Saint Joan of Arc (Jeanne la Pucelle): Difference between revisions
| Line 749: | Line 749: | ||
I wonder though, for Joan mentions the King had hurried to his coronation. It's odd, since it was Joan herself who rushed Charles to Reims, and while ever frustrated by inaction, she pushed the army, with the king in train, towards Reims. So what was Charles supposed to await before the coronation? | I wonder though, for Joan mentions the King had hurried to his coronation. It's odd, since it was Joan herself who rushed Charles to Reims, and while ever frustrated by inaction, she pushed the army, with the king in train, towards Reims. So what was Charles supposed to await before the coronation? | ||
Although they didn't believe her, Joan told the Rouen Court plainly, <blockquote>The crown signified that my King should possess the Kingdom of France.<ref>Murray p. 70</ref></blockquote> | Although they didn't believe her, Joan told the Rouen Court plainly, <blockquote>The crown signified that my King should possess the Kingdom of France.<ref>Murray p. 70</ref></blockquote>As his coronation, Charles VII gained no further lands than what Joan had brought him on the way to Reims. And instead of continuing Joan's advance, he dithered and delayed, and set Joan to the side. By bringing Charles to Reims, Joan saved France, but that happened over many years, something which she never conceived. If we take her language here as not merely symbolic, or an allegory for herself, then she is plainly saying by delay Charles denied himself a larger crown. If so, or regardless, she was terrifically right about it. In prosecuting an extended war, Charles suffered through years of intrigue, palace coups, and even betrayal by his own son. Had he marched an army far larger than the English could ever have mustered, and one with Joan of Arc and all the enthusiasm of the French at its head, and an English army that literally fled what they feared was an actual witch, Paris and Normandy were all his. | ||
Instead, the Rouen court obsessed over this story, and made it a significant element of the "Subsequent Examinations," which consisted of testimony as to conversations with Joan by the Rouen prosecutors on the day of her execution. These testimonies are highly dubious, conducted by the most vociferous of her interrogators, and unusually consistent with one another, even for witnesses of the same event. They all focused on two overriding ideas: 1) that Joan admitted her voices deceived her; and 2) that the angel who bestowed the mysterious "crown" was herself, not an angel.<ref>Murray believes them. See p. 61, fn 1: "The allegory of the Angel sent with a crown, here first given to avoid "perjury," i.e., breaking her promise to preserve the King's secret, is explained by Jeanne herself, on the last day of her life, to mean her own mission from Heaven to lead Charles to his crowning."</ref> Four of the seven testimonies in the Subsequent Examinations discuss the "crown," one which came from her Confessor at Rouen, Dominican Friar Martin Ladvenu:<ref>Murray, p. 149</ref> <blockquote>I heard Jeanne say that, although she had stated in her avowals and confessions, and had affirmed above in the course of the Case, that an Angel from God had brought a crown to him whom she called her King ... that in spite of all she had affirmed on the subject of this Angel, no Angel had brought the crown ; it was she, Jeanne, who had been the Angel, and who said and promised to him whom she called her King, that, if he would set her to the work, she would have him crowned at Rheims. There was no other crown sent from God, in spite of all she might have affirmed in the course of the Case on the subject of the crown and the sign given to him whom she called her King. </blockquote>and from "Subsequent Examinations," testimony of Maitre Pierre Maurice, a young and enthusiastic theologian from the University of Paris who passed the entire trial attempting to "enlighten"<ref>See Pernoud, Her Story, p. 216</ref> Joan:<ref>Murray, p. 149</ref> <blockquote>The day of the sentence, Jeanne being still in the prison, I repaired to her in the morning to exhort her to save her soul. In so exhorting her, I asked her what was the Angel mentioned in the Trial, who, according to her, had brought a crown to him whom she called her King? | Instead, the Rouen court obsessed over this story, and made it a significant element of the "Subsequent Examinations," which consisted of testimony as to conversations with Joan by the Rouen prosecutors on the day of her execution. These testimonies are highly dubious, conducted by the most vociferous of her interrogators, and unusually consistent with one another, even for witnesses of the same event. They all focused on two overriding ideas: 1) that Joan admitted her voices deceived her; and 2) that the angel who bestowed the mysterious "crown" was herself, not an angel.<ref>Murray believes them. See p. 61, fn 1: "The allegory of the Angel sent with a crown, here first given to avoid "perjury," i.e., breaking her promise to preserve the King's secret, is explained by Jeanne herself, on the last day of her life, to mean her own mission from Heaven to lead Charles to his crowning."</ref> Four of the seven testimonies in the Subsequent Examinations discuss the "crown," one which came from her Confessor at Rouen, Dominican Friar Martin Ladvenu:<ref>Murray, p. 149</ref> <blockquote>I heard Jeanne say that, although she had stated in her avowals and confessions, and had affirmed above in the course of the Case, that an Angel from God had brought a crown to him whom she called her King ... that in spite of all she had affirmed on the subject of this Angel, no Angel had brought the crown ; it was she, Jeanne, who had been the Angel, and who said and promised to him whom she called her King, that, if he would set her to the work, she would have him crowned at Rheims. There was no other crown sent from God, in spite of all she might have affirmed in the course of the Case on the subject of the crown and the sign given to him whom she called her King. </blockquote>and from "Subsequent Examinations," testimony of Maitre Pierre Maurice, a young and enthusiastic theologian from the University of Paris who passed the entire trial attempting to "enlighten"<ref>See Pernoud, Her Story, p. 216</ref> Joan:<ref>Murray, p. 149</ref> <blockquote>The day of the sentence, Jeanne being still in the prison, I repaired to her in the morning to exhort her to save her soul. In so exhorting her, I asked her what was the Angel mentioned in the Trial, who, according to her, had brought a crown to him whom she called her King? | ||
| Line 767: | Line 767: | ||
The point was that Joan had failed to take the city, and, as with her failed assault on Paris, she was thereby a false prophet. Article LVII of the Seventy Articles of accusation attacked her on this point:<ref>March 27 (Murray p. 360-361)</ref><blockquote>The day of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, Jeanne did assemble the whole army of Charles, to make an attack on the city of Paris ; she did lead the army against the city, affirming that she would enter it on that day — that she knew it by revelation : she directed all the arrangements possible for the entry. And, nevertheless, she is not afraid to deny it before us here in court. And at other places also, at La Charité-sur-Loire, for example, at Pont L'Evêque, at Compiègne, when she attacked the army of the Duke of Burgundy, she affirmed and foretold that which, according to her, would take place, saying that she knew it by revelation : now, not only did the things predicted by her not come to pass, but the very contrary happened. Before you she hath denied having made these predictions, because they were not realized, as she had said ; but many people worthy of trust report ^ to have heard her utter them. At the time of the assault on Paris, she said that thousands of angels were around her, ready to bear her to Paradise if she should be killed : now, when she was asked why, after the promises made to her, not only did she not enter Paris but that many of her men and she herself had been wounded in a horrible manner and some even killed, she answered " It was Jesus, who broke His word to me.</blockquote><blockquote>What have you to say to this Article</blockquote><blockquote>As to the beginning, I have answered it already. If I think of more later, I will willingly answer then. I never said that Jesus had failed me.</blockquote> | The point was that Joan had failed to take the city, and, as with her failed assault on Paris, she was thereby a false prophet. Article LVII of the Seventy Articles of accusation attacked her on this point:<ref>March 27 (Murray p. 360-361)</ref><blockquote>The day of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, Jeanne did assemble the whole army of Charles, to make an attack on the city of Paris ; she did lead the army against the city, affirming that she would enter it on that day — that she knew it by revelation : she directed all the arrangements possible for the entry. And, nevertheless, she is not afraid to deny it before us here in court. And at other places also, at La Charité-sur-Loire, for example, at Pont L'Evêque, at Compiègne, when she attacked the army of the Duke of Burgundy, she affirmed and foretold that which, according to her, would take place, saying that she knew it by revelation : now, not only did the things predicted by her not come to pass, but the very contrary happened. Before you she hath denied having made these predictions, because they were not realized, as she had said ; but many people worthy of trust report ^ to have heard her utter them. At the time of the assault on Paris, she said that thousands of angels were around her, ready to bear her to Paradise if she should be killed : now, when she was asked why, after the promises made to her, not only did she not enter Paris but that many of her men and she herself had been wounded in a horrible manner and some even killed, she answered " It was Jesus, who broke His word to me.</blockquote><blockquote>What have you to say to this Article</blockquote><blockquote>As to the beginning, I have answered it already. If I think of more later, I will willingly answer then. I never said that Jesus had failed me.</blockquote> | ||
The operations against Charité, Paris, and others such as Compiegne, where Joan was captured by the Burgundians, were unsuccessful. Joan never predicted she would take Paris, although she did assure fellow commanders about various actions, such as at Saint Pierre le Moustier, which she took prior to her assault on Charité. She told her steward,Jean d'Aulen,<ref name=":9" /><blockquote>that she would not leave until she had taken the town</blockquote>She did, but subsequently failed to take Charite, which, d'Aulen, said, was from lack of support, as :<ref name=":10" /><blockquote>Moreover, that, some time after the return from the consecration of the King, he [the King] was advised by his Council — then at Mehun-sur-Yèvre — that it was most necessary to recover the town of La Charité, which was held by the enemy; but that first must be taken the town of Saint Pierre le Moustier, which likewise was held by the enemy ;</blockquote><blockquote>At the request of the men-at-arms, there was an assault made before Paris, and, at the request of the King himself, one also before La Charité. These were neither against nor by the order of my Voices.<ref name=":11" /></blockquote>The deception of the Rouen examiners shows here, as Joan's assault on Paris preceded the others. Shortly after the July 17, 1431 coronation, Charles VII, following the direction of the Bishop of Reims, agreed to a truce with the Duke of Burgundy, who agreed to surrender Paris to Armagnac control. He lied, of course, and Joan led a series of attacks leading the French army towards Paris. On September 8, she led an unsuccessful assault on the outer walls of the city, but she received a crossbow bolt in her leg and was evacuated after some time.<ref>There is much to be said for Divine protection of Joan in her injuries, here at Paris and at Orléans. While missing vital organs, Joan's wounds were serious and susceptible to infection, etc. She recovered from them all. </ref> | The operations against Charité, Paris, and others such as Compiegne, where Joan was captured by the Burgundians, were unsuccessful. Joan never predicted she would take Paris, although she did assure fellow commanders about various actions, such as at Saint Pierre le Moustier, which she took prior to her assault on Charité. She told her steward, Jean d'Aulen,<ref name=":9" /><blockquote>that she would not leave until she had taken the town</blockquote>She did, but subsequently failed to take Charite, which, d'Aulen, said, was from lack of support, as :<ref name=":10" /><blockquote>Moreover, that, some time after the return from the consecration of the King, he [the King] was advised by his Council — then at Mehun-sur-Yèvre — that it was most necessary to recover the town of La Charité, which was held by the enemy; but that first must be taken the town of Saint Pierre le Moustier, which likewise was held by the enemy ;</blockquote><blockquote>At the request of the men-at-arms, there was an assault made before Paris, and, at the request of the King himself, one also before La Charité. These were neither against nor by the order of my Voices.<ref name=":11" /></blockquote>The deception of the Rouen examiners shows here, as Joan's assault on Paris preceded the others. Shortly after the July 17, 1431 coronation, Charles VII, following the direction of the Bishop of Reims, agreed to a truce with the Duke of Burgundy, who agreed to surrender Paris to Armagnac control. He lied, of course, and Joan led a series of attacks leading the French army towards Paris. On September 8, she led an unsuccessful assault on the outer walls of the city, but she received a crossbow bolt in her leg and was evacuated after some time.<ref>There is much to be said for Divine protection of Joan in her injuries, here at Paris and at Orléans. While missing vital organs, Joan's wounds were serious and susceptible to infection, etc. She recovered from them all. </ref> | ||
Charles called off the attack on Paris and ordered a bridge dismantled that Joan would need to use -- rather indicative of their relationship, whereby he needed not her obedience, which he had, but a reason for the order. Most deceitful; but it worked. Paris was left alone, and Charles disbanded the army, again leaving Joan without the means to pursue her agenda. Charles lacked the political will to cut her off completely, so played for and against her by allowing her to run her own campaigns without official backing, especially financially. She ended up chasing down rogue cities along the Loire, and then, eventually, to rescue besieged Armagnac cities to the norther, such as Compeigne, where, with a small contingent and entirely on her own as a commander. she was captured by the Burgundians. | Charles called off the attack on Paris and ordered a bridge dismantled that Joan would need to use -- rather indicative of their relationship, whereby he needed not her obedience, which he had, but a reason for the order. Most deceitful; but it worked. Paris was left alone, and Charles disbanded the army, again leaving Joan without the means to pursue her agenda. Charles lacked the political will to cut her off completely, so played for and against her by allowing her to run her own campaigns without official backing, especially financially. She ended up chasing down rogue cities along the Loire, and then, eventually, to rescue besieged Armagnac cities to the norther, such as Compeigne, where, with a small contingent and entirely on her own as a commander. she was captured by the Burgundians. | ||