_THE REHABILITATION_.
Twenty years after the events which I have attempted to describe, an
act of tardy justice was accorded to Joan of Arc. Charles VII. at
length felt it necessary, more for his own interest than for any care
of the memory of Joan of Arc, to have a revision made of the
iniquitous condemnation of the heroine.
This King, even if unable to rescue the Maid of Orleans from her
captors, might at least have attempted her release, yet during all the
time--over a year--of her imprisonment he had not even made a sign in
her behalf.
There does not exist in the documents of the time a trace of any
negotiation, of the smallest offer made to obtain her exchange by
prisoners or by ransom, or of any wish to effect her release. But
Charles was anxious on his own account, when France had almost wholly
been gained back to its allegiance, that his coronation at Rheims
should not be imputed to the actions and to the aid of one whom the
French clergy and the French judges had condemned and executed as a
heretic and apostate. Hence the vast judicial inquiry set on foot by
the King to vindicate the fame of her whom the English and the
Anglo-French had hoped, through the condemnation pronounced by Cauchon
in the name of the Church, to vilify, and through her, by her trial,
condemnation, and death, to discredit Charles and his coronation.
On the 15th of February, 1450, Charles VII. declared that Joan of
Arc's enemies had destroyed her 'against reason'--so ran the
formula--'and very cruelly,' and that it was his, the King's,
intention 'to obtain the truth regarding this affair.'
Pope Nicolas V. made difficulties. Cardinal d'Estouteville, who had
undertaken to manage the process of rehabilitation, presented the Pope
with a claim for a revision of the sentence of condemnation in the
name of Joan of Arc's mother and of her two brothers. The petition ran
thus: 'The brothers, mother, and relations of Joan, anxious that her
memory and their own should be cleansed from this unmerited disgrace,
demand that the sentence of condemnation that was given at Rouen shall
be annulled.' Not, however, until the death of Pope Nicolas V., and
the accession of Calixtus III., was anything further done.
The new Pope (Alfonso Borgia) did not hesitate as to the line he
intended taking in the matter, and he gave his sanction to the
rehabilitation of the heroine by a rescript dated the 11th of June,
1455. It was as follows:--
'We, Calixtus, servant of the servants of God, accord a favourable
ear to the request which has been made us. There has lately been
brought before us on the part of Peter and John of Arc, also of
Isabella of Arc, their mother, and some of their relations, a petition
stating that their sister, daughter, and relative, Joan of Arc
deceased, had been unjustly condemned as guilty of the crime of heresy
and other crimes against the Faith, on the false testimony of the late
William [John, it should be] d'Estivet of the Episcopal Court of
Beauvais, and of Peter of happy memory, at that time Bishop of
Beauvais, and of the late John Lemaître, belonging to the Inquisition.
The nullity of their proceedings and the innocence of Joan are clearly
established both by documents and further by clearest proofs. In
consequence of this, the brothers, mother, and relatives of Joan are
therefore at liberty to cast off the mark of infamy with which this
trial has falsely stamped them; and thus they have humbly supplicated
our permission to authorise and to proceed in this trial of
rehabilitation.'
The prelates selected by the Pope as commissioners to follow the
course of the trial of rehabilitation were John Jouvenel des Ursins,
Archbishop of Rheims, William Chartrier, Bishop of Paris, and Richard
de Longueil, Bishop of Coutances. On the 7th of November, 1455, this
trial was solemnly begun in the Church of Notre Dame, in Paris.
It has been said that Joan of Arc's father died of grief on hearing of
his daughter's martyrdom. He was certainly dead before the date of
this trial. However, the now aged mother of Joan of Arc, Isabella
Romée d'Arc, in her sixty-seventh year, was there. She was supported
by her two sons, John and Peter, and was accompanied by many of her
relations from Vaucouleurs, and friends from Orleans. The poor soul
appears to have been much affected when she appeared before the
sympathetic crowd. Many of those present must have come from far to
see the mother of the famous heroine claiming at the hands of the
Church the vindication of her daughter's fame.
Two meetings took place at Notre Dame, and a third was held at Rouen,
at which the family of Joan of Arc were unable to be present--the
mother from illness, and the brothers by affairs at home. The
_Procureur_, whose name was Prévosteau, was the advocate for the Arc
family. The debates lasted all through the winter, and into the early
part of the year 1456. During the debates a hundred articles were
drawn up and agreed to, relating to the life, death, and trial of the
heroine. None of these are of much importance or interest.
It was not until the witnesses of Joan of Arc's life at home, and of
her actions abroad, gave their testimony that the debates became
interesting. Then began to pass before the eyes of the spectators a
succession of people who had known Joan of Arc, and who had taken part
in the same actions as those of the Maid--peasants from her native
village, townsfolk from Orleans, generals and soldiers who had ridden
with her into battle and fought by her side.
In fact, here appeared all sorts and conditions of men, from farm
labourers to princes of the blood royal. The testimony of these people
helps one to follow the life of Joan of Arc throughout its short
career with something like precision. The sittings of the
commissioners took place at Paris, Orleans, Rouen, and also at
Domremy. It may be said without exaggeration that the whole of France
and all its classes seemed, after an interval of a quarter of a
century, to raise its voice in honour of the memory of its martyr
Maid, and to attest to the spotless and noble life of her country's
saviour.
At Domremy, at Vaucouleurs, and at Toul, thirty-four witnesses were
heard on the 28th of January and on the 11th of February, 1456. At
Orleans, during the months of February and of March, forty-one
depositions were collected by the Archbishop of Rheims.
In Paris, in April and May, the same prelate, assisted by the Bishop
of Paris, heard the evidence of twenty witnesses. At Rouen, the same
commission heard nineteen others. Finally, at Lyons, the deposition of
Joan of Arc's esquire, d'Aulon, who had attended her throughout her
campaigns, was made before the Vice-Inquisitor of that province, John
Desprès.
All these depositions are recorded in Latin, the only exception being
that of d'Aulon, which was taken down in French. All those written in
Latin have been translated into French by M. Fabre, and published in
his _Procès de Réhabilitation de Jeanne d'Arc_.
Among the witnesses first appear the friends and neighbours of Joan of
Arc in her childhood and early years. From her birthplace came her
greatest friends, Henriette, Mengette, and Isabellette. The first of
these, in the year 1456, was aged forty-five, the second was a year
older, and the third was in her fiftieth year. All three were the
wives of labourers. Henriette was married to Gerard, Mengette to John
Joyart, and Isabellette to Gerardin d'Epinal. To the child of the last
Joan had stood god-mother. Next came from the same village three older
women, all three being god-mothers to Joan. In those days the French
peasantry seem to have had an almost unlimited number of god-fathers
and god-mothers. These were named Jeannette, widow of Thépelin de
Viteau, aged sixty; Jeannette Théverien, aged sixty-six; and Beatrix,
widow of d'Estelin, a labourer of Domremy, then in her eightieth year.
After these three god-mothers, came to give their evidence her
god-fathers. Four of these appear--John Rainguesson, John Barrey, John
de Langart, and John Morel de Greux. Of these four god-fathers, only
the last one seems to have been called to give evidence; he was in his
seventieth year. Gerardin d'Epinal, husband of one of the god-mothers,
also gave his evidence; it was his son Nicolas for whom Joan of Arc
had stood sponsor. In those days it was held that the god-mother of a
child stood to it in the relation of a second mother: hence originated
the term of 'commère' and 'compère,' which Joan gave the d'Epinals.
Six labourers, who had been playmates with Joan in childhood, then
came forward. These men, named respectively Le Cuin, Guillemeth,
Waterin, Colin, Masnier, and Jacquard, were between the ages of
forty-four and fifty. All these humbly born witnesses agreed in their
answers to the twelve questions asked them in the following order:--
1. When and where was Joan born?
2. Who were her parents? Were they of good character and of
good repute?
3. Who were her god-fathers?
4. Was she piously brought up?
5. How did she conduct herself between her seventh year up
to the time she left her home?
6. Did she often frequent the churches and places of
devotion of her free-will?
7. How did she occupy herself, and what were her duties?
8. Did she confess often?
9. Did she frequent the fairies' tree and the haunted well,
and did she go to places with the other young people of the
neighbourhood?
10. How did she leave her home, and how did she accomplish
her journey?
11. Were any investigations made in her native country at
the time she was taken prisoner?
12. Did Joan on one occasion escape to Neufchâteau on
account of a military raid, and was she then in the company
of her parents?
We now arrive at a higher grade in the ranks of the witnesses, in the
shape of 'l'honorable homme Nicolas Bailly.' Bailly was a man of
sixty; he had been employed by the English in 1430, and by Cauchon--he
was a scrivener (_tabellion_) by profession--to make investigations
into the character of Joan in her native place.
Then came the old bell-ringer of Joan of Arc's village--Perrin le
Drassier, aged sixty. He told how the maiden loved the sound of the
church bells, and how she would blame him when he neglected ringing
them, and of her little gifts to him to make him more diligent in his
office. After the bell-ringer came three priests--all belonging to the
neighbourhood of Domremy. The first--namely, the 'discrète personne
Messire Henri Arnolin'--belonged to Gondrecourt-le-Château, near to
Commercy, and was sixty-four. The next is the 'vénérable personne
Messire Etienne de Sionne,' curate of the parish church at
Raucessey-sous-Neufchâteau, aged fifty-four; and the third was named
Dominic Jocab, curate of the parish church of Moutier-sur-Saulx.
Next came an old peasant from Domremy, named Bertrand Laclopssé, a
thatcher by profession, ninety years of age; after him three
neighbours of Joan's father--Thevenin le Royer, seventy years old;
Jacquier, sixty; and John Moen, wheelwright, fifty-six. But a far more
important witness than any of the preceding three-and-twenty was the
uncle of the heroine, Durand Laxart, farm labourer at Burey-le-Petit,
whom, it will be remembered, Joan first took into her confidence
regarding her voices and her mission. Laxart was then in his sixtieth
year. At the close of his evidence he states that all he had said
regarding his niece he had also told Charles VII.--probably at the
time of the coronation, for Laxart was then at Rheims. Laxart was
followed by the couple with whom Joan of Arc lodged when living at
Vaucouleurs, Henry and Joan le Royer (or le Charron). After this
worthy pair appeared the two brave knights who had guarded the Maid of
Orleans during her perilous journey to Chinon--John de Novelem-hont,
commonly called John de Metz, aged fifty-seven, and the other, named
Bertrand de Poulangy--one of the King's esquires--aged sixty-three.
Three other knights were heard after them--namely, Albert d'Ourche,
from Ourche, near Commercy, aged sixty; Geoffrey du Fay, aged fifty;
and Louis de Martigny, living at Martigny-les-Gerboneaux, a village
near Neufchâteau, aged fifty-four. These were followed by two curates
and a sergeant. 'Discrète personne Messire Jean le Fumeux,' of
Vaucouleurs, canon of the Church of Sainte Marie in that village, also
curate of the parish church of d'Ugny, aged only thirty-eight, was, as
he admitted, a mere child when Joan of Arc came to Vaucouleurs; but he
remembered distinctly having seen her praying in the church at
Vaucouleurs, and kneeling for a long time in the subterranean chapel
of Sainte Marie's Church before an image of the Blessed Virgin.
The other priest, named John Colin, was the curate of the parish
church of Domremy, and a canon of the collegiate church of Saint
Nicolas de Brixey, near Vaucouleurs. His age was sixty-six. The last
of these thirty-four witnesses was the sergeant, Guillot Jacquier,
aged thirty-six: why he was called as a witness does not appear. As a
child he had heard Joan of Arc spoken of as 'une brave fille, de bonne
renommée, et de conduite honnête,' which opinion was the general one
given in their evidence by all the other witnesses, whose names only
we have been able to give.
Relating to the period in the life of the heroine between the time of
the King's coronation and that of her capture, the facts told by the
various persons examined are few and far between. In the trial for the
rehabilitation of the Maid of Orleans, the story of her deeds in the
field was not of much importance to the commissioners. What they
principally desired to ascertain was the fact that no taint of heresy
could attach to the life of the heroine. It was for this reason that
all those persons who could throw any light upon Joan's early days and
the actions of her childhood had been collected to give their
evidence. We now come to those witnesses who were examined regarding
the life of Joan of Arc after her interview with the King at Chinon
and about the stirring events which immediately followed that
interview. The first of these is the 'nobile et savant homme Messire
Simon Charles,' Master of the Requests (_Maître des requêtes_) in the
year 1429. He had been president of the State exchequer in 1456, and
was aged sixty. Simon's evidence is of interest and importance both as
regards Joan of Arc's arrival at Chinon, and also with respect to the
siege of Orleans and the triumphant entry into Rheims. The next
witness was one of the clergy who examined Joan when at Poitiers; this
was a preaching friar from Limousin who had asked Joan of Arc in what
language her saints spoke to her, and had been answered by 'In a
better language than yours'--for this good friar, whose name was
Brother Sequier, spoke with a strong Limousin accent. When he was
giving his evidence before the commission (in 1456) he was an old man
in his seventy-third year, and head of the theological college of
Poitiers.
Next to him came the evidence given by the 'vénérable et savant homme
Maître Jean Barbier, docteur ès lois.' Barbier was King's-Advocate in
the House of Parliament, and had also been one of the judges at Joan
of Arc's examination at Poitiers: he was aged fifty. Barbier had been
at Loches when the people threw themselves before Joan of Arc's horse,
and embraced the heroine's feet and hands. Barbier reproved her for
allowing them to do so. He told her that if she permitted them to act
thus it would render them idolatrous in their worship of her, to which
reprimand Joan answered, 'Indeed, without God's help I could not
prevent them from becoming so.'
Another of the Poitiers witnesses was Gobert Thibault, also aged
fifty. This Thibault had been at Chinon when Joan arrived there, and
had followed her to Orleans. Among these Poitiers witnesses was
Francis Garivel, aged forty. Garivel, when a lad of fifteen, had seen
Joan at Poitiers, and he remembered that on her being asked why she
styled Charles Dauphin, and not by his kingly title, she replied that
she could not give him his regal title until he had been crowned and
anointed at Rheims.
The collected testimony of the above witnesses, whose evidence covers
the time passed by Joan at Poitiers, was submitted to Charles VII.,
and the MSS. exist in the National Library in Paris. It has been
edited by the historians Bachon and Quicherat, and translated from the
Latin into French by Fabre.
The next batch of witnesses' evidence concerns the fighting period of
Joan of Arc's life, and consists principally of the testimony given
by her companions in her different campaigns, and this appears to us
by far the most interesting and curious.
Of those witnesses the first to testify was a prince of the blood,
Joan of Arc's 'beau Duc,' as she loved to call John, Duke of Alençon.
He is thus styled in the original document: '_Illustris ac
potentissimus princeps et dominus_.'
Alençon came of a truly noble line of ancestors, and was descended
also from brave warriors. His great-grandfather fell at Crecy, leading
the vanguard of the French host. His grandfather was the
companion-in-arms of the great Du Guesclin. His father, on the field
of Agincourt, after having wounded the Duke of York and stricken him
to the ground, crossed swords with King Harry, and then, overwhelmed
by numbers, had fallen under a rain of blows.
With Dunois (Bastard of Orleans) Alençon is one of the most prominent
of the French leaders who appear in Shakespeare's play, in the first
part of _Henry VI_. Duke John, like his illustrious forebears, had
also fought and bled for his country. His first campaign was made when
he was but eighteen. Alençon first saw Joan of Arc in 1429. A strong
mutual regard sprang up between the prince and the Maid of Domremy.
Alençon had wedded the daughter of the Duke of Orleans, and it was to
her that the heroine, when she left with the Duke for their expedition
against Paris, promised to bring back her husband in safety.
No one had seen more of Joan of Arc during those days of fighting than
had Alençon, and no one bore a higher testimony than did the Duke to
her purity, her courage, and the sublime simplicity of her character.
It was the Duke of Alençon who was especially struck with the skill
shown by the heroine in warlike matters; particularly in her science
in the management of artillery--ridiculously rude as that branch of
the service appears to us.
'Everybody,' Alençon says, 'was amazed to see that in all that
appertained to warfare she acted with as much knowledge and capacity
as if she had been twenty or thirty years trained in the art of war.'
Next to Alençon's evidence came that of the famous Bastard of Orleans,
the Count de Dunois, one of the most engaging and sympathetic figures
of the whole age of chivalry. John of Orleans was the natural son of
the Duke of Orleans, and, as Fabre says of him, he 'glorified the
appellation of Bastard.' Indeed, the Bastard's name deserves to be
handed down in his country's annals with as much glory as that of his
great English rival and foe, Talbot, in those of the English. He was a
consummate soldier, who even at the early age of twenty-three had
brilliantly distinguished himself, and he lived to liberate Normandy
and Guyenne from the English.
Well may M. Fabre, in his book on the rehabilitation of Joan of Arc,
express his regret that Dunois' evidence was not set forth in the
language in which it was delivered, and that it has come down to us
weakened by translation into Latin. What is worse is that we have only
the translation of a translation.
Dunois had, besides his high military reputation, that of being
skilled in oratory. There is, however, in the translation more than a
trace of the enthusiasm with which Dunois speaks of the deeds of the
heroic maiden. Dunois, Bastard of Orleans as he is always called, bore
the following titles, as recited by the chronicler: 'l'illustrieuse
prince Jean Comte de Dunois et de Longueville, lieutenant-général de
notre seigneur le roi.' He was fifty-one years old in the month of
February, 1456. His deposition extends over the entire period of the
life of Joan of Arc between the time of her arrival before Orleans and
the period of the King's coronation.
Dunois' evidence closes thus:--'To conclude, it was habitual to Joan
to speak playfully on matters relating to war, in order to cheer the
soldiers, and she may have alluded to many military events which never
were to take place. But I declare that, when she spoke seriously about
the war, of her deeds, and of her vocation, she said her work was
limited to raising the siege of Orleans, to succouring the unhappy
people shut up in that town and in its suburbs, and to leading the
King to Rheims for his coronation and anointing.'
Next we have the testimony of the noble knight, Raoul de Gaucourt, who
had so stoutly defended Orleans during its long siege. De Gaucourt was
eighty-five years old. This fine old warrior's evidence confirms all
that Dunois had said in praise of Joan of Arc.
The next to appear was the heroine's page, Louis de Contes, aged
fifteen when appointed to attend on Joan of Arc: at the time of the
trial of her rehabilitation he was forty-two.
Next came a very interesting witness, to wit, Joan of Arc's almoner,
'vénérable et religieux personne Jean Pasquerel.' This worthy priest
had been formerly in a Tours monastery. We do not find his age given
at this time. The clear graphic testimony of this good man is a
pleasure to read. His love and admiration for the heroine appear in
every line of his testimony, and although this narrative is already
too long, it will not perhaps be considered tedious if some of his
evidence is quoted.
'When I first had tidings,' he says, 'of Joan of Arc and of her
arrival at Court, I was at Puy, where at that time were her mother and
some people who had accompanied her to Chinon. Having come to me, they
said, "You must come with us and see Joan; we will not allow you to
leave us until you have seen her." So I went with them to Chinon, and
also to Tours. At that time I was reader in a convent in that town.
When she came to Tours, Joan lived in the house of John Dupuy, a
burgher of that place. It was there that I first met her. "Joan,"
they said to her, "we have brought this good father to see you. When
you know him well you will like him very much." And Joan answered them
and said, "The good father pleases me much; I have heard about him
already, and I will make my confession to him to-morrow."
'And I heard her confession on the day following, when I also sang the
Mass before her. Since that I have always followed Joan, and I
remained her chaplain till the time of her capture at Compiègne.'
It was in this good priest's evidence that the touching trait of Joan
of Arc's fondness for gathering children about her was made known.
'She confessed nearly every day,' he said, 'and took the Sacrament
often. When near any community of begging friars she asked me to
remind her of the days on which the beggar children received the
Eucharist, so that she might receive it at the same time with them. It
was her delight,' he said, 'to take the Sacrament along with the poor
mendicant children. She shed tears often at confession.'
Later on in his evidence Pasquerel adds to the above, 'that often at
night I have seen her kneeling, praying for her King and for the
success of her mission. I certainly,' he said, 'firmly believed in the
divine source of her mission, for she was always engaged in good
works, and she was full of every good quality. During a campaign when
provisions ran short Joan would never take that which had been gained
by pillage. To the wounded she was ever pitiful--to the English as
well as to those of her own country, and she always tried to get them
to make their confession, if badly, and even if only slightly,
wounded. The fear of God was ever before her, nor would she for
anything in the world do anything which she considered contrary to His
will: for instance, when she was wounded in the shoulder by the dart
from a crossbow, when some people wished her to allow the wound to be
charmed, promising that if she had it done her hurt would be healed,
Joan said that to do so would be a sin, and that she would sooner die
than commit one.
'I am greatly surprised,' continued the unsophisticated old priest,
'that such great lawyers (_grands clercs_) as were those at Rouen
could have sentenced Joan to death. How could they put to death that
poor child, who was such a good and such a simple Christian, and that
too, so cruelly, without a reason--for surely they had not sufficient
reason at any rate to kill her!'
Pasquerel could evidently not grasp the real reason for the part
played by Cauchon in the execution of the Maid of Orleans, or imagine
that in order to obtain an archbishopric his beloved Joan had been
condemned by the Bishop of Beauvais to the flames. Pasquerel's
evidence ends thus:--
'I have nothing more to add except this. On several occasions Joan
told me that if she were to die, she hoped our lord the King would
found chantries in which the Almighty might be entreated in
intercession for the souls of those who had been slain in the defence
of the kingdom.'
The next witness is John d'Aulon, knight, Seneschal of Beaucaire,
member of the King's Council. It was he who had served Joan of Arc as
esquire during all her campaigns. His evidence is of importance, as it
proves clearly the grounds on which the trial of rehabilitation was
held--namely, to clear the King of having been crowned and anointed
through the agency of one condemned by the Church as an apostate and
heretic. The Archbishop thus wrote to d'Aulon on the 20th of April,
1456:--
'By the sentence pronounced against Joan the English wish it to be
believed that the Maid was a sorceress, a heretic, and in league with
the devil, and therefore that the King had received his kingdom by
those means; and thus they hold as heretics the King and those that
have served him.'
Nothing can be clearer than this declaration, or show better the real
object for which that utterly selfish prince, Charles VII., had, after
the lapse of a quarter of a century since the death of Joan of Arc,
instituted these proceedings--not at all in order to do honour to the
heroine's memory, but in order that his position as King of France
should not be tainted with the heresy which had been charged to the
account of Joan by and through the clergy and French doctors of
theology and learning.
D'Aulon's evidence is one of the most complete of the entire set of
testimonies. It was given, not at Rouen, but at Lyons, in 1456, before
the Vice-Inquisitor, John Desprès.
His depositions are remarkable in this, that, unlike those of the
other witnesses, they are recorded in French, and not in Latin.
Next to d'Aulon succeeds, in the chain of witnesses, Simon Beaucroix,
aged fifty. Simon was a youth at Chinon when Joan of Arc came there.
Beaucroix's evidence is followed by that of John Luillier, a citizen
of Orleans. He bore evidence to the immense popularity of the Maid
during and after the siege of Orleans. At the time of the trial of
rehabilitation Luillier was fifty. To the part played by the Maid at
the siege of his native town he speaks thus:--
'As to the question you put me, whether I think the siege of Orleans
was raised and the town saved from the enemy by the intervention and
the ministration (_ministère_) of the Maid, even more than by the
force of arms, this is my answer: All my fellow citizens, as well as I
myself, believe that had the Maid not come there by the will of God to
our rescue, we should very soon, both town and people, have been in
the power of the besiegers. It is my belief,' he adds, 'that it was
impossible for the people of Orleans and for the army present at
Orleans to have held out much longer against the superior strength of
the enemy.'
More people from Orleans next gave their evidence: viz. William le
Charron, John Volant, William Postian, Denis Roger, James de Thou,
John Canelier, Aignan de Saint-Mesmin, John Hilaire, Jacques
l'Esbalny, Cosmé de Commy, John de Champcoux, Peter Hue, Peter
Jonqualt, John Aubert, William Rouillart, Gentien Cabu, Peter
Vaillant, John Beaucharnys, John Coulon. All these men were burghers
of the town, and their ages varied between forty and seventy. All
agreed with Luillier in their belief that, under God, it was Joan of
Arc who rescued their city from the English.
Following these men we now come to the evidence of some of the women
who had seen or known the heroine. First of these is Joan, wife of
Gilles de Saint-Mesmin, aged seventy. She says: 'The general opinion
was and is still at Orleans that Joan was a good Catholic--simple,
humble, and of a holy life.' Such, too, is the opinion of Joan, the
wife of Guy Boyleau, and of Guillemette, wife of John de Coulon; also
of the widow of John de Mouchy. All these agree with the first lady's
testimony.
We have next the evidence of the daughter of James Boucher, the
treasurer of Orleans, at whose house Joan of Arc lodged while in
Orleans. Charlotte Boucher had married William Houet. When her
deposition was taken in 1456 she was thirty-six years old, and
consequently only nine when Joan lodged at her father's house.
However, young as she was then, the visit of the Maid had left a great
memory behind; she had been Joan's bed-fellow.
'Often,' she says, 'Joan said to my mother, "Hope in God, for He will
deliver the town of Orleans, and drive the enemy away."'
And last we find the evidence of two good wives of Orleans, one widow
of John Huré, the other Petronillé, wife of Beaucharnys. After these
came six clerics, canons of the Church of Saint Aignan at
Orleans--Robert de Farciaux, Peter Compaing, Peter de la Censurey,
Raoul Godert, Hervé Bonart, and André Bordez. Peter Milet and his
wife, Colette, were also witnesses. All had known Joan when she was at
Orleans, as had Aignan Viole, an advocate of Parliament, who had been
in Orleans during the siege.
The 'noble homme Guillaume de Richarville, panetier de la cour,' gave
his evidence, relating to Joan of Arc's appearance at Court, as also
did an old Court physician named Reginald Thierry; it is he who
relates how, at the capture of Saint Pierre-le-Moutier, Joan prevented
its church from being pillaged.
A doughty warrior follows, namely, 'noble et prudent Seigneur le
chevalier Thibauld d'Armagnac, Sire de Thermes, Bailli de Chartres.'
D'Armagnac was fifty years old; he had followed Joan of Arc all
through her campaign, and, like Alençon, had a very high opinion of
her military talents. At the close of his evidence, he says: 'In the
manner of the conduct and ordering of troops, in that of placing them
in battle array, and of animating the men, Joan of Arc had as much
capacity for these things as the most accomplished captain in the art
of war.'
After the soldier, the peasant. This peasant, or rather mechanic, is
a coppersmith named Husson Lemaître. Lemaître hailed from Domremy.
Being in the year 1456 at Rouen, he then and there gave his evidence.
He had known Joan of Arc's family, and Joan too in her childhood; of
all of them he spoke most highly.
Next comes 'honnête et prude femme demoiselle Marguerite la
Tournelle,' the widow of Réné de Bouligny. It was at her house at
Bourges that Joan lodged after the coronation at Rheims.
We now pass to an entirely different category of witnesses. These are
the men who sat in the trial of the heroine. One can well understand
the embarrassment shown by such folk in their replies to the questions
they had to answer, and their wish if it were possible to turn the
responsibility of their previous judgment on the heads of those who
were no longer in this world to answer the charges made against them.
The first of these men is 'vénérable et savante personne Maître Thomas
de Courcelles.' De Courcelles was only fifty-six in 1456, when called
on to make his deposition as to the part he had played in the
heroine's trial at Rouen, five-and-twenty years before. His evidence
is full of the feeblest argument, and his memory appears to have been
a very convenient one, as he repeatedly evades an answer by the plea
of having forgotten all about the incident alluded to.
Next follows that 'vénérable et circonspecte personne, Maître Jean
Beaupère'--a doctor of theology, and canon of Rouen, Paris, and
Besançon. This circumspect person was now in his seventieth year. He
laid most of the blame of Joan of Arc's death upon the English, and
the rest on Cauchon. The English being away, and Cauchon dead, the
circumspection of this doctor's evidence is evident.
We next have that of the Bishop of Noyon, John de Mailly. This bishop
had been in the service of the English King, but had, when Charles
became prosperous, returned to him. In 1456 he was aged sixty. An
intimate of the Prince Cardinal of Winchester, and one of the foremost
of the judges who condemned Joan of Arc to death, his deposition in
1456 is quite a study in the art of trying to convince people that
black is white. He had shown some kind of feeling of humanity at the
time of the martyrdom of the Maid, and had left that scene of horror
early. To the memory of his old friend and colleague, Cauchon, he
gives a parting kick by saying at the close of his examination that of
one thing he was quite certain, and that was that Cauchon received
money for the conduct of the trial from his friends, the English. But
he might have now been reminded that he too had received some of this
blood-money.
Next to appear is another French bishop, Monseigneur Jean Le Fèvre,
Evêque in partibus de Démétriade. This prelate was in his seventieth
year. At the time of Joan of Arc's trial he was professor of theology
of the order of hermit monks of Saint Augustins. The Bishop had taken
an active part in the trial and condemnation. Like his brother bishop,
Le Fèvre enjoyed a very convenient memory, and had quite forgotten
many things of importance which occurred during the trial in 1430. Nor
did he even take part as a spectator in the martyrdom which he had
helped to bring about--'I left before the end,' he said, 'not feeling
the strength to see more.' Let that shred of humanity in the
composition of priests like him be allowed before we entirely condemn
them.
The next witness is also a Churchman, Peter Migiet, the prior of
Longueville, aged seventy. He also had been one of Cauchon's crawling
creatures. There is little of interest in his evidence, except the
passage where he says that an English knight had told him that the
English feared Joan of Arc more than a hundred soldiers, and that her
very name was a source of terror to the foe. Although this sounds an
exaggerated statement, it is not so, as is proved by an edict having
been issued by the English Government in the May of 1430, in which
English officers and soldiers who refused to enter France for fear of
'the enchantments of the Maid' were threatened with severe punishment.
There is, moreover, an edict, bearing the date of December 1430, which
was also issued by the English military authorities, describing the
trial and the punishment by court martial of all soldiers who had
deserted the army in France from fear of Joan of Arc.
After the above priests, on whom rests the infamy of having taken part
in the death of the heroine, it is a relief to find the next witness,
although a Churchman, a man of sufficient honesty and courage to have
been one of those few who refused to take any part in the iniquitous
proceedings connected with Joan of Arc's trial, and who suffered
imprisonment owing to his unwillingness to carry out Cauchon's wishes.
This worthy priest was named Nicolas de Houppeville, a doctor of
theology, now in his sixty-fifth year.
The next witness is John Tiphanie, a canon of the Sainte Chapelle of
Paris. He was also a doctor in medicine. Tiphanie had been compelled
much against his inclination to take part in the trial of Joan. He was
one of the doctors who were sent to see her when she lay ill in
prison.
Then follows another doctor; this is William Delachambre, aged only
forty-eight in 1456. He must have practised his vocation at a very
early age. Delachambre had also joined in the trial of the Maid, from
fear of Cauchon. His evidence relating to the scene at Saint Ouen is
important.
'I remember well,' he says, 'the abjuration which Joan of Arc made.
She hesitated a long while before she made it. At length William Erard
determined her to make it by telling her that, when she had made it,
she should be delivered from her prison. Under this promise she at
length decided to do so, and she then read a short profession of some
six or seven lines written on a piece of folded paper. I was so near
that I could see the writing on the paper.'
We next come to the witness whose evidence is, next to that of Dunois,
of the greatest importance; it is that of the Recorder, or judges'
clerk, William Manchon. Born in 1395, he was sixty-one years of age
when the rehabilitation trial took place. Manchon's evidence takes up
thirty pages in M. Fabre's work, already often referred to--_Le Procès
de Réhabilitation de Jeanne d'Arc_. Much against his will was Manchon
obliged to act in the trial of the Maid, but he did not dare disobey
the orders of those who formed the Council of Henry VI. All that he
deposed has been made use of in the account of the heroine's life; so
now we need do no more than refer to it. The other Recorder who helped
Manchon to draw up the minutes of the trial was also examined; this
was William Colles, called Boisguillaume. He was in his sixty-sixth
year. Colles relates that, after the execution, the people used to
point out the author of Joan's death with horror--'besides,' he adds,
'I have been told that the most prominent of those who took part in
her condemnation died miserably. Nicolas Midi [who had preached the
sermon on the day of her execution, and just before it took place] was
stricken with leprosy, and Cauchon died suddenly, while being
shaved.'
A third Recorder was also examined, Nicolas Taquel. Then followed the
priest Massieu. During the trial of Joan he had acted as bailiff to
the Court, and in that capacity had seen much of the prisoner; he had
always conveyed her to and from her prison. It may be remembered that
it was he who, on Joan's petition to be allowed to kneel before the
chapel on her way to the hall of judgment, granted her request, and
was threatened by Cauchon, should it again occur, to be thrown into
prison where, as Cauchon said to him, he would not have 'the light of
sun or moon.' Massieu remained till the end with Joan, and it is he
who records that the executioner found, after the body had been
destroyed, that the heart remained unconsumed. He also relates that
the executioner was ordered to collect the ashes and all that
remained, and to throw those few relics of humanity into the Seine,
which was accordingly done. Martin Ladvenu followed Massieu. Ladvenu
was a Dominican friar: he was one of the few priests who showed some
humanity to the victim. It was to him that Joan of Arc confessed on
the morning of her death, and it was also to him that the executioner
came on the night of the martyrdom, and said that no execution had
ever affected him as that one had done. Next to arrive was Isambard de
la Pierre, a Dominican priest. He had been an acolyte of the
Vice-Inquisitor, Lemaître; he too, like Ladvenu, had shown sympathy
with the sufferer, had given her advice during the trial, and had
helped to soothe her last moments. De la Pierre states in his evidence
regarding her supposed refusal to submit herself to the Church, that
Joan of Arc, when she was told by her judges to submit herself,
thought they meant themselves by the Church of which they spoke to
her; but when she was told by him what the Church really signified she
always said she submitted herself to it and to the Pope. It was to
Isambard de la Pierre that Joan begged for a cross when on the pile
and about to die. 'As I was close by the poor child,' he says, 'she
begged me humbly to go to the church close at hand and bring her a
cross to hold up right before her eyes, till her death, so that the
cross on which God hung might as long as she lived appear before her.
She died a true and good Christian. In the midst of the flames she
never ceased calling on the sacred name of Jesus, and invoking the aid
of the saints in Paradise. When the fire was lit she begged me to get
down from off the stake with my cross, but to hold it still before
her, which I did. At last, bending down her head, with a strong voice
calling on the name of Jesus, she gave up the ghost.'
Yet another priest succeeds: this is 'vénérable et religieux personne,
frère Jean Toutmouillé,' of the order of the preaching friars of
Rouen. Toutmouillé was quite a youth at the time of Joan of Arc's
death. Another priest follows, William Daval, also one of the order
of preaching friars, and belonging to the Church of Saint James at
Rouen. He, too, had been, with Isambard, one of the acolytes of the
Vice-Inquisitor. In his evidence, he tells of how, after Isambard had
been advising Joan in her prison, he was met by Warwick, who
threatened to have him thrown into the river if he continued seeing
the prisoner.
We next have 'vénérable et circonspecte personne Maître André
Marguerie'; this was one of Cauchon's most trusted creatures. His
'_âme damnée_,' Richard de Grouchet, canon of the collegiate Church of
Sans Faye, is the next witness. There is nothing of any interest in
the testimony of these Churchmen, nor in that of Nicolas Dubesert,
another canon of Rouen, nor in that of Nicolas Caval. Next appears a
prior, Thomas Marie, of the Church of Saint Michel, near Rouen. Four
other ecclesiastics follow them--John Roquier, Peter Bouchier, John
Bonnet, John de Lenozoles; but none of these men's testimony is of any
interest. The evidence of no less a person than the torturer is called
next. He is named--to give him his titles in full--'Honnête homme
Mauger Lessarmentrer, clerc non marier, appariteur de la cour
archiepiscopalle de Rouen.' The name of the chief torturer of the good
city of Rouen, Mauger, has a gruesome ring about it--it reminds one of
the headsman in Harrison Ainsworth's novel of the _Tower of London_.
Aged fifty-six in 1456, Mauger had seen Joan of Arc when she was
brought into the yet extant tower of the castle, and threatened by
Cauchon with the torture. 'We were,' deposed Mauger, 'my companion and
myself, ordered to go there to torture her. She was questioned, and
she answered with much prudence, and so well, that every one was
amazed. Finally, I and my companion left the tower without having laid
hands upon her.' Mauger attended at the execution, and this is what he
heard and saw there and then. 'As soon as the Bishop (Cauchon) had
read the sentence, Joan was taken to the fire. I did not hear whether
the civil judges delivered the sentence or not. Joan was placed
instantly upon the fire. In the midst of the flames she called out
more than six times the name of Jesus. It was when about to give the
last breath that she called out with a loud voice, "Jesus!" so that
every one could hear her. Nearly everybody wept, for all were overcome
with pity.'
After the torturer's witness came that of a soldier, Aimonde de Macy,
who was thirty years old when he met Joan in the Castle of Beaurevoir;
she being then a prisoner in the charge of Ligny.
De Macy was at Rouen at the time when Lord Stafford came so nearly
stabbing the Maid in her prison, and was only prevented from that
dastardly act by Warwick.
We next hear the evidence of an attorney, Peter Daron: he had also
seen Joan in her prison at Rouen, and had seen her die.
Next we have 'prudent homme Maître Jean Fave, maître des requêtes du
roi Charles VII.': he, too, was present at the execution.
Next appears upon the scene 'honnête personne Laurent Guesdon,' clerk
and advocate to the lay court of Rouen. He also had been present at
the death of Joan of Arc, and, from his office as lieutenant of the
Bailiff of Rouen, he held an important position at the execution; and
this is some of his evidence relating to it: 'I assisted at the last
sermon preached at the old market-place. I had accompanied the
Bailiff, being then his deputy. The sentence was read by which Joan
was abandoned to the secular arm; after that sentence had been
pronounced the executioners seized her, before either the Bailiff or
myself had time to read the sentence; and she was led up to the
stake--which was not as it should have been ordered.'
Next arrive as witnesses two burghers of Rouen, Peter Cusquel and John
Moreaux. Both of them had been spectators of the martyrdom, but they
have nothing of interest to say about it. And finally--(and doubtless
the reader will be glad to come to the end of this interminable
procession, as is the writer)--comes the deposition of John
Marcel--'bourgeois' of Paris. Marcel had been in Rouen during the time
of the Maid's trial, and was also present at the end of her life. M.
Fabre, in concluding in his book the translation of the testimonies of
the long list of witnesses given by him for the first time in full,
makes a great point of the universal concurrence of those who knew
Joan of Arc as to her undoubted purity of person as well as of mind:
that fact is of the greatest importance as regarded the rehabilitation
of the Maid of Orleans. That is a subject which it is not now
necessary to do more than to allude to; but to the French judges in
the time of the trial of the rehabilitation, the fact of Joan of Arc
being proved to have been incontestably a virgin was of the highest
interest. It was reserved for a countryman of Joan of Arc's (Du
Bellay) to invent a legend to disprove the fact; and to the
everlasting shame of French literature, Voltaire adopted the lying
calumny in his licentious burlesque-heroic poem, _La Pucelle
d'Orléans_.
The sentence of rehabilitation which fills in the translation a dozen
of M. Fabre's pages, was solemnly delivered in the great hall of the
archiepiscopal palace at Rouen. On that occasion one of Joan of Arc's
brothers, John, was present. The sentence which was framed to wipe
away the iniquity of the judgment by which the heroine had been
condemned, was delivered by the Archbishop of Rheims in the presence
of a vast concourse of people, among whom were the Bishops of Paris
and of Coutances. Among other things ordered to honour the memory of
the Martyr, it was ordained that after a sermon preached on the spot
where the act of abjuration had taken place in the cemetery of the
Church of Saint Ouen, and also on the site of the spot where had stood
the stake and pyre, two crosses should be erected.
Crosses were placed not only there, and in Rouen, but also on other
spots. It is interesting to know that one of these crosses can still
be seen in the Forest of Compiègne; and it is traditionally said that
this cross at Compiègne was placed there by no other than Dunois
himself. Both the crosses at Rouen have disappeared centuries ago.
Processions took place at Rouen, and all was done that the Church
could do to wash out the indelible stain of its action four-and-twenty
years before the time of the rehabilitation. In 1431, the clergy of
France, to please the English, had in the name of orthodoxy, and with
the tolerance of the Pope, denounced Joan of Arc as 'a heretic and
idolatress.' In 1456, the same French clergy, to please Charles VII.,
in the name of religion and justice pronounced the memory of Joan of
Arc free from all taint of heresy and of idolatry, and ordered
processions and erected crosses in her honour to keep her memory fresh
in the land.
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
No. I.
_JOAN OF ARC IN FRENCH AND ENGLISH HISTORY._
Even in France no thoroughly satisfactory history exists of Joan of
Arc, although a large number of histories have been written. Following
is an enumeration of the most important.
As was natural while her countrymen were divided into two camps, those
writers who belonged to the side of the English attacked the heroine,
or rather her mission, with ill-placed zeal. Of them Enguerrand de
Monstrelet was the most eminent.
Less well known chroniclers on the national side, such as Philip de
Bergame, an Augustinian monk, on the other hand exaggerate the deeds
of the Maid. None of these chroniclers' writings can be called
histories of Joan of Arc. Nor in the following (the sixteenth)
century, did such writers as Du Bellay and Haillon do more than allude
to Joan of Arc; the first in his _Instructions sur le fait de la
guerre_, and the second in his book on the _Affaires de France_.
Haillon had written disparagingly of the heroine. It had the effect of
raising the ire of that learned scribe William Postel, who wrote that
the actions and renown of Joan of Arc were as necessary to maintain as
the Bible itself. With Postel the celebrated jurisconsult Stephen
Pasquier was quite in accord, and in his work called _Recherches sur
la France_, he writes that 'never had any one saved France so
opportunely or so well as did this Maid.' In 1576 a book was published
by the magistrates of Orleans relating to the siege of their town, in
which all honour was given to the heroine for the part she had taken
in its delivery. In the preface to that book the following sentiment
is expressed:--'It is a lamentable fact that the Maid, respected by
all other nations, the English alone excepted, finds amongst her
countrymen writings to injure her memory by people who are greater
enemies to the honour of France than those who are strangers to that
country.'
It should be noted that as early as the year 1534 the famous early
chronicler Polydore Virgile, Italian by origin, wrote a voluminous
history of England in twenty-six books, and treated the Maid's mission
as one inspired by divine influence, severely blaming her judges for
their inhuman conduct towards her.
In 1610 a book was published discussing the origin of the family of
the Maid of Orleans; a work of little value. In 1612 one of the
descendants of a brother of Joan of Arc--Charles du Lys--published a
slight work called _Traité sommaire sur le nom, les armes, la
naissance et la parenté de la Pucelle et de ses frères_. In that same
year the first history of Joan of Arc was published, also by a
descendant of one of her brothers, John Hordal. This book was in
Latin; it was entitled '_The History of Joan of Arc, that very noble
heroine_.' Soon after an elaborated work, based on this book, was
produced by Edmond Richer, a doctor of theology in Paris.
The next account of the Maid of any length occurs in Mézarie's huge
_History of France_, It was published between 1643 and 1652. In 1661
appeared a work called _L'Histoire du roi Charles VII., contenant les
choses mémorables de 1422 à 1466_. It was in this work, which was
compiled by Denis Godefroy, that the manuscripts of the _Chronique de
la Pucelle_ were first printed. This chronicle concerns the events
which occurred between the years 1422 and 1429. Although not a
complete history of the heroine, it is the earliest account. It was
republished by Buchon, by Petitot, and by Quicherat; and it was
consulted by Michelet when writing his account of Joan of Arc. M.
Vallet de Viriville believes the Chronicle of the Maiden to have been
written by G. Cousinot, Chancellor of the Duke of Orleans, who was
present at the siege of Orleans. At the close of the seventeenth
century was published a history of France by a Jesuit priest named
David, in which there is some account of Joan of Arc; but David's
history is more remarkable for being a colossal list of falsehoods
than for any other merit.
We now arrive at the eighteenth century, and still find no tolerable
history of Joan of Arc. In the year 1753 the Abbé Longlet Dufresnoy
published a _Life of Joan of Arc_; it is totally devoid of any merit.
In 1790 Clément de l'Averdy published some notices relating to the
trial and condemnation of Joan of Arc. These notices led up to, and
were followed by the publications of Petitot, Buchon, Michaud, and
Pougoulat. At length, under the protection of the Society of French
History, the learned author Quicherat produced his all-important
works. That distinguished historian and antiquarian began his career
under Charlet. In 1847 he was appointed Professor of Archæology, and
later, Director of the Institute of the Charters. Between 1841 and
1850 he edited the original documents relating to the trials of Joan
of Arc--those of her condemnation and of her rehabilitation. Of these
only a few extracts had previously been published by M. l'Averdy. The
series edited by Quicherat consists of five bulky tomes. Although when
Michelet was writing his history of France, Quicherat's work had not
yet been published, the chronicler helped the historian by lending
Michelet the MSS. he was then annotating.
But to return to the earlier years of the century. In 1817, Lebrun des
Charnettes published a history of Joan of Arc in four volumes; this
history of the Maid was up to that time the best that had been
written. In the same year there was published another history of the
heroine by M. Berriat Saint-Prix. The best thing that work contains is
an itinerary of the different places at which Joan of Arc passed the
last three years of her short existence. It is a useful list for any
one who wishes to visit the scenes connected with her wonderful
history.
The list commences with her flight to Neufchâteau in 1428, and the
journey to Toul, and continues as follows:--
1428.
MAY.
From Domremy to Burey-le-Petit, Vaucouleurs. Return to Domremy.
1429.
FEBRUARY.
From Domremy to Vaucouleurs, Toul, Nancy, Saint Nicolas-du-Port.
13th Return to Vaucouleurs, Saint Urbain, Auxerre.
MARCH.
Gien, Sainte Catherine de Fierbois.
6th Chinon, Le Coudray en Touraine, Poitiers.
APRIL.
Chinon, Tours, Saint Florent-les-Saumur.
25th Blois.
28th Rully près de Checy.
29th Orleans.
MAY.
2nd Reconnaissance before Orleans.
4th Sortie on the road of Blois.
10th Return to Blois from Orleans.
To Tours and Loches.
JUNE.
4th Selles-en-Berri.
6th Selles to Romorantin and Orleans,
11th Jargeau.
15th Meun-sur-Loire.
16th Beaugency.
18th Patay and Jauville.
19th Orleans, Saint Benoit-sur-Loire.
22nd Châteauneuf.
24th Departure from Orleans for Gien.
27th Departure from Gien in the direction of Montargis.
JULY.
1st Before Auxerre.
2nd Saint Florentin.
4th Saint Fal.
5th Before Troyes.
10th Entry into Troyes.
14th Bussy.
15th Châlons-sur-Marne.
16th Sept Saulx.
16th Rheims.
21st Saint Marcoul de Corbeny.
22nd Vailly.
23rd Soissons.
29th Château Thierry.
AUGUST.
1st Montmirail-en-Brive.
2nd Provins. Sortie as far as Lamotte-de-Nangis, Bray-sur-Seine.
5th Return towards Paris by Provins.
7th Coulommiers, Château Thierry.
10th La Ferté Milon.
11th Crespy-en-Valois.
12th Lagny-le-Sec.
13th Dammartin and Thieux.
14th Baron, Montessilloy.
15th Crespy.
18th Compiègne, Senlis.
23rd Leave Compiègne.
26th Saint Denis.
SEPTEMBER.
5th La Chapelle, near Paris.
8th Attack on the gate Saint Honoré.
9th Retreat from La Chapelle to Saint Denis.
14th Lagny-sur-Marne.
15th Provins, Bray-sur-Seine. Passage of the river Yonne at a ford
near Sens Courtenay. Château Regnaut, Montargis.
21st Gien. Selles-en-Berri, Bourges.
OCTOBER.
Meun-sur-Yèvre, Bourges.
NOVEMBER.
Saint Pierre-le-Moutier.
9th Moulins.
24th La Charité-sur-Loire, Meun-sur-Yèvre.
DECEMBER.
Jargeau.
1430.
JANUARY.
18th Bourges.
19th Orleans.
MARCH.
3rd Sully.
28th Flight from Sully.
APRIL.
15th Before Melun, Lagny, Sortie against Franquet d'Arras, Senlis,
Compiègne, Pont l'Evêque, Soissons, Compiègne.
MAY.
Lagny, Crecy, Compiègne.
28th Sortie from Compiègne against Margny and Clairvoix.
JUNE, JULY.
At Beaulieu-en-Vermandois.
AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, AND NOVEMBER.
Beaurevoir, Arras, Drugy, near Saint Riquier, Le Crotoy.
DECEMBER.
Saint Valéry-sur-Somme, Eu, Dieppe, Rouen.
1431.
JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH, APRIL, AND MAY.
Rouen.
Sismondi devotes a part of the thirteenth volume of his _History of
France_, published between 1821 and 1844, to the Maid of Orleans. He
sums up the action of the Church to her in these words: 'The Church
was against the Maid. All persons not delegated by her who pretended
to have supernatural powers were accused of using magical arts.'
Barante in his famous history of the Dukes of Burgundy, published in
1824, gives a somewhat meagre and uninteresting account of Joan of
Arc. In 1821 appeared a _Life_ of the heroine, by Jollois, under whose
direction the little monument was placed at Domremy in honour of the
Maid.
Alexandre Dumas has left among his numberless works a Life of _Johanne
la Pucelle,_ which is neither true history nor romance, but a jumble
of both, and is a work hardly worthy the author, but there are some
fine expressions in the book. Dumas christened Joan of Arc 'The Christ
of France.' Michelet in the fifth volume of his _Histoire de France_
published in 1841, has written what will probably always be considered
the best account of the Maid. Although only one hundred and thirty
pages are given to her life, these pages form a book in themselves,
and as a separate volume Michelet's _Life of Joan of Arc_ has gone
through a large number of editions, the latest a handsome illustrated
one, published by Hachette in 1888.
One cannot help regretting that so great a writer should allow his
Anglophobism to appear to such an extent in some of the pages of his
work. Michelet attacks the entire English nation as if they had been
individually and collectively guilty of Joan of Arc's death. He even
goes out of his way to abuse English literature in this amazing
passage: 'De Shakespeare à Milton, de Milton à Byron leur belle et
simple littérature est sceptique, judaïque, satanique.' It is
pitiable that so distinguished a writer as was Michelet should pen
such rubbish, but when a Frenchman writes on the subject of Joan of
Arc much should be forgiven him. More serious than the abuse of the
English in Michelet's work are the inaccuracies in his account of Joan
of Arc. For instance, he writes of the heroine watching the English
coast from her prison in the castle of Crotoy. Her eyesight must have
been telescopic had she been able to do so, for eighty miles of sea
stretch between the site of Crotoy and the English coast.
We next come to Henry Martin's history of France. In this work a third
part of the sixth volume is consecrated to Joan of Arc, whom he calls
the 'Messiah of France.'
M. Wallon, however, is the writer who has given France the most
complete biography of her heroine. This work, published by Hachette,
had in 1879 attained its fifth edition. A most sumptuously illustrated
edition appeared in 1876, one of those splendidly illustrated books in
which the French press has no rival. That book is the finest monument
which has appeared to honour the memory of the Maid of Orleans. Its
illustrations contain views of all places and memorials connected with
the heroine from the fifteenth to the middle of the nineteenth
century. The text of Wallon's Life is, however, wanting in charm, and
it is, as M. Veuillot writes of it, 'un livre sérieuse et solide.'
Sainte-Beuve has been still more severe in his judgment on Wallon's
book, which he calls 'la faiblesse même.'
Some slighter histories may be alluded to: one by Lamartine, unworthy
of the author and the subject; another by M. Abel Desjardins; a third
by Villaume; a fourth by M. Lafontaine. There is an interesting study
by Simon Luce on Joan of Arc's early years; and last, but certainly
not least, the three works by M. Joseph Fabre, relating to Joan of
Arc's life, her trial, her condemnation, and her rehabilitation. In
the two last works the whole of the long examination appears for the
first time, translated into French from the Latin--documents
invaluable to any one studying the heroine's life.
In England little has been written in prose relating to Joan of Arc
that will be likely to live. The early chroniclers were monstrously
unjust to her. It is enough to allude to the lying and scurrilous
abuse which such writers as Robert Fabyan, in his chronicles on the
history of England and of France, published in 1516, heaped upon Joan
of Arc. Hall's and Holinshed's chronicles, from which the author of
the First Part of _King Henry VI._ borrowed so largely, sinned as
deeply. Hall's authorities among French writers were Monstrelet,
Bouchet, Mayer, Argentan, Gile Corozet, and the annals of France and
Aquitaine--and of English writers, Fabyan, Caxton, John Harding, Sir
Thomas More, Basset, Balantyne, and the Chronicle of London.
The annalist Stow, Hume's 'honest historian,' is less unjust and
bitter in his account of Joan of Arc than are Hall and Holinshed.
Thomas Fuller appears not to have settled to his satisfaction whether
Joan of Arc was a witch or a heroine.
In the seventeenth century we have only a handful of poor writers who
have treated more or less badly of the Maid, such as Daniel, Martyn,
and Sir Richard Baker. It is not until well into the eighteenth
century that a man of letters appears capable of giving an
unprejudiced and true history of the life of Joan of Arc: this
historian is Guthrie, who published, between the years 1744 and 1751,
a long history of England. M. Darmesteter has named this author 'a
village Bossuet.'
Coming to our own days we have quite a crowd of writers who have
written with enthusiasm on the Maid of Domremy. It is sufficient to
name the most prominent of these--Landor, Sir James Mackintosh, John
Sterling, Lord Mahon, De Quincey, and J.R. Green.
No. II.
_JOAN OF ARC IN POETRY._
The Maid of Orleans (though a more poetical figure cannot be found in
all history) has not been more fortunate at the hands of the poets
than at those of the historians.
To begin with her own countrywoman--for the first who sang of Joan of
Arc was appropriately enough a fellow-countrywoman--Christine de
Pisan.
As the name indicates, this poetess was an Italian by origin, but
appears to have lived most of her life in France. The latter part she
passed in a convent.
In the year 1429, Christine was sixty-seven years old; she had been
living in some conventual establishment for eleven years. Her verses
in praise of Joan of Arc--which number several hundred stanzas--were
undoubtedly written in the heroine's life-time. They are supposed to
have been the last lines she wrote. These stanzas were completed
shortly after the coronation of Charles VII. A manuscript copy of this
poem exists in which Joan of Arc is compared to Deborah, Judith, and
Queen Esther. These poems are curious and quaint in their old French
expressions, but they are quite unreadable for any but French students
well versed in the literature of the fifteenth century.
In 1440, Martin le France, provost of the Cathedral of Lausanne,
bestows some lines on Joan of Arc in his poem called the _Champion des
dames_. In 1487, Martial de Paris published, under the title of
_Vigiles du roi Charles VII._, a rhymed translation of Jean
Chartrier's chronicle of that monarch.
Villon has left some charming lines in which he has placed the
heroine's name as it were on a string of pearls; they occur in his
exquisite ballad 'Dames du temps jadis,' and, as it would be
profanation to try and translate, I give them here in the original:--
'La Reine blanche comme un lys
Qui chantait à voix de sirène,
Berthe au grand pied, Biétris, Allis,
Haremburge qui tint le Maine,
Et Jeanne la bonne Lorraine
Qu' Anglais brûlèrent à Rouen,
Où sont-ils, vierge souveraine?
Mais où sont les neiges d'antan?'
Long before those beautiful lines were written by Villon, a play
called _Le Mystère du Siège d'Orléans_ had been acted. As early as the
year 1435 this performance appears to have taken place on the
anniversary of the deliverance of the city, and the dramatic piece was
probably acted on the return of that day for many a year after. This
was one of the so-called 'Miracle Plays,' popular both in France and
in England at that period. The author or authors of the play are not
known.
Some one has taken the trouble to count the number of lines: they
amount to 20,529, and are all in dialogue!
Whether the unfortunate audience had to sit all through this
performance one does not know. One hopes, for their sake, that, like a
Chinese play or a Bayreuth performance of Wagner's operas, the
performance was extended over a number of days.
Joan is naturally the heroine throughout; she first appears as the
bearer of the Divine mandate to drive the enemy from off the sacred
soil of France. The play closes with her triumphant return to Orleans
after the victory of Patay. As far as the mission is concerned the
play is historically correct, and it is in this respect an improvement
on Shakespeare and Schiller. There is a point of great interest
concerning this piece which, so far as we know, has never been
noticed--namely, the fact of one of its acts being almost identical
with one in the First Part of _King Henry VI_. In the mystery play the
scene of this act is laid before Orleans. The French are determined to
defend their city to the last; the English are determined on taking
it. We are in front of the besieged and the besiegers. Salisbury has
entered the Tournelles, and he looks out over the city from a window
in the tower. Glansdale ('Glassidas') stands beside him, and says to
Salisbury, 'Look to your right, and to your left--it looks like a
terrestrial paradise, all this country flowing with milk and honey;
you will soon be its master.' Salisbury expresses his satisfaction at
the sight of all the plunder at his feet, and gives vent to some very
sanguinary sentiments about the French; he will slay every one in the
place--all the men, 'et leurs femmes et leurs enfants. Personne je
n'épargnerai.' But scarcely has he been able to give vent to this
terrible threat when his head is carried off by a cannon ball fired
from the town. The English cry out 'Ha! Hay! maudite journée!'
Earl Salisbury is carried out stiff and stark. Talbot and the other
English officers now vow vengeance on the French in these words:--
'Ha, Sallebery, noble coraige!
Ta mort nous sera vendue chère,
Jamais un tel de ton paraige,
Ne se trouvera en frontière.'
If we turn to Scene 4 of the first act of Shakespeare's First Part of
_King Henry VI._, we shall find almost the same scene enacted.
Enter on the turrets, Lord Salisbury, Talbot, etc. Salisbury, after
welcoming Talbot, calls on Sir William Glansdale to look down into the
town, and while conversing the shot is fired which kills Salisbury.
After the death of Salisbury, Talbot vows vengeance on the French, and
says he will
'Nero-like
Play on the lute, beholding the towns burn.'
There can be little doubt that whoever wrote the First Part of _King
Henry VI._ had seen the mystery play of the _Siege of Orleans_ acted
in that town. This brings one to the much debated question, 'Who wrote
the First Part of _King Henry VI._?'
There can be no doubt that Shakespeare had studied both Hall's and
Holinshed's chronicles. The former styled Joan of Arc 'a monstrous
woman,' and also suggested that fine passage beginning 'Why ring not
the bells throughout the town?' We are of those who would wish to
believe that our greatest poet had but little hand in delineating the
French heroine of all time as she is described in Hall and in
Holinshed, and to believe that he left the play--originally written,
we think, by Greene--very much as he found it. It is not indeed till
the fifth act, when Joan is represented as a magician, and when the
grotesqueness of the author passes even the limits of burlesque, that
we fail to see a shred of the poet's skill. Nothing in Shakespeare is
at once so unpoetical as well as so untrue to history as the last
scene, in which Joan repudiates her father. If it is by
Shakespeare--which we cannot believe--it must have been one of the
very earliest of his historical plays; and, with Ben Jonson, we could
wish that the passages referring to the Maid of Orleans had been
freely blotted.
The era of the Renaissance brought with it in France no poets to sing
of Joan of Arc, and we only find--besides the mystery play of the
_Siege of Orleans_--one literary work relating to her at this period;
that is a five-act tragedy written by a Jesuit priest named Fronton du
Duc, a gloomy piece, which was acted in 1580 at Pont-à-Mousson. In the
beginning of the seventeenth century appeared another tragedy by a
Norman squire named Virey: it was titled _Jeanne d'Arques, dite la
Pucelle d'Orléans_. This very mellifluous production was published at
Rouen in the year 1600.
Another tragedy on the same subject appeared in 1642, written by the
Abbé d'Aubignac--a very pedantic play.
Next appears an 'heroic poem' by Chapelain, published in 1656,
entitled _La Pucelle_. Great things had been expected of this poem,
but it fell very flat after a long expectancy of thirty years when it
at length saw the light. Chapelain's ridiculous poem gave the idea to
Voltaire of his licentious one.
Even Voltaire was ashamed of his work, and long denied that he was its
author. As a very slight reparation for his deed, he writes of Joan of
Arc in his _Essai sur les moeurs et l'esprit des natives_, that the
heroine would have had altars built in the days when altars were
erected by primitive men to their liberators.
Southey, referring to Voltaire's infamous production, said, 'I never
committed the crime of reading Voltaire's _Pucelle_.'
After all, Voltaire did infinitely more harm to himself by writing his
poem _La Pucelle_ than he did to the memory of the Maid of Orleans,
for it revealed to the world what an amount of depravity was mixed up
within that wonderful shrewd mind, and how it weakened its genius. The
great Revolution which swept so many shams away with its terrible
breath, venerated, to its honour be it said, both the spirit of
humanity displayed by the poet-philosopher and the spirit of
patriotism that possessed the virgin heroine and martyr.
In 1795 appeared Southey's heroic play on Joan of Arc. That drama is
more a glorification of the principles of the French Revolution than
of Joan of Arc. There is no attempt made to follow out her history.
The play contains a love episode due entirely to the youthful poet's
imagination, but it contains fine passages as well, and seems to us to
have merited more praise from posterity than it has received.
Schiller's play, like Southey's, sins grievously as far as historical
truth is concerned. The German poet wishes, it seems, to remove the
bad impression made by Voltaire's poem. The play was first performed
on the stage at Weimar in 1801; and the _Jungfrau von Orleans_ met
with considerable success. It contains noble lines, but is
historically a mere travesty of the life and death of the heroine.
In 1815 Casimir Delavigne wrote, as a counterblast to the double
invasion that France had just undergone, his well known _Messeniennes_
to the honour of the French heroine. These poems had a great success,
the second being the most admired; but they are now forgotten. Two
other dramatic poets followed in Delavigne's steps: these were
d'Avrigni and Soumet. By the former appeared, in 1819, a tragedy in
five acts and in verse; it was performed at the Théâtre Français.
Soumet's play was also acted; it almost equals d'Avrigni's in length
and tediousness.
Besides the above tragedies which had, as the French term it, the
honour of seeing the light of the footlights, Desnoyers wrote a play
on Joan of Arc in 1841, and was followed by a series of other writers
in verse and in prose--Caze, Dumolard, Maurin, Cramar, Hédouville,
Millot, Lequesme, Crepot, Puymaigre, Porchat, Haldy, Renard, Jouve,
Cozic, Daniel Stern, Bousson de Maviet, Constant Materne. All the
above wrote plays and tragedies on the subject of Joan of Arc between
the years 1805 and 1862. Daniel Stern was the only authoress who
composed a drama in honour of the heroine.
While all this _galimatias_ of dramas has sunk into the limbo which
waits for all such work, Villon's two lines remain as bright as the
day on which, four centuries ago, he wrote them:--
'Jeanne la bonne Lorraine,
Qu' Anglais brûlèrent à Rouen.'
Some plays on the subject of the Maid of Orleans also appeared in
Italy and in England, but none is likely to retain a long hold of the
stage. The drama of Joan of Arc's life has inspired two of the
greatest masters of music of our day. Verdi set a tragedy by Solera to
music in 1845, and in 1869 Gounod wrote some music for a piece by
Jules Barbier, which was performed with some success at the Gaîté
Théâtre in Paris in 1873.
What will always remain an unfortunate fact in the history of modern
literature is that the two greatest minds of England and France have
written on the subject of the Maid of Orleans lines which--for their
fame--it were well they had never written. Whether Shakespeare
composed the First Part of _King Henry VI._ may for long remain a
disputed point, but he is responsible for that play, and consequently
for the manner in which Joan of Arc is treated in it. No genius can
pardon or excuse the abuse and filth with which Voltaire bespatters
the immortal memory of the glorious Maid of Orleans.
Voltaire's attack on Church and State had much to excuse them in his
day; but that on Joan of Arc was entirely unwarranted, uncalled for,
and unpardonable. Still, could Joan have known the offence and the
offender, we have no doubt she would have forgiven the ribaldry and
the ribald as freely as she forgave all her enemies.
FRENCH BIBLIOGRAPHY OF JOAN OF ARC.
Anonym, 'Chanson historique de Jeanne d'Arc et de ses hauts faits.'
Orléans, 1862. 12mo. (Il n'a été publié que 35 exemplaires de cet
ouvrage.)
Attel de Lutange, J.F.D. d', 'l'Héroïne d'Orléans, 15^e siècle,
avec une carte de tous les lieux cités dans cet ouvrage et un plan
de la ville d'Orléans à l'époque de sa délivrance par Jeanne d'Arc.'
3 tom. Paris, 1884. 8vo.
Aufrère-Duvernoy, C., 'Notice sur les monuments érigés à Orléans en
l'honneur de Jeanne Darc.' 1855. 8vo.
Ayroles, J.B.J., 'Jeanne d'Arc sur les autels, et la régénération de
la France, 1885. 12mo.
Barbier, Jules, 'Jeanne d'Arc.' Drame en 5 actes et en vers, musique
de Ch. Gounod, rep^te. à la Gaîté en Nov. 1873.
Barthélemy (E.M. de) et Kerviler (R.), 'Un tournoi de 3 pucelles en
l'honneur de Jeanne d'Arc.' 1878. 8vo.
Baunard, l'Abbé L., 'Jeanne d'Arc et la délivrance d'Orléans.'
Discours. Paris (imp. à Orléans), 1868. 8vo.
Beauregard, l'Abbé Barthélemy de, 'Histoire de Jeanne d'Arc.' 1847.
Benserade, J. de (?), ou Tilet de la Mesnardière (?), 'La pucelle
d'Orléans.' Tragédie en 5 actes et en vers. Paris, 1642. 4to.
---- ---- Autre édition. Paris, 1682. 4to.
Berriat de Saint-Prix, J., 'Jeanne d'Arc, ou Coup-d'oeil sur les
révolutions de France au temps de Charles VI. et Charles VII. et
surtout de la Pucelle d'Orléans.' Paris, 1817. 8vo.
Boucher de Molandon, 'Première expédition de Jeanne d'Arc: Le
ravitaillement d'Orléans. Nouveaux documents. Plan du siège et de
l'expédition.' Orléans, 1874. 8vo.
---- 'Jacques d'Arc, père de la Pucelle. Sa notabilité personnelle,
d'après les documents récemment découverts.' Orléans, 1885. 8vo.
---- 'La famille de Jeanne d'Arc, son séjour à Orléans.' Orléans,
1878. 8vo.
Bouquet, F., 'Faut-il écrire Jeanne d'Arc ou Jeanne Darc.' 1867.
8vo.
Bourbon Lignières, H. Comte de, 'Etude sur Jeanne d'Arc.' 1875. 8vo.
Bouteiller (E. de) et Braux (G. de), 'La famille de Jeanne d'Arc.
Documents inédits, généalogie, lettres de J. Hordal et de Claude du
Lys à Charles du Lys, publiés pour la 1^e fois.' Paris, 1878. 8vo.
---- 'Nouvelles recherches sur la famille de Jeanne d'Arc.' Enquêtes
inédites. Généalogie. Paris, 1879. 8vo.
---- 'Notes iconographiques sur Jeanne d'Arc.' Paris (imp. à
Orléans), 1879. 8vo.
Calianthe (pseud.), 'Tragédie de Jeanne d'Argues, dite la Pucelle
d'Orléans, en 5 actes et en vers.' Rouen, 1611. 12mo.
Canet, V., 'Jeanne d'Arc et sa mission nationale.' Lille (imp. à
Bruges), 1887. 8vo.
Carné-Marcein, Comte de, 'Les fondateurs de l'unité française. Etude
historiques.' 2 tomes. Paris, 1856. 8vo.
Chabannes, Baronne de Clémentine, 'La Vierge Lorraine Jeanne d'Arc.
Son histoire au point de vue de l'héroïsme, de la sainteté et du
martyre.' Paris, 1874. 12mo.
Chapelain, 'La Pucelle ou la France délivrée. Poëme héroïque.'
Paris, 1656. Fol.
Chartier, Alain, 'Les croniques du feu roy Charles septièsme de ce
nom.' Paris, 1528. Fol.
Chaussard, P.J.B., 'Jeanne d'Arc; recueil historique et complet.'
Orléans, 1806. 8vo.
Chevalier, C.U.J., 'Jeanne d'Arc; biobibliographie.' Montbéliard,
1878. 16mo.
Chevojon, L.C., 'Panégyrique de Jeanne d'Arc.' Orléans, 1859. 8vo.
Clément, 'Vie de Jeanne d'Arc.' Rouen, 1858. 8vo. (Faisant partie de
la Bibliothèque Morale de la Jeunesse.)
Delisle, L.V., 'Nouveau témoignage relatif à la mission de Jeanne
d'Arc, &c.' Paris (imp. à Nogent-le-Rotrou), 1885. 8vo.
Delort, Joseph, 'Essai critique sur l'histoire de Charles VII.,
d'Agnès Sorelle et de Jeanne d'Arc, avec portraits et facsimile.'
Paris, 1824. 8vo.
Desbrosses, 'Panégyrique de Jeanne d'Arc.' Orléans, 1861. 8vo.
Desjardins, Abel, 'Vie de Jeanne d'Arc, d'après les documents
nouvellement publiés (avec des cartes d'itinéraire).' Paris,
Firmin-Didot (imp. à Mesnil), 1854. 12mo.
Du Castel (Christine du Pisan), 'Jeanne d'Arc, chronique rimée
publiée par H.H., (c.-à.-d. Henri Herluison). 1856. 16mo.
Dumas, Alexandre, 'Jeanne d'Arc.' 1843. 8vo.
Dupanloup, F.A.P. (Evêque d'Orléans), 'Panégyrique de Jeanne d'Arc,
pron. le 8 mai 1855.' Imp. à Orléans. Paris, 1855 (?) 8vo.
---- 'Second panégyrique de Jeanne d'Arc.' Orléans, 1869. 8vo.
F...., E.G., 'Jeanne d'Arc a-t-elle existé? A-t-elle été brûlée?'
Orléans, 1866. 8vo.
Fabert, L., 'Histoire populaire illustrée des deux procès de Jeanne
d'Arc. (Condamnation, 1431: Réhabilitation, 1456.)' Paris, 1874.
4to.
Fabre, J., 'Procès de condamnation de Jeanne d'Arc, d'après les
textes authentiques des procès verbaux officiels. Traduction (du
Latin) avec éclaircissements.' Paris, 1884. 12mo.
---- 'Jeanne d'Arc, libératrice de la France.' 1884. 18mo.
Favre, Jules, 'Quatre conférence faites en Belgique. Eloge de Jeanne
d'Arc.' Paris, 1874. 12mo.