Poitiers Conclusions

The “Poitiers Conclusions, March/April 1429.

The Conclusions are a summary of the recomendation by the "Doctors" at Poitiers to the King of France, Charles VII, to send Joan of Arc with an army to allow her to "show a sign" at Orleans.

See also Poitiers Conclusions per La Chronique de la Pucelle

Source

The "Poitiers Conclusions" (or "Poitiers Examinations") is a reconstruction of the recommendations of the "Doctors" at Poitiers, the clerics and scholars to whom the King of France consulted to evaluate Joan of Arc. The text was written in the 15th century, likely around the time of the Trial of Rehabilitation in the 1450s. It was not written or used in the events of March-April of 1429, which it describes.

The scribe consolidated the document from various sources, but seems to have relied mostly on the 1429 portions (ending) of the chronicle, Gestes des nobles francoys, by Guillaume Cousinot (the Elder), whose narrative and some details the Conclusions parallels. Other sources do not survive, such as the use of Scriptural references. Those references, however, are historically plausible and so may be assumed as authentic. The Gestes des nobles françoys is a chronicle of Charles VI and Charles VII that ends after May of 1429, after Saint Joan lifted the siege at Orléans. Guillaume Cusinot the Younger, the Cousinot the Elder's nephew, later picked up the account for his larger work on Joan of Arc called La Chronique de la Pucelle.

There did exist an actual "register" of the Poitiers Examinations, which Saint Joan of Arc references numerously during her Trial of Condemnation in 1431. It is likely, too, that her prosecutors had access to that register, as some of their questions demonstrate knowledge of those proceedings at Poitiers. If so, then the curator of the Register, who has to be the Chancellor of France, Archbishop Regnault de Chartres, as the Poitiers Examinations were conducted under his authority and in his presence, gave them access to it. It is very likely that de Chartres had the Poitiers Register purposefully destroyed. He resented Joan of Arc and was strongly motivated to assist in her Trial of Condemnation.

The early nineteenth century French historian, Jean Alexandre Buchon (1791-1846) was the first modern historian to publish the document, including it as an addendum here: Chroniques d'Enguerrand de Monstrelet : [t. IX] : nouvelle édition entièrement refondue sur les manuscrits, avec notes et éclaircissements / par J. A. Buchon | Gallica (This volume is from a large series entitled, Collection des Chroniques Nationales Françaises, Écrites en Langue Vulgaire)

Buchon used a title that was added to the manuscript, perhaps by the original scribe, perhaps by another, but close or near contemporaneously to the document's creation:

C'est l'opinion des docteurs que le roy a demandé touchant le fait de la Pucelle envoyée de par Dieu.

English:

This is the opinion of the doctors that the king requested regarding the matter of the Maiden sent by God.

Crediting Buchon for its discovery, Jules Quicherat included it in his own multi-volume collection of documents related to Joan of Arc published in the 1840s, in Quicherat, Vol III | Gallica; pp. 391-392, entitling it as,

Résumé des Conclusions Données par les Docteurs Réunis a Poitiers, Mars-Avril 1429

English:

Summary of the Conclusions Given By The Doctors Assembled At Poitiers, March-April 1429

Buchon discovered it in a set of documents filed as "Extrait du manuscript du roi 7301" which is now found in BnF 979, available on Gallica here: Français 979 | Gallica |Folio 83

Sources for the Examinations at Poitiers:

• Français 979 | Gallica |Folio 83
• "C'est l'opinion des docteurs" from Chroniques d'Enguerrand de Monstrelet : [t. IX] : nouvelle édition entièrement refondue sur les manuscrits, avec notes et éclaircissements / par J. A. Buchon; p. 404
  • Note, this is from Volume IX which contains the Proces de la Pucelle (starting p. 44 and with a "Dissertation" on the manuscript by L'Abbė Dubois) and La Chronique de la Pucelle (starting p. 221), as part of a larger set of the Chroniques d'Enguerrand de Monstrelet
  • also Quicherat, Vol III | Gallica; pp. 391-392,
• Journal du Siege d'Orleans, pp. 26-28 on the arrival of Joan to Chinon and the examination at Poitiers
• Chronique de la Pucelle by Cousinot (pp. 273-274)

Background

After Joan of Arc arrived to the French court at Chinon, the French King, the "Dauphin" Charles, led her to Poitiers, his administrative capital, where she was investigated by leading theologians and Bishops, including Jean Gerson, the most respected French Catholic thinker.

While no transcript of the hearings and interviews with Joan survive, the "Doctors," after their interviews and investigations, the Doctors send a "Resume," or "Summary" of their conclusions, called "The Poitiers Conclusions." In it, the theologians stated that they found no evil in Joan, only piety, honesty, faith, and "purpose", and recommended to the King that he allow her to lead the French army to Orleans.

Joan of Arc testified in her Condemnation Trial that a "book," or "register" of the hearings at Poitiers existed. It is believed that the Archbishop and Chancellor of France, Regnault de Chartres, destroyed the original register.

Résumé Des Conclusions Données Par Les Docteurs Réunis A Poitiers

In original French from Quicherat, Vol 3, pp. 391-392 (Gallica)

• Note that in Quicherat's version, many modern French accents are absent

Editorial title and summary from Quicherat:

RÉSUMÉ

DES CONCLUSIONS DONNÉES PAR LES DOCTEURS

RÉUNIS A POITIERS

MARS-AVRIL 1429

C’est l’opinion des docteurs que le roi a demandée touchant le fait de la Pucelle envoyée de par Dieu.

Text

Le roi, attendu [la] nécessité de lui et de son royaume, et considéré les continues prières de son povre peuple envers Dieu et tous autres amans paix et justice, ne doit point déboutter ne dejeter la Pucelle, qui se dit estre envoyée de par Dieu pour luy donner secours, non obstant que ces promesses soyent seules [Quicherat note 1] euvres humaines ; ne aussy ne doit croire en lui tantost et légièrement. Mais en suivant la Saincte Escripture, la doit esprovier par deux manières : c’est assavoir par prudence humaine, en enquérant de sa vie, de ses [maniéres] et de son entention, comme dist saint Poul l’Apostre : Probate spiritus, si ex Deo sunt ; et par dévote oroison, requerir signe d’aucune euvre ou sperance divine, par quoy en puisse juger que elle est venue de la volonté de Dieu. Aussy commanda Dieu à Achaaz qu’il demandast signe, quant Dieu luy faisoit promesse de victoire, en luy disant : Pete signum a Domino ; et semblablement fist Gédéon, qui demanda signe, et plusieurs autres, etc.

Le roy, depuis la venue de laditte Pucelle, a observées et tenues euvres et les deux [maniéres][Quicherat note] dessusdittes : c’est assavoir probacion par prudence humaine et par oroison, en demandant signe de Dieu. Quant à la première, qui est par prudence humaine, il a fait esprouver laditte Pucelle de sa vie, de sa naissance, de ses [maniéres], de son entention, et l’a fait garder avec luy, bien par l’espace de six semaines, [pour] à toutes gens la desmontrer, soyent clers, gens d’église, gens de dévocion, gens d’armes, femmes, veufves et autres. Et publiquement et secrettement elle a conversé avec toutes gens ; mais en elle on ne trouve point de mal, fors que bien, humilité, virginité, dévocion, honnesteté, simplesse ; et de sa naissance et de sa vie, plusieurs choses merveilleuses sont dites comme vrayes.

Quant à la seconde manière de probacion, le roy luy demanda signe, auquel elle respont que devant la ville d’Orléans elle le monstrera, et non par ne en autre lieu ; car ainsi luy est ordonné de par Dieu.

Le roy, attendu la probacion faicte de ladicte Pucelle, en tant que luy est possible, et nul mal ne treuve en elle, et considérée sa réponce, qui est de démonstrer signe divin devant Orléans ; veue sa constance et sa persévérance en son propos, et ses requestes instantes d’aler à Orléans pour y monstrer le signe du divin secours ; ne la doit point empescher d’aler à Orléans avec ses gens d’armes, mais la doit faire conduire honnestement, en sperant en Dieu. Car la doubter ou delaissier sans apparance de mal seroit repugner au Saint Esperit, et se rendre indigne de l’aide de Dieu, comme dist Gamaliel en ung conseil des Juifs au regart des Apostres.

The Poitiers Conclusions (English translation)

Translation mine.

• I added paragraph breaks for readability:

Editorial title and summary from Quicherat:

SUMMARY OF THE CONCLUSIONS GIVEN BY THE DOCTORS ASSEMBLED AT POITIERS, MARCH-APRIL 1429
This is the opinion of the doctors which the king has asked concerning the matter of the Maid sent on behalf of God.

Text

The king, attending to his own necessity and that of his kingdom, and taking into account the continual prayers to God of his impoverished people and of all others who love peace and justice, must neither cast aside nor reject the Maid, who says she is sent by God to give him comfort and aid; notwithstanding that these promises are merely of human works; nor should he believe in her at once and lightly. But, following Holy Scripture, he ought to test her in two ways: that is, by human prudence, in inquiring into her life, her manners, and her intentions, as says Saint Paul the Apostle: Probate spiritus, si ex Deo sunt; and by devout prayer, to seek a sign of some divine work or hope, by which one may judge whether she has come by the will of God.

Likewise God commanded Ahaz to ask for a sign, when he promised him victory, saying: Pete signum a Domino; and similarly did Gideon, who asked for a sign, and many others, etc.

The king, since the coming of the said Maid, has observed and followed the two manners above mentioned: that is to say, testing by human prudence and by prayer, in asking signs from God.

As to the first, which is by human prudence, he has tested the said Maid as to her life, her birth, her manners, her intentions, and has kept her with him, for a good space of six weeks, to present her to all people, whether scholars, men of the Church, men of devotion, men-at-arms, women, widows, and others. And publicly and privately she has conversed with all people; but in her one finds no evil, save only good: humility, virginity, devotion, honesty, simplicity; and of her birth and her life, many marvelous things are said to be true.

As to the second manner of testing, the king asked her for a sign, to which she replied that before the city of Orléans she will show it, and in not other place; for thus it is commanded to her by God.

The king, having considered the inquiries made of the said Maid, insofar as is possible for him, and finding no evil in her, and considering her reply, which is to show a divine sign before Orléans; given her constancy and perseverance in her purpose, and her continual requests to go to Orléans in order there to show the sign of divine aid; must not to prevent her from going to Orléans with his men-at-arms, but must have her conducted honorably, trusting in God.

For to doubt her or set her aside without any appearance of evil would be to resist the Holy Spirit, and to render oneself unworthy of the aid of God, as Gamaliel said in a council of the Jews concerning the Apostles.

English translation by Deborah A. Fraioli

Translation from Joan of Arc: the early debate, by Deborah A. Fraioli (2000), pp. 206-207. Fraioli used Aryolres, La vraie Jeanne d’Arc and Quicherate, Procès 3: 391-92.

The king, given his necessity and that of his Kingdom, and considering the continuous prayers of his poor people to God and to all others who love peace and justice, ought not to turn away nor reject the Maid who says she is sent by God for his succor, even though her promises consist only of human works; nor should he believe in her immediately or lightly. But following Holy Writ, he must test her in two ways: that is by human means, inquiring about her life, behavior, and her intentions, as the apostle Saint Paul states: probate spiritus, si ex De sunt; and by devout prayer, requiring the sign either of divine works or hope from heaven through which to judge whether she has come by the will of God. Thus God commanded Ahaz to ask for a sign, when God promised him victory, telling him: pete signum a Domino; and the same with Gideon, who requested a sign, and several others, etc.

The king, since the coming of the said Maid, has observed and [investigated her?] in two ways, that is, by human prudence and asking for a sign from God. As to the first manner, which is by human prudence, he has caused the said Maid to be tested as to her life, birth, moral comportment, and her purpose, keeping her with him for a space of six weeks, presenting her to all manner of people, be they clerics, churchmen, pious people, men at arms, women, widows, or others. She has conversed with everyone publicly and privately. But in her is found no evil only goodness, humility, virginity, piety, honesty, and simplicity; and of her birth and life marvelous things are related as true.

As to the second manner of testing, the king has requested a sign from her to which she replies that before the city of Orléans she will show it and nowhere else: for so it is commanded her by God.

The king, given the investigation conducted of the said made, as far as he is able, and that no evil is found in her, and considering her reply, which is to give a divine sign at Orléans; seeing her constancy and perseverance in her purpose, and her insistent request to go to Orléans to show there the sign of divine aid, must not prevent her from going to Orléans with her men at arms, but must have her led there in good faith, placing hope in God. For doubting her or dismissing her without appearance of evil, would be to repel the Holy Spirit, and render one unworthy of the aid of God, as Gamaliel stated in a council of Jews regarding the apostles.