Saint Joan of Arc (Jeanne la Pucelle): Difference between revisions

Line 999:

How do we even make sense of this? The English were reeling from Joan's onslaught, and as the French army marched triumphantly to and from the sacred coronation of the French King, the Burgundians faced the logic of an English alliance that was losing its authority among the people. And the French minister proposes Burgundian neutrality? It's hard to see to what advantage de La Trémoïlle was leveraging, much less what was the actual situation being leveraged.

At best, de La Trémoïlle's strategy would isolate the English, perhaps weakening their hold on Normandy. At worst, it would have forced the English to seize Paris, which they had otherwise left to the Burgundians to run under a small English guard. It wouldn't look good to crown Edward VI at Rouen, a city of no cultural significance. Or, just as bad, Burgundian neutrality may have opened access for that coronation to take place at Reims instead of Paris. Who knows, but so long as the English regent of France, the Duke of Bedford, was in charge -- and married to the sister of the Duke of the Burgundy<ref>John the Fearless' daughter, Anne of Burgundy. She died at the age of 28 in Paris in late 1432. The English offensives following Joan's execution firmed up the Burgundian alliance for a time~~, but~~ when the French renewed the initiative (discussed below) the Duke's new wife, whom he married six months after Anne's death, ~~being of~~ the House of Luxembourg made for a powerful alliance, but it was no longer a direct line to the Duke of Burgundy ~~(to the extent that Medieval marital ties bound families, which was considerable but hardly binding)~~. </ref> -- the English-Burgundian alliance would hold, especially since the textile factories in Flanders were supplied by English wool.

At best, de La Trémoïlle's strategy would isolate the English, perhaps weakening their hold on Normandy. At worst, it would have forced the English to seize Paris, which they had otherwise left to the Burgundians to run under a small English guard. It wouldn't look good to crown Edward VI at Rouen, a city of no cultural significance. Or, just as bad, Burgundian neutrality may have opened access for that coronation to take place at Reims instead of Paris. Who knows, but so long as the English regent of France, the Duke of Bedford, was in charge -- and married to the sister of the Duke of the Burgundy<ref>John the Fearless' daughter, Anne of Burgundy. She died at the age of 28 in Paris in late 1432. The English offensives following Joan's execution firmed up the Burgundian alliance for a time. But when the French renewed the initiative (discussed below) Anne's absence meant one less obligation between the English and the Burgundians (to the extent that Medieval marital ties bound families, which was considerable but hardly binding). The Duke's new wife, whom he married six months after Anne's death, was from the House of Luxembourg, which made for a powerful alliance, but it was no longer a direct line to the Duke of Burgundy. </ref> -- the English-Burgundian alliance would hold, especially since the textile factories in Flanders were supplied by English wool.

The standard historical explanation that we encounter is that de La Trémoïlle and the Archbishop of Reims, Regnault de Chartres, came to resent Joan out of jealousy, or sexist resentment, or something, and so worked against her, whether that be to French advantage or not.<ref>The French Wikipedia entry on [https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Ier_de_La_Tr%C3%A9moille Georges Ier de La Trémoille — Wikipédia], notes that the blame on de Chartres and de la Trémoille started during the 1440s, and was popularized in a 1789 history of France by Henry Martin, who included Charles VII in the plot against Joan. Just know that 1789 marks a rather anti-monarchical moment in French history. While the Revolution didn't like Joan's Catholicism or support of the monarchy, for the revolutionaries she was an archetype of the French common people rising up against tyranny.</ref>

@@ Line 999: / Line 999: @@
 How do we even make sense of this? The English were reeling from Joan's onslaught, and as the French army marched triumphantly to and from the sacred coronation of the French King, the Burgundians faced the logic of an English alliance that was losing its authority among the people. And the French minister proposes Burgundian neutrality? It's hard to see to what advantage de La Trémoïlle was leveraging, much less what was the actual situation being leveraged.
-At best, de La Trémoïlle's strategy would isolate the English, perhaps weakening their hold on Normandy. At worst, it would have forced the English to seize Paris, which they had otherwise left to the Burgundians to run under a small English guard. It wouldn't look good to crown Edward VI at Rouen, a city of no cultural significance. Or, just as bad, Burgundian neutrality may have opened access for that coronation to take place at Reims instead of Paris. Who knows, but so long as the English regent of France, the Duke of Bedford, was in charge -- and married to the sister of the Duke of the Burgundy<ref>John the Fearless' daughter, Anne of Burgundy. She died at the age of 28 in Paris in late 1432. The English offensives following Joan's execution firmed up the Burgundian alliance for a time, but when the French renewed the initiative (discussed below) the Duke's new wife, whom he married six months after Anne's death, being of the House of Luxembourg made for a powerful alliance, but it was no longer a direct line to the Duke of Burgundy (to the extent that Medieval marital ties bound families, which was considerable but hardly binding). </ref> -- the English-Burgundian alliance would hold, especially since the textile factories in Flanders were supplied by English wool.
+At best, de La Trémoïlle's strategy would isolate the English, perhaps weakening their hold on Normandy. At worst, it would have forced the English to seize Paris, which they had otherwise left to the Burgundians to run under a small English guard. It wouldn't look good to crown Edward VI at Rouen, a city of no cultural significance. Or, just as bad, Burgundian neutrality may have opened access for that coronation to take place at Reims instead of Paris. Who knows, but so long as the English regent of France, the Duke of Bedford, was in charge -- and married to the sister of the Duke of the Burgundy<ref>John the Fearless' daughter, Anne of Burgundy. She died at the age of 28 in Paris in late 1432. The English offensives following Joan's execution firmed up the Burgundian alliance for a time. But when the French renewed the initiative (discussed below) Anne's absence meant one less obligation between the English and the Burgundians (to the extent that Medieval marital ties bound families, which was considerable but hardly binding). The Duke's new wife, whom he married six months after Anne's death, was from the House of Luxembourg, which made for a powerful alliance, but it was no longer a direct line to the Duke of Burgundy. </ref> -- the English-Burgundian alliance would hold, especially since the textile factories in Flanders were supplied by English wool.
 The standard historical explanation that we encounter is that de La Trémoïlle and the Archbishop of Reims, Regnault de Chartres, came to resent Joan out of jealousy, or sexist resentment, or something, and so worked against her, whether that be to French advantage or not.<ref>The French Wikipedia entry on [https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Ier_de_La_Tr%C3%A9moille Georges Ier de La Trémoille — Wikipédia], notes that the blame on de Chartres and de la Trémoille started during the 1440s, and was popularized in a 1789 history of France by Henry Martin, who included Charles VII in the plot against Joan. Just know that 1789 marks a rather anti-monarchical moment in French history. While the Revolution didn't like Joan's Catholicism or support of the monarchy, for the revolutionaries she was an archetype of the French common people rising up against tyranny.</ref>