Rumours & Questions!
Jeanne d'Arc troubles
Frequently asked Questions
Here are some frequently asked questions about Jeanne d'Arc.
I will try to answer any questions here, which will be often asked,
I will answer them as good as I can.
Was St. Joan a royal bastard, who was attributing to the family d'Arc?!
The never-ending question, whether the legend of the poor farmer-girl is just a romantic story of a royal bastard, appears again and again.
But these theories are not proof, and there's too much that speak against this theory.
Here some of the point's against the bastard-theory:
All source's according to, was Jeanne born in the night at the 6, January. Perceval of Boulainvilliers, a valet of King Karl VII reported on the 21st. Juny 1429, in a letter to the duke of Milan: "It was in the night of the Epiphany, where she beholds the light of the world fort her first time, and - wonderful to report! - The poor villagers of the town were infested of an inscrutable delight. Before they knew about the birth of the virgin, they gathered and asked, what new happened! For any it was the occasion to take a new vital energy. What's still to enclose? The cock's, like the herald's of the happy news, crow on a never before kind and flapped its wings, 2 hours it continued, for the announcement." The Letter, wrote to Times, as Jeanne d'Arc was already a celebrity, sure an adorn work will be accumulated. The advocate's of the, "bastard theory", say that the tumult in this night was arise, because a horde of rider was bring the baby of eight months, to the family of Arc. Counter-argument: Some king of action didn't want to be hidden for the chroniclers!
- If Jeanne were to be born in 1407, they would have baptized a five-year-old girl in 1412. After all the four godfather's state in the Rehabilitation, who were at this event very attached. They didn't say anything about the strange, so late baptism. They lived in village like Domrémy, then like today a "mini- society", in there where everyone knows everyone there. They didn't like to keep it hidden, if attribute a child to Jaques and Isabella d'Arc. The presence of 2 tutors's lasted for years, which allegedly gave the girl a befitting one's rank instruction, would be remarkable certainly. The instruction didn't become a success, because of Jeanne, that's a fact, she could neither write nor read. But we can proceed from the assumption that she was able to read, but only hard and arduous, because Jeanne wished in her condemnation-process, to get the points of the charge written.
- Point three: After all in process, where to be sure French prosecutor's and judges against Jeanne would lead, but the English interested person was on control , every little piece of circumstantial evidence about a royal descent of the famous woman greedy took up! Something like that isn't any hand down.
On the contrary: The accused will be real "investigate" in this proceedings - Only about her allegedly relationship to the king, wasn't brought out into the open. You can imagine for yourself, how gladly the judges and their customer's some kind of argument (or just the theory) to take up.
And have we still to emphasize that the king made the investigation at the town Domrémy about Jeanne d'Arc ?!
Regine pernoud summed it up very well:
(...)The one author takes up the pseudo-reasoning of the 17 & 18. Century, the other - "bastard-carrier's", how they were called - take on the assertion's of a certain Pierre Caze, who published in (maybe to pass the time) 1805 the first book, which made Jeanne d'Arc out to be an illegitimate daughter of the Isabeau of Bavaria.
Are you allowed, on top of this, to forget the testimonies of the godfather's and neighbours?! All was a report; Jeanne was really born as a child to Jaques d'Arc and Isabelle Romée in Domrémy. The same pseudo- historian's claim, that all was know about that matter, sure Charles VII, the duke of Alencon, Dunois and Bertrand de Poulengy (who accompanied Jeanne from Vaucouleurs to Chinon). No one wanted to say anything about that, no one doubted it. Don't carry, so they tell, Jeanne's coat of arms one bastard-fathom, during the sword was never respected like a with-sign? Why not only Jeanne a coat of arms, but also her "wrong brothers" too? Flow in their blood vessel's royal blood too?!
All those theories are not of value, to be adopted.
As long as no convincing proof exists, you don't need to consider them.
(Regine Peroud, 1991)
2. Jeanne d'Arc escaped the fire?
Several impostors claimed to be Joan of Arc after the execution date. The most successful was Claude des Armoises. Claude des Armoises married the knight Robert des Armoises and claimed to be Joan of Arc in 1436. She gained the support of Joan of Arc's brothers. She carried on the charade until 1440, gaining gifts and subsidies. One chronicle states, "In this year there came a young girl who said she was the Maid of France and played her role so well that many were duped by her, and especially the greatest nobles." Some modern authors attempt to revive this claim by asserting that some other victim was substituted for Joan of Arc at the stake. The likelihood of this is extremely thin, since the trial of nullification records sworn testimony from numerous witnesses who were present at the execution and confirmed her identity.
There a lot of people who say of Jeanne d'Arc, she wasn't burned, but another woman took the place of Jeanne. Actually the advocates of the theory take it to fill whole sites of reasons, why Cauchon and his supporters should let her go.
But these kind of theory are pretty shaky, the most of the author's point of a certain "Madame d'Arc" who appeared after Jeanne's death, she was highly feted and lived a long time in Charles' castle. Or the certain Jeanne, who appeared some years after Jeanne's death and passed herself off as Jeanne d'Arc. She found belief in some (seemingly credulous) country people, even in one of Jeanne's brothers. But we know, the wrong Jeanne was, after a proces, admitting that she isn't the real Jeanne d'Arc.
I don't believe in this theory, I'm more to smile at it. The authors of that theory, they indicate some kind of a "spectacle" during Jeanne's captivity. On the one hand, Jeanne's judges let leak out, that the judges just aim at Jeanne's death, on the other hand, behind the thick walls they deliberate how Jeanne could escape unnoticed.
But what is with all the passages of the hand down documents? -- such as the fact, that Cauchon put away all judges who thought Jeanne was innocent? Or the spectacle when the hangman was turning back the fire, so that all can see, as a proof, that their was burn THAT and NO OTHER witch!?
If another woman was burned instead of Jeanne, than I ask myself, if they was tell that woman quick before her dead, what she have to say, in the last minutes of her life? As we know, Jeanne's last words were "All what I do, was act under orders of God!" We have even sources that say, that former soldiers of Jeanne were come to Rouen, wouldn't they notice the fraud? Will that fraud hide for the chroniclers ?
Jeanne's rehabilitation, beatified and canonized as a saint, would lose its shine without her burning.
In a lot of novels and stories, the narrators and authors try to raise the romantic over the readable record; by means of a lot of men, Jeanne should love them. Even if it's Jean de Metz, d'Aulon, Dunois, the Englishman Lionel or even the duke of Alencon; due to that human love, Jeanne allegedly broke her vow to God.
Anyone MUST be to blame for Jeanne's captivity.
Just in that one point, is something wrong. Jeanne gave that vow as she was 13, she was more promise to keep her virginity, and less than that never to fall in love. De Metz, d'Aulon and Betrand de Poulengy can be excluded, due their own evidence at the rehabilitation, they all say, that they don't feel any carnal, not even if they saw Jeanne naked. And due to her kindness and benevolence, they never want to request something like that. Alencon had a wife (in some books, he even has several wives) and the rumour of the Englishman "Lionel" was spread due the play of Schiller "Virgin of Orleans." In Schiller's Play, Jeanne let him live, and fell in love with him, so she was break her vow to God.
But it's only a illusion of Schiller, it is true, the English soldier died in Jeanne's arms, and she cried over him, but not due to love, but more due to the reason she was crying after every battle, because she took the blame, that the died soldiers have to step forward to God, with all their sins! There was just one soldier, with the name Lionel who was contact with Jeanne directly, namely the English soldier, who got Jeanne captured. Also here we can mention the quotation of Jeanne d'Arc, before her execution, where she regrets, that her "clean body, which never was violated," would have to be exterminated in that gruesome way. And would Jeanne have promised God, never to fall in love, she wouldn't break her vow so quick! Besides, at the rehabilitation, Jean de Metz said: "and she was the most chaste of all!" And we know, Jeanne warded off all chat-ups with rage and box on the ears
Also, a soldier who was present at the revision said that she was a BIT "childish" sometimes, and she didn't have eyes for sex and love stories. As I said, her generation was much different from ours today.
Manchon and other witnesses describe attempted rape, which, in itself, is a traumatic enough experience. However, there is no justification for the attempts made by a few modern authors to convert this into the type of gang-rape that has become a staple of a many books on the subject. The witnesses describe attempted, not actual, rape; moreover, Joan of Arc was quoted as saying, immediately before her death, that her body was still "uncorrupted".
There is no concrete evidence that Joan was really raped. On the contrary, many chronicles speak against it.
1) There are witness accounts of attempted rape, but also the prevention of it. For example, her guards had attempted to rape her a number of times, and on one occasion she cried out [for help], and the Earl (Warwick) himself came to her aid at the sound of her cry.
2) At that time Jeanne carried, for chastity reasons, a so-called Doublette/Doublee, an upper top similar to a jerkin that was double-layered or had a woollen layer underneath. With "Nestel threads" a usual Doublette was laced by approx. 20 holes, but Jeanne laced hers by 40 holes, at least double. The attempt to open this - while the bearer defended himself - might prove extremely difficult. Jeanne renounced her own comfort to be protected against such attacks in every regard, and this she did during her process as well. When her guards seduced her, presumably to steal her clothes, she became, according to her own indictment, "relapsed" because she chose the only protection she had: her male-clothes. How would a guard have had time to open such a doublet, one that was laced double than usual, while fighting simultaneously?
3) On the same day as Jeanne was led away to the stake, she exclaimed "Should my pure body, which is still uncorrupted, so terribly be destroyed?!" Does this desperate statement not speak for itself?
Jeanne d'Arc is always adjusted by lesbians to have been lesbian. The reason: Jehanne shared her bed with " young girls " rather than men or older women. But can somebody seriously fancy Jeanne d'Arc, virgin and devout as she was? In the 15th century, the night's rest was much different than today. The nightdress only became fashionable later on. Because Jeanne did not want to lie down in the nude between soldiers, she slept in full armament. Indeed, it wasn't unusual at that time for young girls to sleep in the same bed together.
There are NO reports that Jeanne, in anyway, behaved lustfully towards women.If she had any lesbian feelings or if anyone EVER suspected that in
her time, they would've reproached her regarding that in her process!!! ANYONE could've mentioned such a thing in her revision if it was believed to be true, but this NEVER happened! Jehanne was not shaped by the medias like WE are today! She was absolutley pure.Also, a soldier who was present at the revision said that she was a BIT "childish" sometimes, and she didn't have eyes for sex and love stories. As I said, her generation was much different from ours today.
Some lesbian authors also like to use Joan's childhood friend, Hauviette, for their fancy "lesbian love stories" - but this is nonsense as well. Hauviette and Jehanne knew each other since their early childhood and they were seemingly "best friends". They had races and they helped each other with chores. Still, Jehanne's friends always made jokes about her religious ways and piety, and I guess even Hauviette was joined in now and then. But I don't doubt that, since Hauviette was 2 or 3 years younger than Jehanne, Jehanne may have assumed a motherly role towards her little friend. YES Hauviette was engaged. When Jehanne departed from her village, she didn't say "good bye" to anyone, except to her friend Mengette and some other friend which we aren't so familiar with from history. I think Jehanne knew that Hauviette would cry too much over her departure, so she didn't want trouble her with that. She just didn't have the heart to do it.