[Footnote 2617: Nevertheless see on this subject M. Germain Lefevre-Pontalis, who is our authority for this prophecy (Eberhard Windecke, pp. 108-111).]

Perhaps, like many a noble of the republic,[2618] they were more inclined to King Charles than to the Duke of Burgundy. And we may be sure that, chivalrous knights as they were, they esteemed chivalry wherever they found it; wherefore, because of her valour they admired the Maid; and they made her good cheer.

[Footnote 2618: The republic of Metz (W.S.)]

Messire Nicole Lowe gave her a charger and a pair of hose. The charger was worth thirty francs—a sum wellnigh royal—for of the two horses which at Soissons and at Senlis the King gave the Maid Jeanne, one was worth thirty-eight livres ten sous, and the other thirty-seven livres ten sous.[2619] Not more than sixteen francs had been paid for the horse with which she had been provided at Vaucouleurs.[2620]

[Footnote 2619: Chronique du doyen de Saint-Thibaud, in Trial, vol. v, p. 322. Chronique de Philippe de Vigneulles, in Les chroniques Messines of Huguenin, p. 198.]

[Footnote 2620: Trial, vol. ii, p. 457. L. Champion, Jeanne d'Arc ecuyere, ch. ii, ch. vi.]

Nicole Grognot, governor of the town,[2621] offered a sword to the sister of the Du Lys brothers; Aubert Boullay presented her with a hood.[2622]

[Footnote 2621: Variant of La chronique du doyen de Saint-Thibaud sent from Metz to Pierre du Puy, in Trial, vol. v, pp. 322, 324.]

[Footnote 2622: Ibid., pp. 322, 324.]

She rode her horse with the same skill which seven years earlier, if we may believe some rather mythical stories, had filled with wonder the old Duke of Lorraine.[2623] And she spoke certain words to Messire Nicole Lowe which confirmed him in his belief that she was indeed that same Maid Jeanne who had fared forth into France. She had the ready tongue of a prophetess, and spoke in symbols and parables, revealing nought of her intent.

[Footnote 2623: D. Calmet, Histoire de Lorraine, vol. vii. Proofs and illustrations, col. vi.]

Her power would not come to her before Saint John the Baptist's Day, she said. Now this was the very time which the Maid, after the Battle of Patay, in 1429, had fixed for the extermination of the English in France.[2624]

[Footnote 2624: Trial, vol. v, pp. 322, 324. Eberhard Windecke, p. 108. Morosini, vol. iii, p. 62, note.]

This prophecy had not been fulfilled and consequently had not been mentioned again. Jeanne, if she ever uttered it, and it is quite possible that she did, must have been the first to forget it. Moreover, Saint John's Day was a term commonly cited in leases, fairs, contracts, hirings, etc., and it is quite conceivable that the calendar of a prophetess may have been the same as that of a labourer.

The day after their arrival at La Grange-aux-Ormes, Monday, the 21st of May, the Du Lys brothers took her, whom they held to be their sister, to that town of Vaucouleurs[2625] whither Isabelle Romee's daughter had gone to see Sire Robert de Baudricourt. In this town, in the year 1436, there were still living many persons of different conditions, such as the Leroyer couple and the Seigneur Aubert d'Ourches,[2626] who had seen Jeanne in February, 1429.

[Footnote 2625: M. le Baron de Braux was kind enough to write to me from Boucq near Foug, Meurthe-et-Moselle, on the 28th of June, 1896, explaining that Bacquillon (Trial, vol. v, p. 322) is an erroneous reading of one of the manuscripts of the Doyen of Saint-Thibaud. "By comparing," he added, "the various versions (V. Quicherat and Les chroniques Messines) we may ascertain that it is really Vaucouleurs, Valquelou," mistaken for Bacquillon.]

[Footnote 2626: Trial, vol. ii, pp. 406, 408, 445, 449.]

After a week at Vaucouleurs she went to Marville, a small town between Corny and Pont-a-Mousson. There she spent Whitsuntide and abode for three weeks in the house of one Jean Quenat.[2627] On her departure she was visited by sundry inhabitants of Metz, who gave her jewels, recognising her to be the Maid of France.[2628] Jeanne, it will be remembered, had been seen by divers knights of Metz at the time of King Charles's coronation at Reims. At Marville, Geoffroy Desch, following the example of Nicole Lowe, presented the so-called Jeanne with a horse. Geoffroy Desch belonged to one of the most influential families of the Republic of Metz. He was related to Jean Desch, municipal secretary in 1429.[2629]

[Footnote 2627: The Chronique de Tournai says of the true Jeanne that she came from Mareville, a small town between Metz and Pont-a-Mousson. "This Jeanne had long dwelt and served in a metairie [a kind of farm] of this place."]

[Footnote 2628: Chronique du doyen Saint-Thibaud, in Trial, vol. v, pp. 322, 324. Lecoy de la Marche, Jeanne des Armoises, p. 566. G. Save, Jehanne des Armoises, pucelle d'Orleans, p. 14.]

[Footnote 2629: Trial, vol. v, pp. 352 et seq.]

From Marville, she went on a pilgrimage to Notre Dame de Liance, called Lienche by the Picards and known later as Notre Dame de Liesse. At Liance was worshipped a black image of the Virgin, which, according to tradition, had been brought by the crusaders from the Holy Land. The chapel containing this image was situated between Laon and Reims. It was said, by the priests who officiated there, to be one of the halting places on the route of the coronation procession, where the kings and their retinues were accustomed to stop on their return from Reims; but this is very likely not to be true. Whether it were such a halting place or no, there is no doubt that the folk of Metz displayed a particular devotion to Our Lady of Liance; and it seemed fitting that Jeanne, who had escaped from an English prison, should go and give thanks for her marvellous deliverance to the Black Virgin of Picardy.[2630]

[Footnote 2630: Chronique du doyen de Saint-Thibaud, in Trial, vol. v, pp. 322, 324. Dom Lelong, Histoire du diocese de Laon, 1783, p. 371. Abbe Ledouble, Les origines de Liesse et du pelerinage de Notre-Dame, Soissons, 1885, pp. 6 et seq.]

Thence she went on her way to Arlon, to Elisabeth of Gorlitz, Duchess of Luxembourg, an aunt by marriage of the Duke of Burgundy.[2631] She was an old woman, who had been twice a widow. By extortion and oppression she had made herself detested by her vassals. By this princess Jeanne was well received. There was nothing strange in that. Persons living holy lives and working miracles were much sought after by princes and nobles who desired to discover secrets or to obtain the fulfilment of some wish. And the Duchess of Luxembourg might well believe this damsel to be the Maid Jeanne herself, since the brothers Du Lys, the nobles of Metz and the folk of Vaucouleurs were of that opinion.

[Footnote 2631: Trial, vol. v, p. 322, note 2. G. Lefevre-Pontalis, La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, p. 21, note 1.]

For the generality of men, Jeanne's life and death were surrounded by marvels and mysteries. Many had from the first doubted her having perished by the hand of the executioner. Certain were curiously reticent on this point; they said: "the English had her publicly burnt at Rouen, or some other woman like her."[2632] Others confessed that they did not know what had become of her.[2633]

[Footnote 2632: Chronique normande (MS. in the British Museum), in Trial, vol. iv, p. 344. Symphorien Champier, Nef des Dames, Lyon, 1503, ibid.]

[Footnote 2633: Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris, p. 272. Chronique normande, in Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des Chartes, second series, vol. iii, p. 116. D. Calmet, Histoire de Lorraine, p. vi, proofs and illustrations. G. Save, Jehanne des Armoises, pp. 6, 7. It is well known that Gabriel Naude maintained the paradox that Jeanne was only burned in effigy. Considerations politiques sur les coups d'etat, Rome, 1639, in 4to. G. Lefevre-Pontalis, La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, p. 8.]

Thus, when throughout Germany and France the rumour spread that the Maid was alive and had been seen near Metz, the tidings were variously received. Some believed them, others did not. An ardent dispute, which arose between two citizens of Arles, gives some idea of the emotion aroused by such tidings. One maintained that the Maid was still alive; the other asserted that she was dead; each one wagered that what he said was true. This was no light wager, for it was made and registered in the presence of a notary, on the 27th of June, 1436, only five weeks after the interview at La Grange-aux-Ormes.[2634]

[Footnote 2634: Lanery d'Arc, Le culte de Jeanne d'Arc, Orleans, 1887, in 8vo. Revue du Midi.]

Meanwhile, in the beginning of August, the Maid's eldest brother, Jean du Lys, called Petit-Jean, had gone to Orleans to announce that his sister was alive. As a reward for these good tidings, he received for himself and his followers ten pints of wine, twelve hens, two goslings, and two leverets.[2635]

[Footnote 2635: Trial, vol. v, p. 275. Lottin, Recherches, vol. ii, p. 286.]

The birds had been purchased by two magistrates; the name of one, Pierre Baratin, is to be found in the account books of the fortress, in 1429,[2636] at the time of the expedition to Jargeau; the other was an old man of sixty-six, a burgess passing rich, Aignan de Saint-Mesmin.[2637]

[Footnote 2636: Trial, vol. v, p. 262. Lecoy de la Marche, Jeanne des Armoises, p. 568.]

[Footnote 2637: He died at the age of one hundred and eighteen. Trial, iii, p. 29.]

Messengers were passing to and fro between the town of Duke Charles and the town of the Duchess of Luxembourg. On the 9th of August a letter from Arlon reached Orleans. About the middle of the month a pursuivant arrived at Arlon. He was called Coeur-de-Lis, in honour of the heraldic symbol of the city of Orleans, which was a lily-bud, a kind of trefoil. The magistrates of Orleans had sent him to Jeanne with a letter, the contents of which are unknown. Jeanne gave him a letter for the King, in which she probably requested an audience. He took it straight to Loches, where King Charles was negotiating the betrothal of his daughter Yolande to Prince Amedee of Savoie.[2638]

[Footnote 2638: Trial, vol. v, p. 326. Vallet de Viriville, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. ii, p. 376, note. G. Lefevre-Pontalis, La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, p. 23, note 5.]

After forty-one days' journey the pursuivant returned to the magistrates, who had despatched him on the 2nd of September. The messenger complained of a great thirst, wherefore the magistrates, according to their wont, had him served in the chamber of the town-hall with bread, wine, pears, and green walnuts. This repast cost the town two sous four deniers of Paris, while the pursuivant's travelling expenses amounted to six livres which were paid in the following month. The town varlet who provided the walnuts was that same Jacquet Leprestre who had served during the siege. Another letter from the Maid had been received by the magistrates on the 25th of August.[2639]

[Footnote 2639: Trial, vol. v, p. 327.]

Jean du Lys proceeded just as if his miracle-working sister had in very deed been restored to him. He went to the King, to whom he announced the wonderful tidings. Charles cannot have entirely disbelieved them since he ordered Jean du Lys to be given a gratuity of one hundred francs. Whereupon Jean promptly demanded these hundred francs from the King's treasurer, who gave him twenty. The coffers of the victorious King were not full even then.

Having returned to Orleans, Jean appeared before the town-council. He gave the magistrates to wit that he had only eight francs, a sum by no means sufficient to enable him and four retainers to return to Lorraine. The magistrates gave him twelve francs.[2640]

[Footnote 2640: Trial, vol. v, p. 326. Lottin, Recherches, vol. i, pp. 284-285.]

Every year until then the anniversary of the Maid had been celebrated in the church of Saint-Sanxon[2641] on the eve of Corpus Christi and on the previous day. In 1435, eight ecclesiastics of the four mendicant orders sang a mass for the repose of Jeanne's soul. In this year, 1436, the magistrates had four candles burnt, weighing together nine and a half pounds, and pendent therefrom the Maid's escutcheon, a silver shield bearing the crown of France. But when they heard the Maid was alive they cancelled the arrangements for a funeral service in her memory.[2642]

[Footnote 2641: Since 1432. But there is no evidence of any anniversary service having been held in 1433 and 1434. It was reinstituted in 1439.]

[Footnote 2642: Trial, vol. v, pp. 274, 275. Lottin, Recherches, vol. i, p. 286.]

While these things were occurring in France, Jeanne was still with the Duchess of Luxembourg. There she met the young Count Ulrich of Wurtemberg, who refused to leave her. He had a handsome cuirasse made for her and took her to Cologne. She still called herself the Maid of France sent by God.[2643]

[Footnote 2643: Chronique du doyen de Saint-Thibaud, in Trial, vol. v, p. 323. Jean Nider, Formicarium, in Trial, vol. iv, p. 325. Lecoy de la Marche, loc. cit., p. 566.]

Since the 24th of June, Saint John the Baptist's Day, her power had returned to her. Count Ulrich, recognising her supernatural gifts, entreated her to employ them on behalf of himself and his friends. Being very contentious, he had become seriously involved in the schism which was then rending asunder the diocese of Treves. Two prelates were contending for the see; one, Udalric of Manderscheit, appointed by the chapter, the other Raban of Helmstat, Bishop of Speyer, appointed by the Pope.[2644] Udalric took the field with a small force and twice besieged and bombarded the town of which he called himself the true shepherd. These proceedings brought the greater part of the diocese on to his side.[2645] But although aged and infirm, Raban too had weapons; they were spiritual but powerful: he pronounced an interdict against all such as should espouse the cause of his rival.

[Footnote 2644: Art de verifier les dates, vol. xv, pp. 236 et seq. Gallia Christiana, vol. xiii, pp. 970 et seq.; Gams, Series Episcoporum (1873), pp. 317, 319.]

[Footnote 2645: Quicherat, in Trial, vol. iv, p. 502, note, erroneously states that the contest for the Archbishopric of Treves was between Raban of Helmstat and Jacques of Syrck. Concerning Jacques of Syrck or Sierck, see de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. iv, p. 264.]

Count Ulrich of Wurtemberg, who was among the most zealous of Udalric's supporters, questioned the Maid of God concerning him.[2646] Similar cases had been submitted to the first Jeanne when she was in France. She had been asked, for example, which of the three popes, Benedict, Martin, or Clement, was the true father of the faithful, and without immediately pronouncing on the subject she had promised to designate the Pope to whom obedience was due, after she had reached Paris and rested there.[2647] The second Jeanne replied with even more assurance; she declared that she knew who was the true archbishop and boasted that she would enthrone him.

[Footnote 2646: Jean Nider, Formicarium, book v, ch. viii. D. Calmet, Histoire de Lorraine, vol. ii, p. 906.]

[Footnote 2647: Trial, vol. i, pp. 245-246.]

According to her, it was Udalric of Manderscheit, he whom the Chapter had appointed. But when Udalric was summoned before the Council of Bale, he was declared an usurper; and the fathers did what it was by no means their unvarying rule to do,—they confirmed the nomination of the Pope.

Unfortunately the Maid's intervention in this dispute attracted the attention of the Inquisitor General of the city of Cologne, Heinrich Kalt Eysen, an illustrious professor of theology. He inquired into the rumours which were being circulated in the city touching the young prince's protegee; and he learnt that she wore unseemly apparel, danced with men, ate and drank more than she ought, and practised magic. He was informed notably that in a certain assembly the Maid tore a table-cloth and straightway restored it to its original condition, and that having broken a glass against the wall she with marvellous skill put all its pieces together again. Such deeds caused Kalt Eysen to suspect her strongly of heresy and witchcraft. He summoned her before his tribunal; she refused to appear. This disobedience displeased the Inquisitor General, and he sent to fetch the defaulter. But the young Count of Wurtemberg hid his Maid in his house, and afterwards contrived to get her secretly out of the town. Thus she escaped the fate of her whom she was willing only partially to imitate. As he could do nothing else, the Inquisitor excommunicated her.[2648] She took refuge at Arlon with her protectress, the Duchess of Luxembourg. There she met Robert des Armoises, Lord of Tichemont. She may have seen him before, in the spring, at Marville, where he usually resided. This nobleman was probably the son of Lord Richard, Governor of the Duchy of Bar in 1416. Nothing is known of him, save that he surrendered this territory to the foreigner without the Duke of Bar's consent, and then beheld it confiscated and granted to the Lord of Apremont on condition that he should conquer it.

[Footnote 2648: Jean Nider, Formicarium, in Trial, vol. iv, p. 502; vol. v, p. 324.]

It was not extraordinary that Lord Robert should be at Arlon, seeing that his chateau of Tichemont was near this town. He was poor, albeit of noble birth.[2649]

[Footnote 2649: H. Vincent, La maison des Armoises, originaire de Champagne, in Memoires de la Societe d'Archeologie Lorraine, 3rd series, vol. v (1877), p. 324. G. Lefevre-Pontalis, La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, p. 2, note 4.]

The so-called Maid married him,[2650] apparently with the approval of the Duchess of Luxembourg. According to the opinion of the Holy Inquisitor of Cologne, this marriage was contracted merely to protect the woman against the interdict and to save her from the sword of the Church.[2651]

[Footnote 2650: In his Histoire de Lorraine (vol. v, pp. clxiv et seq.), Dom Calmet says that the contract of marriage between Robert des Armoises and the Maid of France, which had long been preserved in the family, was lost in his day. There is no need to regret it, for it is now known that this contract was forged by Father Jerome Vignier. Le Comte de Marsy (La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, Claude des Armoises; du degre de confiance a accorder aux decouvertes de Jerome Vignier, Compiegne, 1890) and M. Tamizey de Larroque (Revue critique, the 20th October, 1890). For Vignier's other forgeries cf. Julien Havet, Questions Merovingiennes, ii.]

[Footnote 2651: Jean Nider, Formicarium, bk. v, ch. viii. Trial, vol. iv, pp. 503, 504.]

Soon after her marriage she went to live at Metz in her husband's house, opposite the church of Sainte-Segolene, over the Sainte-Barbe Gate. Henceforth she was Jeanne du Lys, the Maid of France, the Lady of Tichemont. By these names she is described in a contract dated the 7th of November, 1436, by which Robert des Armoises and his wife, authorised by him, sell to Collard de Failly, squire, dwelling at Marville, and to Poinsette, his wife, one quarter of the lordship of Haraucourt. At the request of their dear friends, Messire Robert and Dame Jeanne, Jean de Thoneletil, Lord of Villette, and Saubelet de Dun, Provost of Marville, as well as the vendors, put their seals to the contract to testify to its validity.[2652]

[Footnote 2652: The preceding deed, by which "Robert des Harmoises et la Pucelle Jehanne d'Arc, sa femme," acquired the estate of Fleville, is very doubtful (D. Calmet, 2nd edition, vol. v, p. clxiv, note).]

In her dwelling, opposite the Sainte-Segolene Church, la Dame des Armoises gave birth to two children.[2653] Somewhere in Languedoc[2654] there was an honest squire who, when he heard of these births, seriously doubted whether Jeanne the Maid and la Dame des Armoises could be one and the same person. This was Jean d'Aulon, who had once been Jeanne's steward. From information he had received from women who knew, he did not believe her to be the kind of woman likely to have children.[2655]

[Footnote 2653: Chronique du doyen de Saint-Thibaud, in Trial, vol. v, p. 323. Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris, pp. 354-355.]

[Footnote 2654: Trial, vol. iii, p. 206, note 2.]

[Footnote 2655: Ibid., p. 219.]

According to Brother Jean Nider, doctor in theology of the University of Vienne, this fruitful union turned out badly. A priest, and, as he says, a priest who might more appropriately be called a pander, seduced this witch with words of love and carried her off. But Brother Jean Nider adds that the priest secretly took la Dame des Armoises to Metz and there lived with her as his concubine.[2656] Now it is proved that her own home was in that very town; hence we may conclude that this friar preacher does not know what he is talking about.[2657]

[Footnote 2656: Jean Nider, Formicarium, in Trial, vol. v, p. 325.]

[Footnote 2657: Chronique du doyen de Saint-Thibaud, in Trial, vol. v, pp. 323-324.]

The fact of the matter is that she did not remain longer than two years in the shadow of Sainte-Segolene.

Although she had married, it was by no means her intention to forswear prophesying and chivalry. During her trial Jeanne had been asked by the examiner: "Jeanne, was it not revealed to you that if you lost your virginity your good fortune would cease and your Voices desert you?" She denied that such things had been revealed to her. And when he insisted, asking her whether she believed that if she were married her Voices would still come to her, she answered like a good Christian: "I know not, and I appeal to God."[2658] Jeanne des Armoises likewise held that good fortune had not forsaken her on account of her marriage. Moreover, in those days of prophecy there were both widows and married women who, like Judith of Bethulia, acted by divine inspiration. Such had been Dame Catherine de la Rochelle, although perhaps after all she had not done anything so very great.[2659]

[Footnote 2658: Trial, vol. i, p. 183.]

[Footnote 2659: Ibid., vol. i, pp. 106, 108, 119, 296. Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris.]

In the summer of 1439, la Dame des Armoises went to Orleans. The magistrates offered her wine and meat as a token of gladness and devotion. On the first of August they gave her a dinner and presented her with two hundred and ten livres of Paris as an acknowledgment of the service she had rendered to the town during the siege. These are the very terms in which this expenditure is entered in the account books of that city.[2660]

[Footnote 2660: Extracts from the accounts of the town of Orleans, in Trial, vol. v, pp. 331-332. Lecoy de la Marche, Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc, pp. 570-571.]

If the folk of Orleans did actually take her for the real Maid, Jeanne, then it must have been more on account of the evidence of the Du Lys brothers, than on that of their own eyes. For, when one comes to think of it, they had seen her but very seldom. During that week in May, she had only appeared before them armed and on horseback. Afterwards in June, 1429, and January, 1430, she had merely passed through the town. True it was she had been offered wine and the magistrates had sat at table with her;[2661] but that was nine years ago. And the lapse of nine years works many a change in a woman's face. They had seen her last as a young girl, now they found her a woman and the mother of two children. Moreover they were guided by the opinion of her kinsfolk. Their attitude provokes some astonishment, however, when one thinks of the conversation at the banquet, and of the awkward and inconsistent remarks the dame must have uttered. If they were not then undeceived, these burgesses must have been passing simple and strongly prejudiced in favour of their guest.

[Footnote 2661: Original documents of Orleans, in Trial, vol. v, p. 270.]

And who can say that they were not? Who can say that, after having given credence to the tidings brought by Jean du Lys, the townsfolk did not begin to discover the imposture? That the belief in the survival of Jeanne was by no means general in the city, during the visit of la Dame des Armoises, is proved by the entries in the municipal accounts of sums expended on the funeral services, which we have already mentioned. Supposing we abstract the years 1437 and 1438, the anniversary service had at any rate been held in 1439, two days before Corpus-Christi, and only about three months before the banquet on the 1st of August.[2662] Thus these grateful burgesses of Orleans were at one and the same time entertaining their benefactress at banquets and saying masses in memory of her death.

[Footnote 2662: Trial, vol. v, p. 274. Lottin, Recherches, vol. i, p. 286.]

La Dame des Armoises only spent a fortnight with them. She left the city towards the end of July. Her departure would seem to have been hasty and sudden. She was invited to a supper, at which she was to have been presented with eight pints of wine, but when the wine was served she had gone, and the banquet had to be held without her.[2663] Jean Quillier and Thevanon of Bourges were present. This Thevanon may have been that Thevenin Villedart, with whom Jeanne's brothers dwelt during the siege.[2664] In Jean Quillier we recognise the young draper who, in June, 1429, had furnished fine Brussels cloth of purple, wherewith to make a gown for the Maid.[2665]

[Footnote 2663: Extracts from the accounts of the town of Orleans, in Trial, vol. v, pp. 331-332. Lottin, Recherches, vol. i, p. 287.]

[Footnote 2664: Trial, vol. v, p. 260.]

[Footnote 2665: Ibid., pp. 112-113.]

La Dame des Armoises had gone to Tours, where she gave herself out to be the true Jeanne. She gave the Bailie of Touraine a letter for the King; and the Bailie undertook to see that it was delivered to the Prince, who was then at Orleans, having arrived there but shortly after Jeanne's departure. The Bailie of Touraine in 1439 was none other than that Guillaume Bellier who ten years before as lieutenant of Chinon had received the Maid into his house and committed her to the care of his devout wife.[2666]

[Footnote 2666: Trial, vol. iii, p. 17; vol. v, p. 327.]

To the messenger, who bore this letter, Guillaume Bellier also gave a note for the King written by himself, and "touching the deeds of la Dame des Armoises."[2667] We know nothing of its purport.[2668]

[Footnote 2667: Ibid., vol. v, p. 332. G. Lefevre-Pontalis, La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, pp. 23-24.]

[Footnote 2668: Trial, vol. v, p. 332.]

Shortly afterwards the Dame went off into Poitou. There she placed herself at the service of Seigneur Gille de Rais, Marshal of France.[2669] He it was who in his early youth had conducted the Maid to Orleans, had been with her throughout the coronation campaign, had fought at her side before the walls of Paris. During Jeanne's captivity he had occupied Louviers and pushed on boldly to Rouen. Now throughout the length and breadth of his vast domains he was kidnapping children, mingling magic with debauchery, and offering to demons the blood and the limbs of his countless victims. His monstrous doings spread terror round his castles of Tiffauges and Machecoul, and already the hand of the Church was upon him.

[Footnote 2669: Vallet de Viriville, Notices et extraits de chartes et de manuscrits appartenant au British Museum, in Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des Chartes, vol. viii, 1846, p. 116.]

According to the Holy Inquisitor of Cologne, la Dame des Armoises practised magic; but it was not as an invoker of demons that the Marechal de Rais employed her; he placed her in authority over the men-at-arms,[2670] in somewhat the same position as Jeanne had occupied at Lagny and Compiegne. Did she do great prowess? We do not know. At any rate she did not hold her office long; and after her it was bestowed on a Gascon squire, one Jean de Siquemville.[2671] In the spring of 1440 she was near Paris.[2672]

[Footnote 2670: Abbe Bossard, Gille de Rais, p. 174.]

[Footnote 2671: Pardon, in Trial, vol. v, pp. 332-334.]

[Footnote 2672: Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris, p. 335. Lecoy de la Marche, Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc, p. 574.]

For nearly two years and a half the great town had been loyal to King Charles. He had entered the city, but had failed to restore it to prosperity. Deserted houses were everywhere falling into ruins; wolves penetrated into the suburbs and devoured little children.[2673] The townsfolk, who had so recently been Burgundian, could not all forget how the Maid in company with Friar Richard and the Armagnacs had attacked the city on the day of the Nativity of Our Lady. There were many, doubtless, who bore her ill will and believed she had been burned for her sins; but her name no longer excited universal reprobation as in 1429. Certain even among her former enemies regarded her as a martyr to the cause of her liege lord.[2674] Even in Rouen such an opinion was not unknown, and it was much more likely to be held in the city of Paris which had lately turned French. At the rumour that Jeanne was not dead, that she had been recognised by the people of Orleans and was coming to Paris, the lower orders in the city grew excited and disturbances were threatening.

[Footnote 2673: Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris, pp. 338 et seq. De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. iii, pp. 384 et seq.]

[Footnote 2674: Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris, p. 270.]

Under Charles of Valois in 1440, the spirit of the University was just the same as it had been under Henry of Lancaster in 1431. It honoured and respected the King of France, the guardian of its privileges and the defender of the liberties of the Gallican Church. The illustrious masters felt no remorse at having demanded and obtained the chastisement of the rebel and heretic, Jeanne the Maid. Whosoever persists in error is a heretic; whosoever essays and fails to overthrow the powers that be is a rebel. It was God's will that in 1440 Charles of Valois should possess the city of Paris; it had not been God's will in 1429; wherefore the Maid had striven against God. With equal bitterness would the University, in 1440, have proceeded against a Maid of the English.

The magistrates who had returned to their Paris homes from their long dreary exile at Poitiers sat in the Parlement side by side with the converted Burgundians.[2675] In the days of adversity these faithful servants of King Charles had set the Maid to work, but now in 1440 it was none of their business to maintain publicly the truth of her mission and the purity of her faith. Burned by the English, that was all very well. But a trial conducted by a bishop and a vice-inquisitor with the concurrence of the University is not an English trial; it is a trial at once essentially Gallican and essentially Catholic. Jeanne's name was forever branded throughout Christendom. That ecclesiastical sentence could be reversed by the Pope alone. But the Pope had no intention of doing this. He was too much afraid of displeasing the King of Catholic England; and moreover were he once to admit that an inquisitor of the faith had pronounced a wrong sentence he would undermine all human authority. The French clerks submit and are silent. In the assemblies of the clergy no one dares to utter Jeanne's name.

[Footnote 2675: De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. iii, ch. xvi.]

Fortunately for them neither the doctors and masters of the University nor the sometime members of the Parlement of Poitiers share the popular delusion touching la Dame des Armoises. They have no doubt that the Maid was burned at Rouen. And they fear lest this woman, who gives herself out to be the deliverer of Orleans, may arouse a tumult by her entrance into the city. Wherefore the Parlement and the University send out men-at-arms to meet her. She is arrested and brought to the Palais.[2676]

[Footnote 2676: Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris, pp. 354, 355. Lecoy de la Marche, Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc, p. 574.]

She was examined, tried and sentenced to be publicly exhibited. In the Palais de Justice, leading up from the court called the Cour-de-Mai, there was a marble slab on which malefactors were exhibited. La Dame des Armoises was put up there and shown to the people whom she had deceived. The usual sermon was preached at her and she was forced to confess publicly.[2677]

[Footnote 2677: Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris, loc. cit.]

She declared that she was not the Maid, that she was married to a knight and had two sons. She told how one day, in her mother's presence, she heard a woman speak slightingly of her; whereupon she proceeded to attack the slanderer, and, when her mother restrained her, she turned her blows against her parent. Had she not been in a passion she would never have struck her mother. Notwithstanding this provocation, here was a special case and one reserved for the papal jurisdiction. Whosoever had raised his hand against his father or his mother, as likewise against a priest or a clerk, must go and ask forgiveness of the Holy Father, to whom alone belonged the power of convicting or acquitting the sinner. This was what she had done. "I went to Rome," she said, "attired in man's apparel. I engaged as a soldier in the war of the Holy Father Eugenius, and in this war I twice committed homicide."

When had she journeyed to Rome? Probably before the exile of Pope Eugenius to Florence, about the year 1433, when the condottieri of the Duke of Milan were advancing to the gates of the Eternal City.[2678]

[Footnote 2678: Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris, pp. 354, 355. Lecoy de la Marche, Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc, p. 574. G. Lefevre-Pontalis, La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, p. 27.]

We do not find either the University, or the Ordinary, or the Grand Inquisitor demanding the trial of this woman, who was suspected of witchcraft and of homicide, and who was attired in unseemly garments. She was not prosecuted as a heretic, doubtless because she was not obstinate, and obstinacy alone constitutes heresy.

Henceforth she attracted no further attention. It is believed, but on no very trustworthy evidence, that she ended by returning to Metz, to her husband, le Chevalier des Armoises, and that she lived quietly and respectably to a good old age, dwelling in the house over the door of which were her armorial bearings, or rather those of Jeanne the Maid, the sword, the crown and the Lilies.[2679]

[Footnote 2679: Vergnaud-Romagnesi, Des portraits de Jeanne d'Arc et de la fausse Jeanne d'Arc and Memoire sur les fausses Jeanne d'Arc, in Les Memoires de la Societe d'Agriculture d'Orleans, 1854, in 8vo.]

The success of this fraud had endured four years. After all it is not so very surprising. In every age people have been loath to believe in the final end of existences which have touched their imagination; they will not admit that great personalities can be struck down by death like ordinary folk; such an end to a noble career is repugnant to them. Impostors, like la Dame des Armoises, never fail to find some who will believe in them. And the Dame appeared at a time which was singularly favourable to such a delusion; intellects had been dulled by long suffering; communication between one district and another was rendered impossible or difficult, and what was happening in one place was unknown quite near at hand; in the minds of men there reigned dimness, ignorance, confusion.

But even then folk would not have been imposed upon so long by this pseudo-Jeanne had it not been for the support given her by the Du Lys brothers. Were they her dupes or her accomplices? Dull-witted as they may have been, it seems hardly credible that the adventuress could have imposed upon them. Admitting that she very closely resembled La Romee's daughter, the woman from La Grange-aux-Ormes cannot possibly for any length of time have deceived two men who knew Jeanne intimately, having been brought up with her and come with her into France.

If they were not imposed upon, then how can we account for their conduct? They had lost much when they lost their sister. When he arrived at La Grange-aux-Ormes, Pierre du Lys had just quitted a Burgundian prison; his ransom had been paid with his wife's dowry, and he was then absolutely destitute.[2680] Jean, Bailie of Vermandois, afterwards Governor of Chartres and about 1436 Bailie of Vaucouleurs, was hardly more prosperous.[2681] Such circumstances explained much. And yet it is unlikely that they of themselves alone and unsupported would have played a game so difficult, so risky, and so dangerous. From the little we know of their lives we should conclude that they were both too simple, too naif, too placid, to carry on such an intrigue.

[Footnote 2680: Trial, vol. v, pp. 210, 213.]

[Footnote 2681: Trial, vol. v, p. 279.]

We are tempted to believe that they were urged on by some higher and greater power. Who knows? Perhaps by certain indiscreet persons in the service of the King of France. The condemnation and death of Jeanne was a serious attack upon the prestige of Charles VII. May he not have had in his household or among his counsellors certain subjects who were rashly jealous enough to invent this appearance, in order to spread abroad the belief that Jeanne the Maid had not died the death of a witch, but that by virtue of her innocence and her holiness she had escaped the flames? If this were so, then we may regard the imposture of the pseudo-Jeanne, invented at a time when it seemed impossible ever to obtain a papal revision of the trial of 1431, as an attempt, surreptitious and fraudulent and speedily abandoned, to bring about her rehabilitation.

Such a hypothesis would explain why the Du Lys brothers were not punished or even disgraced, when they had put themselves in the wrong, had deceived King and people and committed the crime of high treason. Jean continued provost of Vaucouleurs for many a long year, and then, when relieved of his office, received a sum of money in lieu of it. Pierre, as well as his mother, La Romee, was living at Orleans. In 1443 he received from Duke Charles, who had returned to France three years before, the grant of an island in the Loire, l'Ile-aux-Boeufs,[2682] which was fair grazing land. Nevertheless, he remained poor, and was constantly receiving help from the Duke and the townsfolk of Orleans.[2683]

[Footnote 2682: Trial, vol. v, pp. 212, 214. Lottin, Recherches, vol. i, p. 287. Duleau, Vidimus d'une charte de Charles VII, concedant a Pierre du Lys la possession de l'Isle-aux-Boeufs, Orleans, 1860, in 8vo. 6. G. Lefevre-Pontalis, La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, p. 28, note 1.]

[Footnote 2683: I have not made use of the very late evidence given by Pierre Sala (Trial, vol. iv, p. 281). It is vague and somewhat legendary, and cannot possibly be introduced into the Life of La Dame des Armoises. For the bibliography of this interesting subject, see Lanery d'Arc, Le livre d'or de Jeanne d'Arc, pp. 573, 580, and G. Lefevre-Pontalis, La fausse Jeanne d'Arc, Paris, 1895, in 8vo, concerning the account given by M. Gaston Save.

There are those who have supposed, without adducing any proof, that this pseudo-Jeanne was a sister of the Maid (Lebrun de Charmettes, Histoire de Jeanne d'Arc, vol. iv, pp. 291 et seq.). Francis Andre, La verite sur Jeanne d'Arc, Paris, 1895, in 18mo, pp. 75 et seq.]



CHAPTER XVI

AFTER THE DEATH OF THE MAID (continued)—THE ROUEN JUDGES AT THE COUNCIL OF BALE AND THE PRAGMATIC SANCTION—THE REHABILITATION TRIAL—THE MAID OF SARMAIZE—THE MAID OF LE MANS

From year to year the Council of Bale drew out its deliberations in a series of sessions well nigh as lengthy as the tail of the dragon in the Apocalypse. Its manner of reforming at once the Church, its members, and its head struck terror into the hearts of the sovereign Pontiff and the Sacred College. Sorrowfully did AEneus Sylvius exclaim, "There is assembled at Bale, not the Church of God indeed, but the synagogue of Satan."[2684] But though uttered by a Roman cardinal, even such an expression can hardly be termed violent when applied to the synod which established free elections to bishoprics, suppressed the right of bestowing the pallium, of exacting annates and payments to the papal chancery, and which was endeavouring to restore the papacy to evangelical poverty. The King of France and the Emperor, on the other hand, looked favourably on the Council when it essayed to bridle the ambition and greed of the Bishop of Rome.

[Footnote 2684: De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. iii, p. 335.]

Now among the Fathers who displayed the greatest zeal in the reformation of the Church were the masters and doctors of the University of Paris, those who had sat in judgment on Jeanne the Maid, and notably Maitre Nicolas Loiseleur and Maitre Thomas de Courcelles. Charles VII convoked an assembly of the clergy of the realm in order to examine the canons of Bale. The assembly met in the Sainte-Chapelle at Bourges, on the 1st of May, 1438. Master Thomas de Courcelles, appointed delegate by the Council, there conferred with the Lord Bishop of Castres. Now in 1438 the Bishop of Castres was that elegant humanist, that zealous counsellor of the crown, who, in style truly Ciceronian, complained in his letters that so closely was he bound to his glebe, the court, that no time remained to him to visit his spouse.[2685] He was none other than that Gerard Machet, the King's confessor, who had, in 1429, along with the clerks at Poitiers, pleaded the authority of prophecy in favour of the Maid, in whom he found nought but sincerity and goodness.[2686] Maitre Thomas de Courcelles at Rouen had urged the Maid's being tortured and delivered to the secular arm.[2687] At the Bourges assembly the two churchmen agreed touching the supremacy of General Councils, the freedom of episcopal elections, the suppression of annates and the rights of the Gallican Church. At that moment it was not likely that either one or the other remembered the poor Maid. From the deliberations of this assembly, in which Maitre Thomas played an important part, there issued the solemn edict promulgated by the King on the 7th of July, 1438; the Pragmatic Sanction. By this edict the canons of Bale became the constitution of the Church of France.[2688]

[Footnote 2685: Le P. Ayroles, La Pucelle devant l'eglise de son temps, p. 10.]

[Footnote 2686: Trial, vol. iii, p. 565.]

[Footnote 2687: Ibid., vol. i, p. 403.]

[Footnote 2688: Ordonnances, vol. xiii, pp. 267, 291. Preuves des libertes de l'eglise gallicane, edited by Lenglet-Dufresnoy, second part, p. 6. De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. iii, pp. 353, 361. N. Arlos, Histoire de la pragmatique sanction, etc.]

The Emperor also agreed to the reforms of Bale. So audacious did the Fathers become that they summoned Pope Eugenius to appear before their tribunal. When he refused to obey their summons, they deposed him, declaring him to be disobedient, obstinate, rebellious, a breaker of rules, a perturber of ecclesiastical unity, a perjurer, a schismatic, a hardened heretic, a squanderer of the treasures of the Church, scandalous, simoniacal, pernicious and damnable.[2689] Such was the condemnation of the Holy Fathers pronounced among other doctors by Maitre Jean Beaupere, Maitre Thomas de Courcelles and Maitre Nicolas Loiseleur, who had all three so sternly reproached Jeanne with having refused to submit to the Pope.[2690] Maitre Nicolas had been extremely energetic throughout the Maid's trial, playing alternately the parts of the Lorraine prisoner and Saint Catherine; when she was led to the stake he had run after her like a madman.[2691] This same Maitre Nicolas now displayed great activity in the Council wherein he attained to some eminence. He upheld the view that the General Council canonically convoked, was superior to the Pope and in a position to depose him. And albeit this canon was a mere master of arts, he made such an impression on the Fathers at Bale that in 1439, they despatched him to act as juris-consult at the Diet of Mainz. Meanwhile his attitude was strongly displeasing to the chapter which had sent him as deputy to the Council. The canons of Rouen sided with the Sovereign Pontiff and against the Fathers, on this point joining issue with the University of Paris. They disowned their delegate and sent to recall him on the 28th of July, 1438.[2692]

[Footnote 2689: Hefele, Histoire de l'Eglise gallicane, vol. xx, p. 357. De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. iii, p. 363. De Beaurepaire, Les etats de Normandie sous la domination anglaise, pp. 66, 67, 185, 188.]

[Footnote 2690: Du Boulay, Hist. Universitatis, vol. v, p. 431. De Beaurepaire, Notes sur les juges, p. 28.]

[Footnote 2691: Trial, vol. ii, pp. 10, 12, 332, 362; vol. iii, pp. 60, 133, 141, 145, 156, 162, 173, 181.]

[Footnote 2692: De Beaurepaire, Notes sur les juges et assesseurs du proces de condamnation, pp. 78, 82.]

Maitre Thomas de Courcelles, one of those who had declared the Pope disobedient, obstinate, rebellious and the rest, was nominated one of the commissioners to preside over the election of a new pope, and, like Loiseleur, a delegate to the Diet of Mainz. But, unlike Loiseleur, he was not disowned by those who had appointed him, for he was the deputy of the University of Paris who recognised the Pope of the Council, Felix, to be the true Father of the Faithful.[2693] In the assembly of the French clergy held at Bourges in the August of 1440, Maitre Thomas spoke in the name of the Fathers of Bale. He discoursed for two hours to the complete satisfaction of the King.[2694] Charles VII, while remaining loyal to Pope Eugenius, maintained the Pragmatic Sanction. Maitre Thomas de Courcelles was henceforth one of the pillars of the French Church.

[Footnote 2693: J. Quicherat, Apercus nouveaux, p. 106.]

[Footnote 2694: De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. iii, p. 372.]

Meanwhile the English government had declared for the Pope and against the Council.[2695] My Lord Pierre Cauchon, who had become Bishop of Lisieux, was Henry VI's ambassador at the Council. And at Bale a somewhat unpleasant experience befell him. By reason of his translation to the see of Lisieux he owed Rome annates to the amount of 400 golden florins. In Germany he was informed by the Pope's Treasurer that by his failure to pay this sum, despite the long delays granted to him, he had incurred excommunication, and that being excommunicate, by presuming to celebrate divine service he had committed irregularity.[2696] Such accusations must have caused him considerable annoyance. But after all, such occurrences were frequent and of no great consequence. On churchmen these thunderbolts fell but lightly, doing them no great hurt.

[Footnote 2695: De Beaurepaire, Les etats de Normandie sous la domination anglaise, pp. 66, 67, 185, 188. De Beaucourt, loc. cit. p. 362.]

[Footnote 2696: De Beaurepaire, loc. cit., p. 17. Notes sur les juges et assesseurs du proces de condamnation, p. 117. Recherches sur le proces, p. 124.]

From 1444, the realm of France, disembarrassed alike of adversaries and of defenders, was free to labour, to work at various trades, to engage in commerce and to grow rich. In the intervals between wars and during truces, King Charles's government, by the interchange of natural products and of merchandise, also, we may add, by the abolition of tolls and dues on the Rivers Seine, Oise, and Loire, effected the actual conquest of Normandy. Thus, when the time for nominal conquest came, the French had only to take possession of the province. So easy had this become, that in the rapid campaign of 1449,[2697] even the Constable was not beaten, neither was the Duke of Alencon. In his royal and peaceful manner Charles VII resumed possession of his town of Rouen, just as twenty years before he had taken Troyes and Reims, as the result of an understanding with the townsfolk and in return for an amnesty and the grant of rights and privileges to the burghers. He entered the city on Monday, the 10th of November, 1449.

[Footnote 2697: De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. v, ch. i.]

The French government felt itself strong enough even to attempt the reconquest of that essentially English province, Aquitaine. In 1451, my Lord the Bastard, now Count of Dunois, took possession of the fortress of Blaye. Bordeaux and Bayonne surrendered in the same year. In the following manner did the Lord Bishop of Le Mans celebrate these conquests, worthy of the majesty of the most Christian King.

"Maine, Normandy, Aquitaine, these goodly provinces have returned to their allegiance to the King. Almost without the shedding of French blood hath this been accomplished. It hath not been necessary to overthrow the ramparts of many strongly walled towns, or to demolish their fortifications or for the inhabitants to suffer either pillage or murder."[2698]

[Footnote 2698: Lanery d'Arc, Memoires et consultations en faveur de Jeanne d'Arc, p. 249.]

Indeed Normandy and Maine were quite content at being French once more. The town of Bordeaux was alone in regretting the English, whose departure spelt its ruin. It revolted in 1452; and then after considerable difficulty was reconquered once and for all.

King Charles, henceforth rich and victorious, now desired to efface the stain inflicted on his reputation by the sentence of 1431. He wanted to prove to the whole world that it was no witch who had conducted him to his coronation. He was now eager to appeal against the condemnation of the Maid. But this condemnation had been pronounced by the church, and the Pope alone could order it to be cancelled. The King hoped to bring the Pope to do this, although he knew it would not be easy. In the March of 1450, he proceeded to a preliminary inquiry;[2699] and matters remained in that position until the arrival in France of Cardinal d'Estouteville, the legate of the Holy See. Pope Nicolas had sent him to negotiate with the King of France a peace with England and a crusade against the Turks. Cardinal d'Estouteville, who belonged to a Norman family, was just the man to discover the weak points in Jeanne's trial. In order to curry favour with Charles, he, as legate, set on foot a new inquiry at Rouen, with the assistance of Jean Brehal, of the order of preaching friars, the Inquisitor of the Faith in the kingdom of France. But the Pope did not approve of the legate's intervention;[2700] and for three years the revision was not proceeded with. Nicolas V would not allow it to be thought that the sacred tribunal of the most holy Inquisition was fallible and had even once pronounced an unjust sentence. And there existed at Rome a stronger reason for not interfering with the trial of 1431: the French demanded revision; the English were opposed to it; and the Pope did not wish to annoy the English, for they were then just as good and even better Catholics than the French.[2701]

[Footnote 2699: Trial, vol. ii, pp. 1, 22.]

[Footnote 2700: Gallia Christiana, vol. iii, col. 1129 and vol. xi, col. 90. De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. v, p. 219. Le P. Ayroles, La Pucelle devant l'eglise de son temps, ch. vi.]

[Footnote 2701: De Beaurepaire, Les etats de Normandie sous la domination anglaise, pp. 185, 188.]

In order to relieve the Pope from embarrassment and set him at his ease, the government of Charles VII invented an expedient: the King was not to appear in the suit; his place was to be taken by the family of the Maid. Jeanne's mother, Isabelle Romee de Vouthon, who lived in retirement at Orleans,[2702] and her two sons, Pierre and Jean du Lys, demanded the revision.[2703] By this legal artifice the case was converted from a political into a private suit. At this juncture Nicolas V died, on the 24th of March, 1455. His successor, Calixtus III, a Borgia, an old man of seventy-eight, by a rescript dated the 11th of June, 1455, authorised the institution of proceedings. To this end he appointed Jean Jouvenel des Ursins, Archbishop of Reims, Guillaume Chartier, Bishop of Paris, and Richard Olivier, Bishop of Coutances, who were to act conjointly with the Grand Inquisitor of France.[2704]

[Footnote 2702: Trial, vol. v, p. 276.]

[Footnote 2703: Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 108, 112.]

[Footnote 2704: Ibid., p. 95. Le P. Ayroles, La Pucelle devant l'eglise de son temps, p. 607. J. Belon and F. Balme, Jean Brehal, grand inquisiteur de France et la rehabilitation de Jeanne d'Arc, Paris, 1893, in 4to.]

From the first it was agreed that certain of those concerned in the original trial were not now to be involved, "for they had been deceived." Notably it was admitted that the Daughter of Kings, the Mother of Learning, the University of Paris, had been led into error by a fraudulent indictment consisting of twelve articles. It was agreed that the whole responsibility should be thrown on to the Bishop of Beauvais and the Promoter, Guillaume d'Estivet, who were both deceased. The precaution was necessary. Had it not been taken, certain doctors very influential with the King and very dear to the Church of France would have been greatly embarrassed.

On the 7th of November, 1455, Isabelle Romee and her two sons, followed by a long procession of innumerable ecclesiasties, laymen, and worthy women, approached the church of Notre Dame in Paris to demand justice from the prelates and papal commissioners.[2705]

[Footnote 2705: Trial, vol. ii, pp. 82, 92.]

Informers and accusers in the trial of the late Jeanne were summoned to appear at Rouen on the 12th of December. Not one came.[2706] The heirs of the late Messire Pierre Cauchon declined all liability for the deeds of their deceased kinsman, and touching the civil responsibility, they pleaded the amnesty granted by the King on the reconquest of Normandy.[2707] As had been expected, the proceedings went forward without any obstacle or even any discussion.

[Footnote 2706: Ibid., pp. 92, 112.]

[Footnote 2707: Ibid., pp. 193, 196.]

Inquiries were instituted at Domremy, at Orleans, at Paris, at Rouen.[2708] The friends of Jeannette's childhood, Hauviette, Mengette, either married or grown old; Jeannette, the wife of Thevenin; Jeannette, the widow of Estellin; Jean Morel of Greux; Gerardin of Epinal, the Burgundian, and his wife Isabellette, who had been godmother to Jacques d'Arc's daughter; Perrin, the bell-ringer; Jeanne's uncle Lassois; the Leroyer couple and a score of peasants from Domremy all appeared. Bertrand de Poulengy, then sixty-three and gentleman of the horse to the King of France, was heard; likewise Jean de Novelompont, called Jean de Metz, who had been raised to noble rank and was now living at Vaucouleurs, where he held some military office. Gentlemen and ecclesiasties of Lorraine and Champagne were examined.[2709] Burgesses of Orleans were also called, and notably Jean Luillier, the draper, who in June, 1429, had furnished fine Brussels cloth of purple for Jeanne's gown and ten years later had been present at the banquet given by the magistrates of Orleans in honour of the Maid who, as it was believed, had escaped burning.[2710] Jean Luillier was the most intelligent of the witnesses; as for the others, of whom there were about two dozen townsmen and townswomen, of between fifty and sixty years of age, they did little but repeat his evidence.[2711] He spoke well; but the fear of the English dazzled him and he saw many more of them than there had ever been.

[Footnote 2708: Ibid., pp. 291, 463; vol. iii, pp. 1, 202.]

[Footnote 2709: Trial, vol. ii, pp. 378, 463.]

[Footnote 2710: Ibid., vol. v, pp. 112, 113, 331.]

[Footnote 2711: Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 23, 35.]

Touching the examination at Poitiers there were called an advocate, a squire, a man of business, Francois Garivel, who was fifteen at the time of Jeanne's interrogation.[2712] The only cleric summoned was Brother Seguin of Limousin.[2713] The clerics of Poitiers were first as disinclined to risk themselves in this matter as were those of Rouen; a burnt child dreads the fire. La Hire and Poton of Saintrailles were dead. The survivors of Orleans and of Patay were called; the Bastard Jean, now Count of Dunois and Longueville, who gave his evidence like a clerk;[2714] the old Sire de Gaucourt, who in his eighty-fifth year made some effort of memory, and for the rest gave the same evidence as the Count of Dunois;[2715] the Duke of Alencon, on the point of making an alliance with the English and of procuring a powder with which to dry up the King,[2716] but who was none the less talkative and vain-glorious;[2717] Jeanne's steward, Messire Jean d'Aulon, who had become a knight, a King's Counsellor and Seneschal of Beaucaire,[2718] and the little page Louis de Coutes, now a noble of forty-two.[2719] Brother Pasquerel too was called; even in his old-age he remained superficial and credulous.[2720] And there was heard also the widow of Maitre Rene de Bouligny, Demoiselle Marguerite la Toroulde, who delicately and with a good grace related what she remembered.[2721]

[Footnote 2712: Ibid., pp. 1, 19.]

[Footnote 2713: Ibid., vol. iii, p. 202.]

[Footnote 2714: Ibid., pp. 2 et seq.]

[Footnote 2715: Ibid., p. 16.]

[Footnote 2716: De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. vi, p. 43. P. Dupuy, Histoire des Templiers, 1658, in 4to. Cimber and Danjou, Archives curieuses de l'histoire de France, vol. i, pp. 137-157. (See also, Michelet, History of France, translated by G.H. Smith, vol. ii, p. 206.) Note—Alencon says to his English valet: "If I could have a powder that I wot of and put it in the vessel in which the King's sheets are washed, he should sleep sound enough [dormir tout sec]." Trial of Alencon (W.S.).]

[Footnote 2717: Trial, vol. iii, p. 90.]

[Footnote 2718: Ibid., p. 209.]

[Footnote 2719: Ibid., p. 65.]

[Footnote 2720: Ibid., p. 100.]

[Footnote 2721: Ibid., p. 85.]

Care was taken not to summon the Lord Archbishop of Rouen, Messire Raoul Roussel, as a witness of the actual incidents of the trial, albeit he had sat in judgment on the Maid, side by side with my Lord of Beauvais. As for the Vice Inquisitor of Religion, Brother Jean Lemaistre, he might have been dead, so completely was he ignored. Nevertheless, certain of the assessors were called: Jean Beaupere, canon of Paris, of Besancon and of Rouen; Jean de Mailly, Lord Bishop of Noyon; Jean Lefevre, Bishop of Demetriade; divers canons of Rouen, sundry ecclesiastics who appeared some unctuous, others stern and frowning;[2722] and, finally, the most illustrious Thomas de Courcelles, who, after having been the most laborious and assiduous collaborator of the Bishop of Beauvais, recalled nothing when he came before the commissioners for the revision.[2723]

[Footnote 2722: Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 20, 21, 161; vol. iii, pp. 43, 53, passim.]

[Footnote 2723: Trial, vol. iii, pp. 44, 56. J. Quicherat, Apercus nouveaux, p. 106.]



Among those who had been most zealous to procure Jeanne's condemnation were those who were now most eagerly labouring for her rehabilitation. The registrars of the Lord Bishop of Beauvais, the Boisguillaumes, the Manchons, the Taquels, all those ink-pots of the Church who had been used for her death sentence, worked wonders when that sentence had to be annulled; all the zeal they had displayed in the institution of the trial they now displayed in its revision; they were prepared to discover in it every possible flaw.[2724]

[Footnote 2724: Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 161; vol. iii, pp. 41, 42, 195.]

And in what a poor and paltry tone did these benign fabricators of legal artifices denounce the cruel iniquity which they had themselves perpetrated in due form! Among them was the Usher, Jean Massieu, a dissolute priest,[2725] of scandalous morals, but a kindly fellow for all that, albeit somewhat crafty and the inventor of a thousand ridiculous stories against Cauchon, as if the old Bishop were not black enough already.[2726] The revision commissioners produced a couple of sorry monks, Friar Martin Ladvenu and Friar Isambart de la Pierre, from the monastery of the preaching friars at Rouen. They wept in a heart-rending manner as they told of the pious end of that poor Maid, whom they had declared a heretic, then a relapsed heretic, and had finally burned alive. There was not one of the clerks charged with the examination of Jeanne but was touched to the heart at the memory of so saintly a damsel.[2727]

[Footnote 2725: De Beaurepaire, Notes sur les juges.]

[Footnote 2726: Trial, vol. ii, pp. 329 et seq.]

[Footnote 2727: Trial, vol. ii, pp. 363 et seq., 434 et seq.]

Huge piles of memoranda drawn up by doctors of high repute, canonists, theologians and jurists, both French and foreign, were furnished for the trial. Their chief object was to establish by scholastic reasoning that Jeanne had submitted her deeds and sayings to the judgment of the Church and of the Holy Father. These doctors proved that the judges of 1431 had been very subtle and Jeanne very simple. Doubtless, it was the best way to make out that she had submitted to the Church; but they over-reached themselves and made her too simple. According to them she was absolutely ignorant, almost an idiot, understanding nothing, imagining that the clerics who examined her in themselves alone constituted the Church Militant. This had been the impression of the doctors on the French side in 1429. La Pucelle, "une puce," said the Lord Archbishop of Embrun.[2728]

[Footnote 2728: Lanery d'Arc, Memoires et consultations en faveur de Jeanne d'Arc, p. 576.]

But there was another reason for making her appear as weak and imbecile as possible. Such a representation exalted the power of God, who through her had restored the King of France to his inheritance.

Declarations confirming this view of the Maid were obtained by the commissioners from most of the witnesses. She was simple, she was very simple, she was absolutely simple, they repeated one after the other. And they all in the same words added: "Yes, she was simple, save in deeds of war, wherein she was well skilled."[2729] Then the captains said how clever she was in placing cannon, albeit they knew well to the contrary. But how could she have failed to be well versed in deeds of war, since God himself led her against the English? And in this possession of the art of war by an unskilled girl lay the miracle.

[Footnote 2729: Trial, vol. iii, pp. 32, 87, 100, 116, 119, 120, 126, 128 et passim.]

The Grand Inquisitor of France, Jean Brehal, in his reminiscence enumerates the reasons for believing that Jeanne came from God. One of the proofs which seems to have struck him most forcibly is that her coming is foretold in the prophecies of Merlin, the Magician.[2730]

[Footnote 2730: Lanery d'Arc, Memoires et consultations, p. 402.]

Believing that he could prove from one of Jeanne's answers that her first apparitions were in her thirteenth year, Brother Jean Brehal argues that the fact is all the more credible seeing that this number 13, composed of 3, which indicates the Blessed Trinity, and of 10, which expresses the perfect observation of the Decalogue, is marvellously favourable to divine visitations.[2731]

[Footnote 2731: Trial, vol. iii, p. 398.]

On the 16th of June, 1455, the sentence of 1431 was declared unjust, unfounded, iniquitous. It was nullified and pronounced invalid.

Thus was honour restored to the messenger of the coronation, thus was her memory reconciled with the Church. But that abundant source whence on the appearance of this child there had flowed so many pious legends and heroic fables was henceforth dried up. The rehabilitation trial added little to the popular legend. It rendered it possible to connect with Jeanne's death the usual incidents narrated of the martyrdom of virgins, such as the dove taking flight from the stake, the name of Jesus written in letters of flame, the heart intact in the ashes.[2732] The miserable deaths of the wicked judges were insisted upon. True it is that Jean d'Estivet, the Promoter, was found dead in a dove-cot,[2733] that Nicolas Midi was attacked by leprosy, that Pierre Cauchon died when he was being shaved.[2734] But, among those who aided and accompanied the Maid, more than one came to a bad end. Sire Robert de Baudricourt, who had sent Jeanne to the King, died in prison, excommunicated for having laid waste the lands of the chapter of Toul.[2735] The Marechal de Rais was sentenced to death.[2736] The Duke of Alencon, convicted of high treason, was pardoned only to fall under a new condemnation and to die in captivity.[2737]

[Footnote 2732: Trial, vol. iii, p. 355.]

[Footnote 2733: Ibid., p. 162.]

[Footnote 2734: Gallia Christiana, vol. xi, col. 793.]

[Footnote 2735: Histoire ecclesiastique et politique de la ville et du diocese de Toul, 1707, p. 529.]

[Footnote 2736: Abbe Bossard, Gilles de Rais, pp. 333 et seq.]

[Footnote 2737: De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. vi, p. 197.]

Two years after Charles VII had ordered the preliminary inquiry into the trial of 1431, a woman, following the example of la Dame des Armoises, passed herself off as the Maid Jeanne.

At this time there lived in the little town of Sarmaize, between the Marne and the Meuse, two cousins german of the Maid, Poiresson and Perinet, both sons of the late Jean de Vouthon, Isabelle Romee's brother, who in his lifetime had been a thatcher by trade. Now, on a day in 1452, it befell that the cure of Notre Dame de Sarmaize, Simon Fauchard, being in the market-house of the town, there came to him a woman dressed as a youth who asked him to play at tennis with her.

He consented, and when they had begun their game the woman said to him, "Say boldly that you have played tennis with the Maid." And at these words Simon Fauchard was right joyful.

The woman afterwards went to the house of Perinet, the carpenter, and said, "I am the Maid; I come to visit my Cousin Henri."

Perinet, Poiresson, and Henri de Vouthon made her good cheer and kept her in their house, where she ate and drank as she pleased.[2738]

[Footnote 2738: Inquiry of 1476, in G. de Braux and E. de Bouteiller, Nouvelles recherches, p. 10.]

Then, when she had had enough, she went away.

Whence came she? No one knows. Whither did she go? She may probably be recognised in an adventuress, who not long afterwards, with her hair cut short and a hood on her head, wearing doublet and hose, wandered through Anjou, calling herself Jeanne the Maid. While the doctors and masters, engaged in the revision of the trial, were gathering evidence of Jeanne's life and death from all parts of the kingdom, this false Jeanne was finding credence with many folk. But she became involved in difficulties with a certain Dame of Saumoussay,[2739] and was cast into the prison of Saumur, where she lay for three months. At the end of this time, having been banished from the dominions of the good King Rene, she married one Jean Douillet; and, by a document dated the 3rd day of February, 1456, she received permission to return to Saumur, on condition of living there respectably and ceasing to wear man's apparel.[2740]

[Footnote 2739: Or Chaumussay. Lecoy de la Marche, Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc, Paris, 1871, in 8vo, p. 19.]

[Footnote 2740: Lecoy de la Marche, Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc, in Revue des questions historiques, October, 1871, p. 576. Le roi Rene, Paris, 1875, vol. i, pp. 308-327; vol. ii, pp. 281-283.]

About this time there came to Laval in the diocese of Le Mans, a damsel between eighteen and twenty-two, who was a native of a neighbouring place called Chasse-les-Usson. Her father's name was Jean Feron and she was commonly called Jeanne la Ferone.

She was inspired from heaven, and the names Jesus and Mary were for ever on her lips; yet the devil cruelly tormented her. The Dame de Laval, mother of the Lords Andre and Guy, being now very aged, marvelled at the piety and the sufferings of the holy damsel; and she sent her to Le Mans, to the Bishop.

Since 1449, the see of Le Mans had been held by Messire Martin Berruyer of Touraine. In his youth he had been professor of philosophy and rhetoric at the University of Paris. Later he had devoted himself to theology and had become one of the directors of the College of Navarre. Although he was infirm with age, his learning was such that he was consulted by the commissioners for the rehabilitation trial,[2741] whereupon he drew up a memorandum touching the Maid. Herein he believes her to have been verily sent of God because she was abject and very poor and appeared well nigh imbecile in everything that did not concern her mission. Messire Martin argues that it was by reason of the King's virtues that God had vouchsafed to him the help of the Maid.[2742] Such an idea found favour with the theologians of the French party.

[Footnote 2741: Trial, vol. iii, p. 314, note 1. Gallia Christiana, vol. ii, fol. 518. Du Boulay, Hist. Univ. Paris, vol. v, p. 905. Le P. Ayroles, La Pucelle devant l'eglise de son temps, pp. 403, 404.]

[Footnote 2742: Lanery d'Arc, Memoires et consultations, p. 247.]

The Lord Bishop, Martin Berruyer, heard Jeanne la Ferone in confession, renewed her baptism, confirmed her in the faith and gave her the name of Marie, in gratitude for the abounding grace which the most Holy Virgin, Mother of God, had granted to his servant.

This maid was subject to the violent attacks of evil spirits. Many a time did my Lord of Mans behold her covered with bleeding wounds, struggling in the grasp of the enemy, and on several occasions he delivered her by means of exorcisms. Greatly was he edified by this holy damsel, who made known unto him marvellous secrets, who abounded in pious revelations and noble Christian utterances. Wherefore in praise of La Ferone he wrote many letters[2743] to princes and communities of the realm.

[Footnote 2743: Du Clercq, Memoires, ed. Reiffenberg, Brussels, 1823, vol. iii, pp. 98 et seq. Jean de Roye, Chronique scandaleuse, ed. Bernard de Mandrot, 1894, vol. i, pp. 13, 14. Chronique de Bourdigne, ed. Quatrebarbes, vol. ii, p. 212. Dom Piolin, Histoire de l'eglise du Mans, vol. v, p. 163.]

The Queen of France, who was then very old and whose husband had long ago deserted her, heard tell of the Maid of Le Mans, and wrote to Messire Martin Berruyer, requesting him to make the damsel known unto her.

Thus there befel, what we have seen happening over and over again in this history, that when a devout person, leading a contemplative life uttered prophecies, those in places of authority grew curious concerning her and desired to submit her to the judgment of the Church that they might know whether the goodness that appeared in her were true or false. Certain officers of the King visited La Ferone at Le Mans.

As revelations touching the realm of France had been vouchsafed to her, she spoke to them the following words:

"Commend me very humbly to the King and bid him recognise the grace which God granteth unto him, and lighten the burdens of his people."

In the December of 1460, she was summoned before the Royal Council, which was then sitting at Tours, while the King, who was sick of an ulcer in the leg, was residing in the Chateau of Les Montils.[2744] The Maid of Le Mans was examined in like manner as the Maid Jeanne had been, but the result was unfavourable; she was found wanting in everything. Brought before the ecclesiastical court she was convicted of imposture. It appeared that she was no maid, but was living in concubinage with a cleric, that certain persons in the service of my Lord of Le Mans instructed her in what she was to say, and that such was the origin of the revelations she made to the Reverend Father in God, Messire Martin Berruyer, under the seal of the confession. Convicted of being a hypocrite, an idolatress, an invoker of demons, a witch, a magician, lascivious, dissolute, an enchantress, a mine of falsehood, she was condemned to have a fool's cap put on her head and to be preached at in public, in the towns of Le Mans, Tours and Laval. On the 2nd of May, 1461, she was exhibited to the folk at Tours, wearing a paper cap and over her head a scroll on which her deeds were set forth in lines of Latin and of French. Maitre Guillaume de Chateaufort, Grand Master of the Royal College of Navarre, preached to her. Then she was cast into close confinement in a prison, there to weep over her sins for the space of seven years, eating the bread of sorrow and drinking the water of affliction;[2745] at the end of which time she rented a house of ill fame.[2746]

[Footnote 2744: Chastellain, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, vol. iii, p. 444.]

[Footnote 2745: Jacques du Clercq, Memoires, vol. iii, pp. 107 et seq.]

[Footnote 2746: Antoine du Faur, Livre des femmes celebres, in Trial, vol. v, p. 336.]

On Wednesday, the 22nd of July, 1461, covered with ulcers internal and external, believing himself poisoned and perhaps not without reason, Charles VII died, in the fifty-ninth year of his age, in his Chateau of Mehun-sur-Yevre.[2747]

[Footnote 2747: De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. vi, pp. 442, 451. Chronique Martiniane, ed. P. Champion, p. 110.]

On Thursday, the 6th of August, his body was borne to the Church of Saint-Denys in France and placed in a chapel hung with velvet; the nave was draped with black satin, the vault was covered with blue cloth embroidered with flowers-de-luce.[2748] During the ceremony, which took place on the following day, a funeral oration was delivered on Charles VII. The preacher was no less a personage than the most highly renowned professor at the University of Paris, the doctor, who according to the Princes of the Roman Church was ever aimable and modest, he who had been the stoutest defender of the liberties of the Gallican Church, the ecclesiastic who, having declined a Cardinal's hat, bore to the threshold of an illustrious old age none other title than that of Dean of the Canons of Notre Dame de Paris, Maitre Thomas de Courcelles.[2749] Thus it befell that the assessor of Rouen, who had been the most bitterly bent on procuring Jeanne's cruel condemnation, celebrated the memory of the victorious King whom the Maid had conducted to his solemn coronation.

[Footnote 2748: Mathieu d'Escouchy, vol. ii, p. 422. Jean Chartier, Chronique, vol. iii, pp. 114-121.]

[Footnote 2749: Gallia Christiana, vol. vii, col. 151 and 214. Hardouin, Acta Conciliorum, vol. ix, col. 1423. De Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. vi, p. 444.]



APPENDICES



APPENDIX I

LETTER FROM DOCTOR G. DUMAS

My Dear Master,—You ask for my medical opinion in the case of Jeanne d'Arc. Had I been able to examine it at my leisure with the Doctors Tiphaine and Delachambre, who were summoned before the tribunal at Rouen, I might have found it difficult to come to any definite conclusion. And even more difficult do I find it now, when my diagnosis must necessarily be retrospective and based upon examinations conducted by persons who never dreamed of attempting to discover the existence of any nervous disease. However since they ascribed what we now call disease to the influence of the devil, their questions are not without significance for us. Therefore with many reservations I will endeavour to answer your question.

Of Jeanne's inherited constitution we know nothing; and of her personal antecedents we are almost entirely ignorant. Our only information concerning such matters comes from Jean d'Aulon, who, on the evidence of several women, states[2750] that she was never fully developed, a condition which frequently occurs in neurotic subjects.

[Footnote 2750: Trial, vol. iii. p. 219.]

We should, however, be unable to arrive at any conclusion concerning Jeanne's nervous constitution had not her judges, and in particular Maitre Jean Beaupere, in the numerous examinations to which they subjected her, elicited certain significant details on the subject of her hallucinations.

Maitre Beaupere begins by inquiring very judiciously whether Jeanne had fasted the day before she first heard her voices. Whence we infer that the interdependence of inanition and hallucinations was recognised by this illustrious professor of theology. Before condemning Jeanne as a witch he wanted to make sure that she was not merely suffering from weakness. Some time later we find Saint Theresa suspecting that the visions said to have been seen by a certain nun were merely the result of long fasting. Saint Theresa insisted on the nun's partaking of food, and the visions ceased.

Jeanne replies that she had only fasted since the morning, and Maitre Beaupere proceeds to ask:

Q. "In what direction did you hear the voice?"

A. "I heard it on the right, towards the church."

Q. "Was the voice accompanied by any light?"

A. "I seldom heard it without there being a light. This light appeared in the direction whence the voice came."[2751]

[Footnote 2751: Trial, vol. i, p. 52 and passim.]

We might wonder whether by the expression "a droite" (a latere dextro) Jeanne meant her own right side or the position of the church in relation to her; and in the latter case, the information would have no clinical significance; but the context leaves no doubt as to the veritable meaning of her words.

"How can you," urges Jean Beaupere, "see this light which you say appears to you, if it is on your right?"

If it had been merely a question of the situation of the church and not of Jeanne's own right side, she would only have had to turn her face to see the light in front of her, and Jean Beaupere's objection would have been pointless.

Consequently at about the age of thirteen, at the period of puberty, which for her never came, Jeanne would appear to have been subject on her right side to unilateral hallucinations of sight and hearing. Now Charcot[2752] considered unilateral hallucinations of sight to be common in cases of hysteria.[2753] He even thought that in hysterical subjects they are allied to a hemianaesthesia situated on the same side of the body, and which in Jeanne would be on the right side. Jeanne's trial might have proved the existence of this hemianaesthesia, an extremely significant symptom in the diagnosis of hysteria, if the judges had applied torture or merely had examined the skin of the subject in order to discover anaesthesia patches which were called marks of the devil.[2754] But from the merely oral examination which took place we can only draw inferences concerning Jeanne's general physical condition. In case excessive importance should be attached to such inferences I should add that in the diagnosis of hysteria contemporary neurologists pay less attention than did Charcot to unilateral hallucinations of sight.