Chapter 37

AFTER THE DEATH OF THE MAID (_continued_)--THE ROUEN JUDGES AT THE COUNCIL OF BALE AND THE PRAGMATIC SANCTION--THE REHABILITATION TRIAL--THE MAID OF SARMAIZE--THE MAID OF LE MANS

From year to year the Council of Bale drew out its deliberations in a series of sessions well nigh as lengthy as the tail of the dragon in the Apocalypse. Its manner of reforming at once the Church, its members, and its head struck terror into the hearts of the sovereign Pontiff and the Sacred College. Sorrowfully did AEneus Sylvius exclaim, "There is assembled at Bale, not the Church of God indeed, but the synagogue of Satan."[2684] But though uttered by a Roman cardinal, even such an expression can hardly be termed violent when applied to the synod which established free elections to bishoprics, suppressed the right of bestowing the pallium, of exacting annates and payments to the papal chancery, and which was endeavouring to restore the papacy to evangelical poverty. The King of France and the Emperor, on the other hand, looked favourably on the Council when it essayed to bridle the ambition and greed of the Bishop of Rome.

[Footnote 2684: De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. iii, p. 335.]

Now among the Fathers who displayed the greatest zeal in the reformation of the Church were the masters and doctors of the University of Paris, those who had sat in judgment on Jeanne the Maid, and notably Maitre Nicolas Loiseleur and Maitre Thomas de Courcelles. Charles VII convoked an assembly of the clergy of the realm in order to examine the canons of Bale. The assembly met in the Sainte-Chapelle at Bourges, on the 1st of May, 1438. Master Thomas de Courcelles, appointed delegate by the Council, there conferred with the Lord Bishop of Castres. Now in 1438 the Bishop of Castres was that elegant humanist, that zealous counsellor of the crown, who, in style truly Ciceronian, complained in his letters that so closely was he bound to his glebe, the court, that no time remained to him to visit his spouse.[2685] He was none other than that Gerard Machet, the King's confessor, who had, in 1429, along with the clerks at Poitiers, pleaded the authority of prophecy in favour of the Maid, in whom he found nought but sincerity and goodness.[2686] Maitre Thomas de Courcelles at Rouen had urged the Maid's being tortured and delivered to the secular arm.[2687] At the Bourges assembly the two churchmen agreed touching the supremacy of General Councils, the freedom of episcopal elections, the suppression of annates and the rights of the Gallican Church. At that moment it was not likely that either one or the other remembered the poor Maid. From the deliberations of this assembly, in which Maitre Thomas played an important part, there issued the solemn edict promulgated by the King on the 7th of July, 1438; the Pragmatic Sanction. By this edict the canons of Bale became the constitution of the Church of France.[2688]

[Footnote 2685: Le P. Ayroles, _La Pucelle devant l'eglise de son temps_, p. 10.]

[Footnote 2686: _Trial_, vol. iii, p. 565.]

[Footnote 2687: _Ibid._, vol. i, p. 403.]

[Footnote 2688: _Ordonnances_, vol. xiii, pp. 267, 291. _Preuves des libertes de l'eglise gallicane_, edited by Lenglet-Dufresnoy, second part, p. 6. De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. iii, pp. 353, 361. N. Arlos, _Histoire de la pragmatique sanction, etc._]

The Emperor also agreed to the reforms of Bale. So audacious did the Fathers become that they summoned Pope Eugenius to appear before their tribunal. When he refused to obey their summons, they deposed him, declaring him to be disobedient, obstinate, rebellious, a breaker of rules, a perturber of ecclesiastical unity, a perjurer, a schismatic, a hardened heretic, a squanderer of the treasures of the Church, scandalous, simoniacal, pernicious and damnable.[2689] Such was the condemnation of the Holy Fathers pronounced among other doctors by Maitre Jean Beaupere, Maitre Thomas de Courcelles and Maitre Nicolas Loiseleur, who had all three so sternly reproached Jeanne with having refused to submit to the Pope.[2690] Maitre Nicolas had been extremely energetic throughout the Maid's trial, playing alternately the parts of the Lorraine prisoner and Saint Catherine; when she was led to the stake he had run after her like a madman.[2691] This same Maitre Nicolas now displayed great activity in the Council wherein he attained to some eminence. He upheld the view that the General Council canonically convoked, was superior to the Pope and in a position to depose him. And albeit this canon was a mere master of arts, he made such an impression on the Fathers at Bale that in 1439, they despatched him to act as juris-consult at the Diet of Mainz. Meanwhile his attitude was strongly displeasing to the chapter which had sent him as deputy to the Council. The canons of Rouen sided with the Sovereign Pontiff and against the Fathers, on this point joining issue with the University of Paris. They disowned their delegate and sent to recall him on the 28th of July, 1438.[2692]

[Footnote 2689: Hefele, _Histoire de l'Eglise gallicane_, vol. xx, p. 357. De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. iii, p. 363. De Beaurepaire, _Les etats de Normandie sous la domination anglaise_, pp. 66, 67, 185, 188.]

[Footnote 2690: Du Boulay, _Hist. Universitatis_, vol. v, p. 431. De Beaurepaire, _Notes sur les juges_, p. 28.]

[Footnote 2691: _Trial_, vol. ii, pp. 10, 12, 332, 362; vol. iii, pp. 60, 133, 141, 145, 156, 162, 173, 181.]

[Footnote 2692: De Beaurepaire, _Notes sur les juges et assesseurs du proces de condamnation_, pp. 78, 82.]

Maitre Thomas de Courcelles, one of those who had declared the Pope disobedient, obstinate, rebellious and the rest, was nominated one of the commissioners to preside over the election of a new pope, and, like Loiseleur, a delegate to the Diet of Mainz. But, unlike Loiseleur, he was not disowned by those who had appointed him, for he was the deputy of the University of Paris who recognised the Pope of the Council, Felix, to be the true Father of the Faithful.[2693] In the assembly of the French clergy held at Bourges in the August of 1440, Maitre Thomas spoke in the name of the Fathers of Bale. He discoursed for two hours to the complete satisfaction of the King.[2694] Charles VII, while remaining loyal to Pope Eugenius, maintained the Pragmatic Sanction. Maitre Thomas de Courcelles was henceforth one of the pillars of the French Church.

[Footnote 2693: J. Quicherat, _Apercus nouveaux_, p. 106.]

[Footnote 2694: De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. iii, p. 372.]

Meanwhile the English government had declared for the Pope and against the Council.[2695] My Lord Pierre Cauchon, who had become Bishop of Lisieux, was Henry VI's ambassador at the Council. And at Bale a somewhat unpleasant experience befell him. By reason of his translation to the see of Lisieux he owed Rome annates to the amount of 400 golden florins. In Germany he was informed by the Pope's Treasurer that by his failure to pay this sum, despite the long delays granted to him, he had incurred excommunication, and that being excommunicate, by presuming to celebrate divine service he had committed irregularity.[2696] Such accusations must have caused him considerable annoyance. But after all, such occurrences were frequent and of no great consequence. On churchmen these thunderbolts fell but lightly, doing them no great hurt.

[Footnote 2695: De Beaurepaire, _Les etats de Normandie sous la domination anglaise_, pp. 66, 67, 185, 188. De Beaucourt, _loc. cit._ p. 362.]

[Footnote 2696: De Beaurepaire, _loc. cit._, p. 17. _Notes sur les juges et assesseurs du proces de condamnation_, p. 117. _Recherches sur le proces_, p. 124.]

From 1444, the realm of France, disembarrassed alike of adversaries and of defenders, was free to labour, to work at various trades, to engage in commerce and to grow rich. In the intervals between wars and during truces, King Charles's government, by the interchange of natural products and of merchandise, also, we may add, by the abolition of tolls and dues on the Rivers Seine, Oise, and Loire, effected the actual conquest of Normandy. Thus, when the time for nominal conquest came, the French had only to take possession of the province. So easy had this become, that in the rapid campaign of 1449,[2697] even the Constable was not beaten, neither was the Duke of Alencon. In his royal and peaceful manner Charles VII resumed possession of his town of Rouen, just as twenty years before he had taken Troyes and Reims, as the result of an understanding with the townsfolk and in return for an amnesty and the grant of rights and privileges to the burghers. He entered the city on Monday, the 10th of November, 1449.

[Footnote 2697: De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. v, ch. i.]

The French government felt itself strong enough even to attempt the reconquest of that essentially English province, Aquitaine. In 1451, my Lord the Bastard, now Count of Dunois, took possession of the fortress of Blaye. Bordeaux and Bayonne surrendered in the same year. In the following manner did the Lord Bishop of Le Mans celebrate these conquests, worthy of the majesty of the most Christian King.

"Maine, Normandy, Aquitaine, these goodly provinces have returned to their allegiance to the King. Almost without the shedding of French blood hath this been accomplished. It hath not been necessary to overthrow the ramparts of many strongly walled towns, or to demolish their fortifications or for the inhabitants to suffer either pillage or murder."[2698]

[Footnote 2698: Lanery d'Arc, _Memoires et consultations en faveur de Jeanne d'Arc_, p. 249.]

Indeed Normandy and Maine were quite content at being French once more. The town of Bordeaux was alone in regretting the English, whose departure spelt its ruin. It revolted in 1452; and then after considerable difficulty was reconquered once and for all.

King Charles, henceforth rich and victorious, now desired to efface the stain inflicted on his reputation by the sentence of 1431. He wanted to prove to the whole world that it was no witch who had conducted him to his coronation. He was now eager to appeal against the condemnation of the Maid. But this condemnation had been pronounced by the church, and the Pope alone could order it to be cancelled. The King hoped to bring the Pope to do this, although he knew it would not be easy. In the March of 1450, he proceeded to a preliminary inquiry;[2699] and matters remained in that position until the arrival in France of Cardinal d'Estouteville, the legate of the Holy See. Pope Nicolas had sent him to negotiate with the King of France a peace with England and a crusade against the Turks. Cardinal d'Estouteville, who belonged to a Norman family, was just the man to discover the weak points in Jeanne's trial. In order to curry favour with Charles, he, as legate, set on foot a new inquiry at Rouen, with the assistance of Jean Brehal, of the order of preaching friars, the Inquisitor of the Faith in the kingdom of France. But the Pope did not approve of the legate's intervention;[2700] and for three years the revision was not proceeded with. Nicolas V would not allow it to be thought that the sacred tribunal of the most holy Inquisition was fallible and had even once pronounced an unjust sentence. And there existed at Rome a stronger reason for not interfering with the trial of 1431: the French demanded revision; the English were opposed to it; and the Pope did not wish to annoy the English, for they were then just as good and even better Catholics than the French.[2701]

[Footnote 2699: _Trial_, vol. ii, pp. 1, 22.]

[Footnote 2700: _Gallia Christiana_, vol. iii, col. 1129 and vol. xi, col. 90. De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. v, p. 219. Le P. Ayroles, _La Pucelle devant l'eglise de son temps_, ch. vi.]

[Footnote 2701: De Beaurepaire, _Les etats de Normandie sous la domination anglaise_, pp. 185, 188.]

In order to relieve the Pope from embarrassment and set him at his ease, the government of Charles VII invented an expedient: the King was not to appear in the suit; his place was to be taken by the family of the Maid. Jeanne's mother, Isabelle Romee de Vouthon, who lived in retirement at Orleans,[2702] and her two sons, Pierre and Jean du Lys, demanded the revision.[2703] By this legal artifice the case was converted from a political into a private suit. At this juncture Nicolas V died, on the 24th of March, 1455. His successor, Calixtus III, a Borgia, an old man of seventy-eight, by a rescript dated the 11th of June, 1455, authorised the institution of proceedings. To this end he appointed Jean Jouvenel des Ursins, Archbishop of Reims, Guillaume Chartier, Bishop of Paris, and Richard Olivier, Bishop of Coutances, who were to act conjointly with the Grand Inquisitor of France.[2704]

[Footnote 2702: _Trial_, vol. v, p. 276.]

[Footnote 2703: _Ibid._, vol. ii, pp. 108, 112.]

[Footnote 2704: _Ibid._, p. 95. Le P. Ayroles, _La Pucelle devant l'eglise de son temps_, p. 607. J. Belon and F. Balme, _Jean Brehal, grand inquisiteur de France et la rehabilitation de Jeanne d'Arc_, Paris, 1893, in 4to.]

From the first it was agreed that certain of those concerned in the original trial were not now to be involved, "for they had been deceived." Notably it was admitted that the Daughter of Kings, the Mother of Learning, the University of Paris, had been led into error by a fraudulent indictment consisting of twelve articles. It was agreed that the whole responsibility should be thrown on to the Bishop of Beauvais and the Promoter, Guillaume d'Estivet, who were both deceased. The precaution was necessary. Had it not been taken, certain doctors very influential with the King and very dear to the Church of France would have been greatly embarrassed.

On the 7th of November, 1455, Isabelle Romee and her two sons, followed by a long procession of innumerable ecclesiasties, laymen, and worthy women, approached the church of Notre Dame in Paris to demand justice from the prelates and papal commissioners.[2705]

[Footnote 2705: _Trial_, vol. ii, pp. 82, 92.]

Informers and accusers in the trial of the late Jeanne were summoned to appear at Rouen on the 12th of December. Not one came.[2706] The heirs of the late Messire Pierre Cauchon declined all liability for the deeds of their deceased kinsman, and touching the civil responsibility, they pleaded the amnesty granted by the King on the reconquest of Normandy.[2707] As had been expected, the proceedings went forward without any obstacle or even any discussion.

[Footnote 2706: _Ibid._, pp. 92, 112.]

[Footnote 2707: _Ibid._, pp. 193, 196.]

Inquiries were instituted at Domremy, at Orleans, at Paris, at Rouen.[2708] The friends of Jeannette's childhood, Hauviette, Mengette, either married or grown old; Jeannette, the wife of Thevenin; Jeannette, the widow of Estellin; Jean Morel of Greux; Gerardin of Epinal, the Burgundian, and his wife Isabellette, who had been godmother to Jacques d'Arc's daughter; Perrin, the bell-ringer; Jeanne's uncle Lassois; the Leroyer couple and a score of peasants from Domremy all appeared. Bertrand de Poulengy, then sixty-three and gentleman of the horse to the King of France, was heard; likewise Jean de Novelompont, called Jean de Metz, who had been raised to noble rank and was now living at Vaucouleurs, where he held some military office. Gentlemen and ecclesiasties of Lorraine and Champagne were examined.[2709] Burgesses of Orleans were also called, and notably Jean Luillier, the draper, who in June, 1429, had furnished fine Brussels cloth of purple for Jeanne's gown and ten years later had been present at the banquet given by the magistrates of Orleans in honour of the Maid who, as it was believed, had escaped burning.[2710] Jean Luillier was the most intelligent of the witnesses; as for the others, of whom there were about two dozen townsmen and townswomen, of between fifty and sixty years of age, they did little but repeat his evidence.[2711] He spoke well; but the fear of the English dazzled him and he saw many more of them than there had ever been.

[Footnote 2708: _Ibid._, pp. 291, 463; vol. iii, pp. 1, 202.]

[Footnote 2709: _Trial_, vol. ii, pp. 378, 463.]

[Footnote 2710: _Ibid._, vol. v, pp. 112, 113, 331.]

[Footnote 2711: _Ibid._, vol. ii, pp. 23, 35.]

Touching the examination at Poitiers there were called an advocate, a squire, a man of business, Francois Garivel, who was fifteen at the time of Jeanne's interrogation.[2712] The only cleric summoned was Brother Seguin of Limousin.[2713] The clerics of Poitiers were first as disinclined to risk themselves in this matter as were those of Rouen; a burnt child dreads the fire. La Hire and Poton of Saintrailles were dead. The survivors of Orleans and of Patay were called; the Bastard Jean, now Count of Dunois and Longueville, who gave his evidence like a clerk;[2714] the old Sire de Gaucourt, who in his eighty-fifth year made some effort of memory, and for the rest gave the same evidence as the Count of Dunois;[2715] the Duke of Alencon, on the point of making an alliance with the English and of procuring a powder with which to dry up the King,[2716] but who was none the less talkative and vain-glorious;[2717] Jeanne's steward, Messire Jean d'Aulon, who had become a knight, a King's Counsellor and Seneschal of Beaucaire,[2718] and the little page Louis de Coutes, now a noble of forty-two.[2719] Brother Pasquerel too was called; even in his old-age he remained superficial and credulous.[2720] And there was heard also the widow of Maitre Rene de Bouligny, Demoiselle Marguerite la Toroulde, who delicately and with a good grace related what she remembered.[2721]

[Footnote 2712: _Ibid._, pp. 1, 19.]

[Footnote 2713: _Ibid._, vol. iii, p. 202.]

[Footnote 2714: _Ibid._, pp. 2 _et seq._]

[Footnote 2715: _Ibid._, p. 16.]

[Footnote 2716: De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. vi, p. 43. P. Dupuy, _Histoire des Templiers_, 1658, in 4to. Cimber and Danjou, _Archives curieuses de l'histoire de France_, vol. i, pp. 137-157. (See also, Michelet, History of France, translated by G.H. Smith, vol. ii, p. 206.) Note--Alencon says to his English valet: "If I could have a powder that I wot of and put it in the vessel in which the King's sheets are washed, he should sleep sound enough [_dormir tout sec_]." _Trial of Alencon_ (W.S.).]

[Footnote 2717: _Trial_, vol. iii, p. 90.]

[Footnote 2718: _Ibid._, p. 209.]

[Footnote 2719: _Ibid._, p. 65.]

[Footnote 2720: _Ibid._, p. 100.]

[Footnote 2721: _Ibid._, p. 85.]

Care was taken not to summon the Lord Archbishop of Rouen, Messire Raoul Roussel, as a witness of the actual incidents of the trial, albeit he had sat in judgment on the Maid, side by side with my Lord of Beauvais. As for the Vice Inquisitor of Religion, Brother Jean Lemaistre, he might have been dead, so completely was he ignored. Nevertheless, certain of the assessors were called: Jean Beaupere, canon of Paris, of Besancon and of Rouen; Jean de Mailly, Lord Bishop of Noyon; Jean Lefevre, Bishop of Demetriade; divers canons of Rouen, sundry ecclesiastics who appeared some unctuous, others stern and frowning;[2722] and, finally, the most illustrious Thomas de Courcelles, who, after having been the most laborious and assiduous collaborator of the Bishop of Beauvais, recalled nothing when he came before the commissioners for the revision.[2723]

[Footnote 2722: _Ibid._, vol. ii, pp. 20, 21, 161; vol. iii, pp. 43, 53, _passim_.]

[Footnote 2723: _Trial_, vol. iii, pp. 44, 56. J. Quicherat, _Apercus nouveaux_, p. 106.]

Among those who had been most zealous to procure Jeanne's condemnation were those who were now most eagerly labouring for her rehabilitation. The registrars of the Lord Bishop of Beauvais, the Boisguillaumes, the Manchons, the Taquels, all those ink-pots of the Church who had been used for her death sentence, worked wonders when that sentence had to be annulled; all the zeal they had displayed in the institution of the trial they now displayed in its revision; they were prepared to discover in it every possible flaw.[2724]

[Footnote 2724: _Ibid._, vol. ii, pp. 161; vol. iii, pp. 41, 42, 195.]

And in what a poor and paltry tone did these benign fabricators of legal artifices denounce the cruel iniquity which they had themselves perpetrated in due form! Among them was the Usher, Jean Massieu, a dissolute priest,[2725] of scandalous morals, but a kindly fellow for all that, albeit somewhat crafty and the inventor of a thousand ridiculous stories against Cauchon, as if the old Bishop were not black enough already.[2726] The revision commissioners produced a couple of sorry monks, Friar Martin Ladvenu and Friar Isambart de la Pierre, from the monastery of the preaching friars at Rouen. They wept in a heart-rending manner as they told of the pious end of that poor Maid, whom they had declared a heretic, then a relapsed heretic, and had finally burned alive. There was not one of the clerks charged with the examination of Jeanne but was touched to the heart at the memory of so saintly a damsel.[2727]

[Footnote 2725: De Beaurepaire, _Notes sur les juges_.]

[Footnote 2726: _Trial_, vol. ii, pp. 329 _et seq._]

[Footnote 2727: _Trial_, vol. ii, pp. 363 _et seq._, 434 _et seq._]

Huge piles of memoranda drawn up by doctors of high repute, canonists, theologians and jurists, both French and foreign, were furnished for the trial. Their chief object was to establish by scholastic reasoning that Jeanne had submitted her deeds and sayings to the judgment of the Church and of the Holy Father. These doctors proved that the judges of 1431 had been very subtle and Jeanne very simple. Doubtless, it was the best way to make out that she had submitted to the Church; but they over-reached themselves and made her too simple. According to them she was absolutely ignorant, almost an idiot, understanding nothing, imagining that the clerics who examined her in themselves alone constituted the Church Militant. This had been the impression of the doctors on the French side in 1429. _La Pucelle_, "_une puce_," said the Lord Archbishop of Embrun.[2728]

[Footnote 2728: Lanery d'Arc, _Memoires et consultations en faveur de Jeanne d'Arc_, p. 576.]

But there was another reason for making her appear as weak and imbecile as possible. Such a representation exalted the power of God, who through her had restored the King of France to his inheritance.

Declarations confirming this view of the Maid were obtained by the commissioners from most of the witnesses. She was simple, she was very simple, she was absolutely simple, they repeated one after the other. And they all in the same words added: "Yes, she was simple, save in deeds of war, wherein she was well skilled."[2729] Then the captains said how clever she was in placing cannon, albeit they knew well to the contrary. But how could she have failed to be well versed in deeds of war, since God himself led her against the English? And in this possession of the art of war by an unskilled girl lay the miracle.

[Footnote 2729: _Trial_, vol. iii, pp. 32, 87, 100, 116, 119, 120, 126, 128 _et passim_.]

The Grand Inquisitor of France, Jean Brehal, in his reminiscence enumerates the reasons for believing that Jeanne came from God. One of the proofs which seems to have struck him most forcibly is that her coming is foretold in the prophecies of Merlin, the Magician.[2730]

[Footnote 2730: Lanery d'Arc, _Memoires et consultations_, p. 402.]

Believing that he could prove from one of Jeanne's answers that her first apparitions were in her thirteenth year, Brother Jean Brehal argues that the fact is all the more credible seeing that this number 13, composed of 3, which indicates the Blessed Trinity, and of 10, which expresses the perfect observation of the Decalogue, is marvellously favourable to divine visitations.[2731]

[Footnote 2731: _Trial_, vol. iii, p. 398.]

On the 16th of June, 1455, the sentence of 1431 was declared unjust, unfounded, iniquitous. It was nullified and pronounced invalid.

Thus was honour restored to the messenger of the coronation, thus was her memory reconciled with the Church. But that abundant source whence on the appearance of this child there had flowed so many pious legends and heroic fables was henceforth dried up. The rehabilitation trial added little to the popular legend. It rendered it possible to connect with Jeanne's death the usual incidents narrated of the martyrdom of virgins, such as the dove taking flight from the stake, the name of Jesus written in letters of flame, the heart intact in the ashes.[2732] The miserable deaths of the wicked judges were insisted upon. True it is that Jean d'Estivet, the Promoter, was found dead in a dove-cot,[2733] that Nicolas Midi was attacked by leprosy, that Pierre Cauchon died when he was being shaved.[2734] But, among those who aided and accompanied the Maid, more than one came to a bad end. Sire Robert de Baudricourt, who had sent Jeanne to the King, died in prison, excommunicated for having laid waste the lands of the chapter of Toul.[2735] The Marechal de Rais was sentenced to death.[2736] The Duke of Alencon, convicted of high treason, was pardoned only to fall under a new condemnation and to die in captivity.[2737]

[Footnote 2732: _Trial_, vol. iii, p. 355.]

[Footnote 2733: _Ibid._, p. 162.]

[Footnote 2734: _Gallia Christiana_, vol. xi, col. 793.]

[Footnote 2735: _Histoire ecclesiastique et politique de la ville et du diocese de Toul_, 1707, p. 529.]

[Footnote 2736: Abbe Bossard, _Gilles de Rais_, pp. 333 _et seq._]

[Footnote 2737: De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. vi, p. 197.]

Two years after Charles VII had ordered the preliminary inquiry into the trial of 1431, a woman, following the example of la Dame des Armoises, passed herself off as the Maid Jeanne.

At this time there lived in the little town of Sarmaize, between the Marne and the Meuse, two cousins german of the Maid, Poiresson and Perinet, both sons of the late Jean de Vouthon, Isabelle Romee's brother, who in his lifetime had been a thatcher by trade. Now, on a day in 1452, it befell that the cure of Notre Dame de Sarmaize, Simon Fauchard, being in the market-house of the town, there came to him a woman dressed as a youth who asked him to play at tennis with her.

He consented, and when they had begun their game the woman said to him, "Say boldly that you have played tennis with the Maid." And at these words Simon Fauchard was right joyful.

The woman afterwards went to the house of Perinet, the carpenter, and said, "I am the Maid; I come to visit my Cousin Henri."

Perinet, Poiresson, and Henri de Vouthon made her good cheer and kept her in their house, where she ate and drank as she pleased.[2738]

[Footnote 2738: Inquiry of 1476, in G. de Braux and E. de Bouteiller, _Nouvelles recherches_, p. 10.]

Then, when she had had enough, she went away.

Whence came she? No one knows. Whither did she go? She may probably be recognised in an adventuress, who not long afterwards, with her hair cut short and a hood on her head, wearing doublet and hose, wandered through Anjou, calling herself Jeanne the Maid. While the doctors and masters, engaged in the revision of the trial, were gathering evidence of Jeanne's life and death from all parts of the kingdom, this false Jeanne was finding credence with many folk. But she became involved in difficulties with a certain Dame of Saumoussay,[2739] and was cast into the prison of Saumur, where she lay for three months. At the end of this time, having been banished from the dominions of the good King Rene, she married one Jean Douillet; and, by a document dated the 3rd day of February, 1456, she received permission to return to Saumur, on condition of living there respectably and ceasing to wear man's apparel.[2740]

[Footnote 2739: Or Chaumussay. Lecoy de la Marche, _Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc_, Paris, 1871, in 8vo, p. 19.]

[Footnote 2740: Lecoy de la Marche, _Une fausse Jeanne d'Arc_, in _Revue des questions historiques_, October, 1871, p. 576. _Le roi Rene_, Paris, 1875, vol. i, pp. 308-327; vol. ii, pp. 281-283.]

About this time there came to Laval in the diocese of Le Mans, a damsel between eighteen and twenty-two, who was a native of a neighbouring place called Chasse-les-Usson. Her father's name was Jean Feron and she was commonly called Jeanne la Ferone.

She was inspired from heaven, and the names Jesus and Mary were for ever on her lips; yet the devil cruelly tormented her. The Dame de Laval, mother of the Lords Andre and Guy, being now very aged, marvelled at the piety and the sufferings of the holy damsel; and she sent her to Le Mans, to the Bishop.

Since 1449, the see of Le Mans had been held by Messire Martin Berruyer of Touraine. In his youth he had been professor of philosophy and rhetoric at the University of Paris. Later he had devoted himself to theology and had become one of the directors of the College of Navarre. Although he was infirm with age, his learning was such that he was consulted by the commissioners for the rehabilitation trial,[2741] whereupon he drew up a memorandum touching the Maid. Herein he believes her to have been verily sent of God because she was abject and very poor and appeared well nigh imbecile in everything that did not concern her mission. Messire Martin argues that it was by reason of the King's virtues that God had vouchsafed to him the help of the Maid.[2742] Such an idea found favour with the theologians of the French party.

[Footnote 2741: _Trial_, vol. iii, p. 314, note 1. _Gallia Christiana_, vol. ii, fol. 518. Du Boulay, _Hist. Univ. Paris_, vol. v, p. 905. Le P. Ayroles, _La Pucelle devant l'eglise de son temps_, pp. 403, 404.]

[Footnote 2742: Lanery d'Arc, _Memoires et consultations_, p. 247.]

The Lord Bishop, Martin Berruyer, heard Jeanne la Ferone in confession, renewed her baptism, confirmed her in the faith and gave her the name of Marie, in gratitude for the abounding grace which the most Holy Virgin, Mother of God, had granted to his servant.

This maid was subject to the violent attacks of evil spirits. Many a time did my Lord of Mans behold her covered with bleeding wounds, struggling in the grasp of the enemy, and on several occasions he delivered her by means of exorcisms. Greatly was he edified by this holy damsel, who made known unto him marvellous secrets, who abounded in pious revelations and noble Christian utterances. Wherefore in praise of La Ferone he wrote many letters[2743] to princes and communities of the realm.

[Footnote 2743: Du Clercq, _Memoires_, ed. Reiffenberg, Brussels, 1823, vol. iii, pp. 98 _et seq._ Jean de Roye, _Chronique scandaleuse_, ed. Bernard de Mandrot, 1894, vol. i, pp. 13, 14. _Chronique de Bourdigne_, ed. Quatrebarbes, vol. ii, p. 212. Dom Piolin, _Histoire de l'eglise du Mans_, vol. v, p. 163.]

The Queen of France, who was then very old and whose husband had long ago deserted her, heard tell of the Maid of Le Mans, and wrote to Messire Martin Berruyer, requesting him to make the damsel known unto her.

Thus there befel, what we have seen happening over and over again in this history, that when a devout person, leading a contemplative life uttered prophecies, those in places of authority grew curious concerning her and desired to submit her to the judgment of the Church that they might know whether the goodness that appeared in her were true or false. Certain officers of the King visited La Ferone at Le Mans.

As revelations touching the realm of France had been vouchsafed to her, she spoke to them the following words:

"Commend me very humbly to the King and bid him recognise the grace which God granteth unto him, and lighten the burdens of his people."

In the December of 1460, she was summoned before the Royal Council, which was then sitting at Tours, while the King, who was sick of an ulcer in the leg, was residing in the Chateau of Les Montils.[2744] The Maid of Le Mans was examined in like manner as the Maid Jeanne had been, but the result was unfavourable; she was found wanting in everything. Brought before the ecclesiastical court she was convicted of imposture. It appeared that she was no maid, but was living in concubinage with a cleric, that certain persons in the service of my Lord of Le Mans instructed her in what she was to say, and that such was the origin of the revelations she made to the Reverend Father in God, Messire Martin Berruyer, under the seal of the confession. Convicted of being a hypocrite, an idolatress, an invoker of demons, a witch, a magician, lascivious, dissolute, an enchantress, a mine of falsehood, she was condemned to have a fool's cap put on her head and to be preached at in public, in the towns of Le Mans, Tours and Laval. On the 2nd of May, 1461, she was exhibited to the folk at Tours, wearing a paper cap and over her head a scroll on which her deeds were set forth in lines of Latin and of French. Maitre Guillaume de Chateaufort, Grand Master of the Royal College of Navarre, preached to her. Then she was cast into close confinement in a prison, there to weep over her sins for the space of seven years, eating the bread of sorrow and drinking the water of affliction;[2745] at the end of which time she rented a house of ill fame.[2746]

[Footnote 2744: Chastellain, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, vol. iii, p. 444.]

[Footnote 2745: Jacques du Clercq, _Memoires_, vol. iii, pp. 107 _et seq._]

[Footnote 2746: Antoine du Faur, _Livre des femmes celebres_, in _Trial_, vol. v, p. 336.]

On Wednesday, the 22nd of July, 1461, covered with ulcers internal and external, believing himself poisoned and perhaps not without reason, Charles VII died, in the fifty-ninth year of his age, in his Chateau of Mehun-sur-Yevre.[2747]

[Footnote 2747: De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. vi, pp. 442, 451. _Chronique Martiniane_, ed. P. Champion, p. 110.]

On Thursday, the 6th of August, his body was borne to the Church of Saint-Denys in France and placed in a chapel hung with velvet; the nave was draped with black satin, the vault was covered with blue cloth embroidered with flowers-de-luce.[2748] During the ceremony, which took place on the following day, a funeral oration was delivered on Charles VII. The preacher was no less a personage than the most highly renowned professor at the University of Paris, the doctor, who according to the Princes of the Roman Church was ever aimable and modest, he who had been the stoutest defender of the liberties of the Gallican Church, the ecclesiastic who, having declined a Cardinal's hat, bore to the threshold of an illustrious old age none other title than that of Dean of the Canons of Notre Dame de Paris, Maitre Thomas de Courcelles.[2749] Thus it befell that the assessor of Rouen, who had been the most bitterly bent on procuring Jeanne's cruel condemnation, celebrated the memory of the victorious King whom the Maid had conducted to his solemn coronation.

[Footnote 2748: Mathieu d'Escouchy, vol. ii, p. 422. Jean Chartier, _Chronique_, vol. iii, pp. 114-121.]

[Footnote 2749: _Gallia Christiana_, vol. vii, col. 151 and 214. Hardouin, _Acta Conciliorum_, vol. ix, col. 1423. De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. vi, p. 444.]

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I

LETTER FROM DOCTOR G. DUMAS

My Dear Master,--You ask for my medical opinion in the case of Jeanne d'Arc. Had I been able to examine it at my leisure with the Doctors Tiphaine and Delachambre, who were summoned before the tribunal at Rouen, I might have found it difficult to come to any definite conclusion. And even more difficult do I find it now, when my diagnosis must necessarily be retrospective and based upon examinations conducted by persons who never dreamed of attempting to discover the existence of any nervous disease. However since they ascribed what we now call disease to the influence of the devil, their questions are not without significance for us. Therefore with many reservations I will endeavour to answer your question.

Of Jeanne's inherited constitution we know nothing; and of her personal antecedents we are almost entirely ignorant. Our only information concerning such matters comes from Jean d'Aulon, who, on the evidence of several women, states[2750] that she was never fully developed, a condition which frequently occurs in neurotic subjects.

[Footnote 2750: _Trial_, vol. iii. p. 219.]

We should, however, be unable to arrive at any conclusion concerning Jeanne's nervous constitution had not her judges, and in particular Maitre Jean Beaupere, in the numerous examinations to which they subjected her, elicited certain significant details on the subject of her hallucinations.

Maitre Beaupere begins by inquiring very judiciously whether Jeanne had fasted the day before she first heard her voices. Whence we infer that the interdependence of inanition and hallucinations was recognised by this illustrious professor of theology. Before condemning Jeanne as a witch he wanted to make sure that she was not merely suffering from weakness. Some time later we find Saint Theresa suspecting that the visions said to have been seen by a certain nun were merely the result of long fasting. Saint Theresa insisted on the nun's partaking of food, and the visions ceased.

Jeanne replies that she had only fasted since the morning, and Maitre Beaupere proceeds to ask:

_Q._ "In what direction did you hear the voice?"

_A._ "I heard it on the right, towards the church."

_Q._ "Was the voice accompanied by any light?"

_A._ "I seldom heard it without there being a light. This light appeared in the direction whence the voice came."[2751]

[Footnote 2751: _Trial_, vol. i, p. 52 and _passim_.]

We might wonder whether by the expression "_a droite_" (_a latere dextro_) Jeanne meant her own right side or the position of the church in relation to her; and in the latter case, the information would have no clinical significance; but the context leaves no doubt as to the veritable meaning of her words.

"How can you," urges Jean Beaupere, "see this light which you say appears to you, if it is on your right?"

If it had been merely a question of the situation of the church and not of Jeanne's own right side, she would only have had to turn her face to see the light in front of her, and Jean Beaupere's objection would have been pointless.

Consequently at about the age of thirteen, at the period of puberty, which for her never came, Jeanne would appear to have been subject on her right side to unilateral hallucinations of sight and hearing. Now Charcot[2752] considered unilateral hallucinations of sight to be common in cases of hysteria.[2753] He even thought that in hysterical subjects they are allied to a hemianaesthesia situated on the same side of the body, and which in Jeanne would be on the right side. Jeanne's trial might have proved the existence of this hemianaesthesia, an extremely significant symptom in the diagnosis of hysteria, if the judges had applied torture or merely had examined the skin of the subject in order to discover anaesthesia patches which were called marks of the devil.[2754] But from the merely oral examination which took place we can only draw inferences concerning Jeanne's general physical condition. In case excessive importance should be attached to such inferences I should add that in the diagnosis of hysteria contemporary neurologists pay less attention than did Charcot to unilateral hallucinations of sight.

[Footnote 2752: A famous French alienist (1825-1893).--W.S.]

[Footnote 2753: _Progres medical_, January 19, 1878.]

[Footnote 2754: The existence of patches devoid of feeling was considered in the Middle Ages to prove that the subject was a witch. Hence needles were run into the supposed witch. And if she felt them in every part of her body she was acquitted.--W.S.]

The other characteristics of Jeanne's hallucinations revealed by her examinations during the trial are no less interesting than these, although they do not lead to any more certain conclusions.

Those visions and voices, which the subject refers to an external source and which are so characteristic of hysterical hallucinations, proceed suddenly from the subconscious self. Jeanne's conscious self was so far from being prepared for her voices that she declares she was very much afraid when she first heard them: "I was thirteen when I heard a voice coming from God telling me to lead a good life. And the first time I was very much afraid. This voice came to me about noon; it was in the summer, in my father's garden."[2755]

[Footnote 2755: _Trial_, vol. i, p. 52.]

And then straightway the voice becomes imperative. It demands an obedience which is not refused: "It said to me: 'Go forth into France,' and I could no longer stay where I was."[2756]

[Footnote 2756: _Trial_, vol. i, p. 53.]

Her visions all occur in the same manner. They appeal to the senses in exactly the same way and are received by the Maid with equal credulity.

Finally, these hallucinations of hearing and of sight are soon associated with similar hallucinations of smell and touch, which serve to confirm Jeanne's belief in their reality.

_Q._ "Which part of Saint Catherine did you touch?"

_A._ "You will hear nothing more."

_Q._ "Did you kiss or embrace Saint Catherine or Saint Margaret?"

_A._ "I embraced them both."

_Q._ "In embracing them did you feel heat or anything?"

_A._ "I could not embrace them without feeling and touching them."[2757]

[Footnote 2757: _Trial_, vol. i, p. 186.]

Because they thus appeal to the senses and seem to possess a certain material reality, hysterical hallucinations make a profound and ineffaceable impression on those who experience them. The subjects speak of them as being actual and very striking facts. When they become accusers, as so many women do who claim to have been the victims of imaginary assaults, they support their assertions in the most energetic fashion.

Not only does Jeanne see, hear, smell and touch her saints, she joins the procession of angels they bring in their train. With them she performs actual deeds, as if there were perfect unity between her life and her hallucinations.

"I was in my lodging, in the house of a good woman, near the _chateau_ of Chinon, when the angel came. And then he and I went together to the King."

_Q._ "Was this angel alone?"

_A._ "This angel was with a goodly company of other angels.[2758] They were with him, but not every one saw them.... Some were very much alike; others were not, or at any rate not as I saw them. Some had wings. Certain even wore crowns, and in their company were Saint Catherine and Saint Margaret. With the angel aforesaid and with the other angels they went right into the King's chamber."

[Footnote 2758: According to the evidence of Maitre Pierre Maurice, at the condemnation trial (vol. i. p. 480), Jeanne must have seen the angels "in the form of certain infinitesimal things" (_sub specie quarumdam rerum minimarum_). This was also the character of the hallucinations experienced by Saint Rose of Lima ("Vie de Sainte Rose de Lima," by P. Leonard Hansen, p. 179).]

_Q._ "Tell us how the angel left you."

_A._ "He left me in a little chapel, and at his departure I was very sorrowful, and I even wept. Willingly would I have gone away with him; I mean my soul would have gone."[2759]

[Footnote 2759: _Trial_, vol. i, p. 144.]

In all these hallucinations there is the same objective clearness, the same subjective certitude as in toxic hallucinations; and this clearness, this certitude, may in Jeanne's case suggest hysteria.

But if in certain respects Jeanne resembles hysterical subjects, in others she differs from them. She seems early to have acquired an independence of her visions and an authority over them.

Without ever doubting their reality, she resists them and sometimes disobeys them, when, for example, in defiance of Saint Catherine, she leaps from her prison of Beaurevoir: "Well nigh every day Saint Catherine told me not to leap and that God would come to my aid, and also would succour those of Compiegne. And I said to Saint Catherine: 'Since God is to help those of Compiegne, I want to be with them.'"[2760]

[Footnote 2760: _Trial_, vol. i, p. 110.]

On another occasion she assumes such authority over her visions that she can make the two saints come at her bidding when they do not come of themselves.

_Q._ "Do you call these saints, or do they come without being called?"

_A._ "They often come without being called, and sometimes when they did not come I asked God to send them speedily."[2761]

[Footnote 2761: _Trial_, vol. i, p. 279 and _passim_.]

All this is not in the accepted manner of the hysterical, who are usually somewhat passive with regard to their nervous fits and hallucinations. But Jeanne's dominance over her visions is a characteristic I have noted in many of the higher mystics and in those who have attained notoriety. This kind of subject, after having at first passively submitted to his hysteria, afterwards uses it rather than submits to it, and finally by means of it attains in his ecstasy to that divine union after which he strives.

If Jeanne were hysterical, such a characteristic would help us to determine the part played by the neurotic side of her nature in the development of her character and in her life.

If there were any hysterical strain in her nature, then it was by means of this hysterical strain that the most secret sentiments of her heart took shape in the form of visions and celestial voices. Her hysteria became the open door by which the divine--or what Jeanne deemed the divine--entered into her life. It strengthened her faith and consecrated her mission; but in her intellect and in her will Jeanne remains healthy and normal. Nervous pathology can therefore cast but a feeble light on Jeanne's nature. It can reveal only one part of that spirit which your book resuscitates in its entirety. With the expression of my respectful admiration, believe me, my dear master,

DOCTOR G. DUMAS.

APPENDIX II

THE FARRIER OF SALON

Towards the end of the seventeenth century, there lived at Salon-en-Crau, near Aix, a farrier, one Francois Michel. He came of a respectable family. He himself had served in the cavalry regiment of the Chevalier de Grignan. He was held to be a sensible man, honest and devout. He was close on forty when, in February, 1697, he had a vision.

Returning to his home one evening, he beheld a spectre, holding a torch in its hand. This spectre said to him:

"Fear nothing. Go to Paris and speak to the King. If thou dost not obey this command thou shalt die. When thou shalt approach to within a league of Versailles, I will not fail to make known unto thee what things thou shalt say to his Majesty. Go to the Governor of thy province, who will order all that is necessary for thy journey."

The figure which thus addressed him was in the form of a woman. She wore a royal crown and a mantle embroidered with flowers-de-luce of gold, like the late Queen, Marie-Therese, who had died a holy death full fourteen years before.

The poor farrier was greatly afraid. He fell down at the foot of a tree, knowing not whether he dreamed or was awake. Then he went back to his house, and told no man of what he had seen.

Two days afterwards he passed the same spot. There again he beheld the same spectre, who repeated the same orders and the same threats. The farrier could no longer doubt the reality of what he saw; but as yet he could not make up his mind what to do.

A third apparition, more imperious and more importunate than the first, reduced him to obedience. He went to Aix, to the Governor of the province; he saw him and told him how he had been given a mission to speak to the King. The Governor at first paid no great heed to him. But the visionary's patient persistence could not fail to impress him. Moreover, since the King was personally concerned in the matter, it ought not to be entirely neglected. These considerations led the Governor to inquire from the magistrates of Salon touching the farrier's family and manner of life. The result of these inquiries was very favourable. Accordingly the Governor deemed it fitting to proceed forthwith to action. In those days no one was quite sure whether advice, very useful to the most Christian of Kings, might not be sent by some member of the Church Triumphant through the medium of a common artisan. Still less were they sure that some plot in which the welfare of the State was concerned might not be hatched under colour of an apparition. In both contingencies, the second of which was quite probable, it would be advisable to send Francois Michel to Versailles. And this was the decision arrived at by the Governor.

For the transport of Francois Michel he adopted measures at once sure and inexpensive. He confided him to an officer who was taking recruits in that direction. After having received the communion in the church of the Franciscans, who were edified by his pious bearing, the farrier set out on February 25 with his Majesty's young soldiers, with whom he travelled as far as La Ferte-sous-Jouarre. On his arrival at Versailles, he asked to see the King or at least one of his Ministers of State. He was directed to M. de Barbezieux, who, when he was still very young, had succeeded his father, M. de Louvois, and in that position had displayed some talent. But the good farrier declined to tell him anything, because he was not a Minister of State.

And it was true that Barbezieux, although a Minister, was not a Minister of State. But that a farrier from Provence should be capable of drawing such a distinction occasioned considerable surprise.

M. de Barbezieux doubtless did not evince such scorn for this compatriot of Nostradamus as would have been shown in his place by a man of broader mind. For he, like his father, was addicted to the practice of astrology, and he was always inquiring concerning his horoscope of a certain Franciscan friar who had predicted the hour of his death.

We do not know whether he gave the King a favourable report of the farrier, or whether the latter was admitted to the presence of M. de Pomponne, who was then at the head of the administration of Provence. But we do know that Louis XIV consented to see the man. He had him brought up the steps leading to the marble courtyard, and then granted him a lengthy audience in his private apartments.

On the morrow, as the King was coming down his private staircase on his way out hunting, he met Marshal de Duras, who was Captain of the King's bodyguard for the day. With his usual freedom of speech the Marshal spoke to the King of the farrier, using a common saying:

"Either the man is mad, or the King is not noble."

At these words the King, contrary to his usual habit, paused and turned to the Marshal de Duras:

"Then I am not noble," he said, "for I talked to him for a long time, and he spoke very sensibly; I assure you he is far from being mad."

The last words he uttered with so solemn a gravity that those who were present were astonished.

Persons who claim to be inspired are expected to show some sign of their mission. In a second interview, Francois Michel showed the King a sign in fulfilment of a promise he had given. He reminded him of an extraordinary circumstance which the son of Anne of Austria believed known to himself alone. Louis XIV himself admitted it, but for the rest preserved a profound silence touching this interview.

Saint Simon, always eager to collect every court rumour, believed it was a question of some phantom, which more than twenty years before had appeared to Louis XIV in the Forest of Saint-Germain.

For the third and last time the King received the farrier of Salon.

The courtiers displayed so much curiosity in this visionary that he had to be shut up in the monastery of Des Recollets. There the little Princess of Savoy, who was shortly to marry the Duke of Burgundy, came to see him with several lords and ladies of the court.

He appeared slow to speak, good, simple, and humble. The King ordered him to be furnished with a fine horse, clothes, and money; then he sent him back to Provence.

Public opinion was divided on the subject of the apparition which had appeared to the farrier and the mission he had received from it. Most people believed that he had seen the spirit of Marie-Therese; but some said it was Nostradamus.[2762]

[Footnote 2762: Michel de Nostre-Dame, called Nostradamus (1503-1566), a Provencal astrologer, whose prophecies were published under the title of "Centuries." He was invited to the French court by Catherine de' Medici, and became the doctor of Charles IX.--W.S.]

It was only at Salon, where he slept in the church of the Franciscans, that this astrologer was absolutely believed in. His "Centuries," which appeared at Paris and at Lyon in no less than ten editions in the course of one century, entertained the credulous throughout the kingdom. In 1693, there had just been published a book of the prophecies of Nostradamus showing how they had been fulfilled in history from the reign of Henry II down to that of Louis the Great.

It came to be believed that in the following mysterious quatrain the farrier's coming had been prophesied:

"Le penultiesme du surnom du Prophete, Prendra Diane pour son iour et repos: Loing vaguera par frenetique teste, En delivrant un grand peuple d'impos."[2763]

[Footnote 2763: The last syllable but one of the surname of the Prophet will Diane take for her day and her rest. Far shall wander that inspired one delivering a great nation from the burden of taxes.]

An attempt was made to apply these obscure lines to the poor prophet of Salon. In the first line he is said to figure as one of the twelve minor prophets, Micah, which name is closely allied to Michel. In the second line Diane was said to be the mother of the farrier, who was certainly called by that name. But if the line means anything at all, it is more likely to refer to the day of the moon, Monday. It was carefully pointed out that in the third line _frenetique_ means not _mad_ but _inspired_. The fourth and only intelligible line would suggest that the spectre bade Michel ask the King to lessen the taxes and dues which then weighed so heavily on the good folk of town and country:

_En delivrant un grand peuple d'impos._ This was enough to make the farrier popular and to cause those unhappy sufferers to centre in this poor windbag their hopes for a better future. His portrait was engraved in copper-plate, and below it was written the quatrain of Nostradamus. M. d'Argenson,[2764] who was at the head of the police department, had these portraits seized. They were suppressed, so says the _Gazette d'Amsterdam_, on account of the last line of the quatrain written beneath the portrait, the line which runs: _En delivrant un grand peuple d'impos_. Such an expression was hardly likely to please the court.

[Footnote 2764: Marc Rene Marquis d'Argenson (1652-1721), after being Lieutenant General de la Police at Paris, became, from 1718-1720, President du Conseil des Finances and Garde des Sceaux.--W.S.]

No one ever knew exactly what was the mission the farrier received from his spectre. Subtle folk suspected one of Madame de Maintenon's intrigues. She had a friend at Marseille, a Madame Arnoul, who was as ugly as sin, it was said, and yet who managed to make men fall in love with her. They thought that this Madame Arnoul had shown Marie-Therese to the good man of Salon in order to induce the King to live honourably with widow Scarron. But in 1697 widow Scarron had been married to Louis for twelve years at least; and one cannot see why ghostly aid should have been necessary to attach the old King to her.

On his return to his native town, Francois Michel shoed horses as before.

He died at Lancon, near Salon, on December 10, 1726.[2765]

[Footnote 2765: _Gazette d'Amsterdam_, March-May, 1697; _Annales de la cour et de Paris_ (vol. ii. pp. 204, 219); _Theatrum Europaeum_ (vol. xv. pp. 359-360); _Memoires de Sourches_ (vol. v. pp. 260, 263); _Lettres de Madame Dunoyer_ (Letter xxvi); _Saint Simon, Memoires_, ed. Regnier (_Collection des Grands Ecrivains de la France_), vol. vi. pp. 222, 228, 231; Appendix X, p. 545; _Memoires du duc de Luynes_, vol. x. pp. 410, 412--Abbe Proyart, _Vie du duc de Bourgogne_ (ed. 1782), vol. i. pp. 978, 981.]

APPENDIX III

MARTIN DE GALLARDON

Ignace Thomas Martin was by calling a husbandman. A native of Gallardon in Eure-et-Loir, he dwelt there with his wife and four children in the beginning of the nineteenth century. Those who knew him tell us that he was of average height, with brown straight hair, a calm glance, a thin countenance and an air of quiet and assurance. A pencil portrait, which his son, M. le Docteur Martin, has kindly sent me, gives a more exact idea of the visionary. The portrait, which is in profile, presents a forehead curiously high and straight, a long narrow head, round eyes, broad nostrils, a compressed mouth, a protruding chin, hollow cheeks and an air of austerity. He is dressed as a _bourgeois_, with a collar and white cravat.

According to the evidence of his brother, a man both physically and mentally sound, his was the gentlest of natures; he never sought to attract attention; in his regular piety there was nothing ecstatic. Both the mayor and the priest of Gallardon confirmed this description. They agreed in representing him to have been a good simple creature, with an intellect well-balanced although not very active.

In 1816 he was thirty-three. On January 15 in this year he was alone in his field, over which he was spreading manure, when in his ear he heard a voice which had not been preceded by footsteps. Then he turned his head in the direction of the voice and saw a figure which alarmed him. In comparison with human size it was but slight; its countenance, which was very thin, dazzled by its unnatural whiteness. It was wearing a high hat and a frock-coat of a light colour, with laced shoes.

It said in a kindly tone: "You must go to the King; you must warn him that his person is in danger, that wicked people are seeking to overthrow his Government."

It added further recommendations to Louis XVIII touching the necessity of having an efficient police, of keeping holy the Sabbath, of ordering public prayers and of suppressing the disorders of the Carnival. If such measures be neglected, it said, "France will fall into yet greater misfortunes." All this was doubtless nothing more or less than what M. La Perruque, Priest of Gallardon, had a hundred times repeated from the pulpit on Sunday.

Martin replied:

"Since you know so much about it, why don't you perform your errand yourself? Why do you appeal to a poor man like me who knows not how to express himself?"

Then the unknown replied to Martin:

"It is not I who will go, but you; do as I command you."

As soon as he had uttered these words, his feet rose from the ground, his body bent, and with this double movement he vanished.

From this time onwards, Martin was haunted by the mysterious being. One day, having gone down into his cellar, he found him there. On another occasion, during vespers, he saw him in church, near the holy water stoup, in a devout attitude. When the service was over, the unknown accompanied Martin on his way home and again commanded him to go and see the King. The farmer told his relatives who were with him, but neither of them had seen or heard anything.

Tormented by these apparitions, Martin communicated them to his priest, M. La Perruque. He, being certain of the good faith of his parishioner and deeming that the case ought to be submitted to the diocesan authority, sent the visionary to the Bishop of Versailles. The Bishop was then M. Louis Charrier de la Roche, a priest who in the days of the Revolution had taken the oath to the Republic. He resolved to subject Martin to a thorough examination; and from the first he told him to ask the unknown what was his name, and who it was who sent him.

But when the messenger in the light-coloured frock-coat appeared again, he declared that his name must remain unknown.

"I come," he added, "from him who has sent me, and he who has sent me is above me."

He may have wished to conceal his name; but at least he did not conceal his views; the vexation he displayed on the escape of La Valette[2766] proved that in politics he was an ultra Royalist of the most violent type.

[Footnote 2766: Antoine Marie Chamans, Comte de La Valette (1769-1830), was a French general during the first empire. Having been arrested in 1815 and condemned to death, he was saved by his wife.--W.S.]

Meanwhile the Comte de Breteuil, Prefect of Eure-et-Loir, had been told of the visionary at the same time as the Bishop. He also questioned Martin. He expected to find him a nervous, agitated person; but when he found him tranquil, speaking simply, but with logical sequence and precision, he was very astonished.

Like M. l'Abbe La Perruque he deemed the matter sufficiently important to bring before the higher authorities. Accordingly he sent Martin, under the escort of a lieutenant of _gendarmerie_, to the Ministre de la Police Generale.

Having reached Paris on March 8, Martin lodged with the _gendarme_ at the Hotel de Calais, in the Rue Montmartre. They occupied a double-bedded room. One morning, when Martin was in bed, he beheld an apparition and told Lieutenant Andre, who could see nothing, although it was broad daylight. Indeed, Martin's visitations became so frequent that they ceased to cause him either surprise or concern. It was only to the abrupt disappearance of the unknown that he could never grow accustomed. The voice continued to give the same command. One day it told him that if it were not obeyed France would not know peace until 1840.

In 1816 the Ministre de la Police Generale was the Comte Decazes who was afterwards created a duke. He was in the King's confidence. But he knew that the extreme Royalists were hatching plots against his royal master. Decazes wished to see the good man from Gallardon, suspecting doubtless, that he was but a tool in the hands of the Extremists. Martin was brought to the Minister, who questioned him and at once perceived that the poor creature was in no way dangerous. He spoke to him as he would to a madman, endeavouring to regard the subject of his mania as if it were real, and so he said:

"Don't be agitated; the man who has been troubling you is arrested; you will have nothing more to fear from him."

But these words did not produce the desired effect. Three or four hours after this interview, Martin again beheld the unknown, who, after speaking to him in his usual manner, said: "When you were told that I had been arrested, you were told a lie; he who said so has no power over me."

On Sunday, March 10, the unknown returned; and on that day he disclosed the matter concerning which the Bishop of Versailles had inquired, and which he had said at first he would never reveal.

"I am," he declared, "the Archangel Raphael, an angel of great renown in the presence of God, and I have received power to afflict France with all manner of suffering."

Three days later, Martin was shut up in Charenton on the certificate of Doctor Pinel, who stated him to be suffering from intermittent mania with alienation of mind.

He was treated in the kindest manner and was even permitted to enjoy some appearance of liberty. Pinel himself originated the humane treatment of the insane. Martin in the asylum was not forsaken by the blessed Raphael. On Friday, the 15th, as the peasant was tying his shoe laces, the Archangel in his frock-coat of a light colour, spoke to him these words:

"Have faith in God. If France persists in her incredulity, the misfortunes I have predicted will happen. Moreover, if they doubt the truth of your visions, they have but to cause you to be examined by doctors in theology."

These words Martin repeated to M. Legros; Director of the Royal Institution of Charenton, and asked him what a doctor in theology was. He did not know the meaning of the term. In the same manner, when he was at Gallardon he had asked the priest, M. La Perruque, the meaning of certain expressions the voice had used. For example, he did not understand the wild frenzy of France [_le delvie de la France_] nor the evils to which she would fall a victim [_elle serait en proie_]. But there is nothing that need puzzle us in such ignorance, if it really existed. Martin may well have remembered the words he did not understand and which he afterwards attributed to his Archangel still without understanding them.

The visions recurred at brief intervals. On Sunday, March 31, the Archangel appeared to him in the garden, took his hand, which he pressed affectionately, opened his coat and displayed a bosom of so dazzling a whiteness that Martin could not bear to gaze on it. Then he took off his hat.

"Behold my forehead," he said, "and give heed that it beareth not the mark of the beast whereby the fallen angels were sealed."

Louis XVIII expressed a desire to see Martin and to question him. The King, like his favourite Minister, believed the visionary to be a tool in the hands of the extreme party.

On Tuesday, April 2, Martin was taken to the Tuileries and brought into the King's closet, where was also M. Decazes. As soon as the King saw the farmer, he said to him: "Martin, I salute you."

Then he signed to his Minister to withdraw. Thereupon Martin, according to his own telling, repeated to the King all that the Archangel had revealed to him, and disclosed to Louis XVIII sundry secret matters concerning the years he had spent in exile; finally he made known to him certain plots which had been formed against his person. Then the King, profoundly agitated and in tears, raised his hands and his eyes to heaven and said to Martin:

"Martin, these are things which must never be known save to you and to me."

The visionary promised him absolute secrecy.

Such was the interview of April 2, according to the account given of it by Martin, who then, under the influence of M. La Perruque's sermons, was an infatuated Royalist. It would be interesting to know more of this priest whose inspiration is obvious throughout the whole story. Louis XVIII agreed with M. Decazes that the man was quite harmless; and he was sent back to his plough.

Later, the agents of one of those false dauphins so numerous under the Restoration, got hold of Martin and made use of him in their own interest. After Louis XVIII's death, under the influence of these adventurers, the poor man, reconstituting the story of his interview with the late King, introduced into it other revelations he claimed to have received and completely changed the whole character of the incident. In this second version the passionate Royalist of 1816 was transformed into an accusing prophet, who came to the King's own palace to denounce him as a usurper and a regicide, forbidding him in God's name to be crowned at Reims.

Such ramblings I cannot relate at length. They are to be found fully detailed in the book of M. Paul Marin. The author of this work would have done well to indicate that these follies were suggested to the unhappy man by the partisans of Naundorf, who was passing himself off as the Duke of Normandy, who had escaped from the Temple.

Thomas Ignace Martin died at Chartres in 1834. It is alleged, but it has never been proved, that he was poisoned.[2767]

[Footnote 2767: _Rapport adresse a S. Ex. le Ministre de la Police Generale sur l'etat du nomme Martin, envoye par son ordre a la maison royale de Charenton, le 13 Mars, 1816, par MM. Pinel, medecin en chef de l'hopital de la Salpetriere, et Royer-Collard, medecin en chef de la maison royale de Charenton, et l'un et l'autre professeurs a la faculte de medecine de Paris._ Inscribed at the end with the date--Paris, 6 May, 1816--39 pages in 4'o MS. in the library of the author. Le Capitaine Paul Marin, _Thomas Martin de Gallardon Les Medecins et les thaumaturges du XIX'e siecle_, Paris, s.d. in 18'o. _Memoires de la Comtesse de Boignes_, edited by Charles Nicoullaud, Paris, 1907, vol. iii. pp. 355 and _passim_.]

APPENDIX IV

ICONOGRAPHICAL NOTE

There is no authentic picture of Jeanne. From her we know that at Arras she saw in the hands of a Scotsman a picture in which she was represented on her knees presenting a letter to her King. From her we know also that she never caused to be made either image or painting of herself, and that she was not aware of the existence of any such image or painting. The portrait painted by the Scotsman, which was doubtless very small, is unfortunately lost and no copy of it is known.[2768] The slight pen-and-ink figure, drawn on a register of May 10, 1429, by a clerk of the Parlement of Paris, who had never seen the Maid, must be regarded as the mere scribbling of a scribe who was incapable of even designing a good initial letter.[2769] I shall not attempt to reconstruct the iconography of the Maid.[2770] The bronze equestrian statue in the Cluny Museum produces a grotesque effect that one is tempted to believe deliberate, if one may ascribe such an intention to an old sculptor. It dates from the reign of Charles VIII. It is a Saint George or a Saint Maurice, which, at a time doubtless quite recent, was taken to represent the Maid. Between the legs of the miserable jade, on which the figure is mounted, was engraved the inscription: _La pucelle dorlians_, a description which would not have been employed in the fifteenth century.[2771] About 1875, the Cluny Museum exhibited another statuette, slightly larger, in painted wood, which was also believed to be fifteenth century, and to represent Jeanne d'Arc. It was relegated to the store-room, when it turned out to be a bad seventeenth-century Saint Maurice from a church at Montargis.[2772] Any saint in armour is frequently described as a Jeanne d'Arc. This is what happened to a small fifteenth-century head wearing a helmet, found buried in the ground at Orleans, broken off from a statue and still bearing traces of painting: a work in good style and with a charming expression.[2773] I have not patience to relate how many initial letters of antiphonaries and sixteenth-, seventeenth- and even eighteenth-century miniatures have been touched up or repainted and passed off as true and ancient representations of Jeanne. Many of them I have had the opportunity of seeing.[2774] On the other hand, if they were not so well known, it would give me pleasure to recall certain manuscripts of the fifteenth century, which, like _Le Champion des Dames_ and _Les Vigiles de Charles VII_, contain miniatures in which the Maid is portrayed according to the fancy of the illuminator. Such pictures are interesting because they reveal her as she was imagined by those who lived during her lifetime or shortly afterwards. It is not their merit that appeals to us; they possess none; and in no way do they suggest Jean Foucquet.[2775]

[Footnote 2768: _Trial_, vol. i, pp. 100, 292.]

[Footnote 2769: There is a wood engraving of this figure in Wallon, _Jeanne d'Arc_, p. 95.]

[Footnote 2770: E. de Bouteiller and G. de Braux, _Notes iconographiques sur Jeanne d'Arc_, Paris and Orleans, 1879, in 18'o royal paper.]

[Footnote 2771: Reproduced in many works, notably opposite p. 17 in the book of E. de Bouteiller and G. de Braux, referred to above.]

[Footnote 2772: _Ibid._, see woodcut opposite p. 8.]

[Footnote 2773: In the Orleans Museum. A copper-plate engraving by M. Georges Lavalley, in the _Jeanne d'Arc_, of M. Raoul Bergot, Tours, s.d. large 8'o.]

[Footnote 2774: Of this class of so-called portrait, I will merely mention the miniature which serves as frontispiece to vol. iv. of _La Vrai Jeanne d'Arc_, of P. Ayroles, Paris, 1898, in large 8'o, and the miniature of the Spetz Collection, reproduced in the _Jeanne d'Arc_ of Canon Henri Debout, vol. ii. p. 103 (also in _The Maid of France_ by Andrew Lang, 1908. W.S.).]

[Footnote 2775: _Le champion des dames_, MS. of the fifteenth century; _Bibl. nat._, fonds francais, No. 841; Martial d'Auvergne, MS. of the end of the fifteenth century, fonds francais, No. 5054. An initial of a fifteenth-century Latin MS., _Bibl. nat._, No. 14665.]

While the Maid lived, and especially while she was in captivity, the French hung her picture in churches.[2776] In the Museum of Versailles there is a little painting on wood which is said to be one of those votive pictures. It represents the Virgin with the Child Jesus, having Saint Michael on her right and Jeanne d'Arc on her left.[2777] It is of Italian workmanship and very roughly executed. Jeanne's head, which has disappeared beneath the blows of some hard-pointed instrument, must have been execrably drawn, if we may judge from the others remaining on this panel. All four figures are represented with a scrolled and beaded nimbus, which would have certainly been condemned by the clerics of Paris and Rouen. And indeed others less strict might accuse the painter of idolatry when he exalted to the left hand of the Virgin, to be equal with the Prince of Heavenly Hosts, a mere creature of the Church Militant.

[Footnote 2776: _Trial_, vol. i, p. 100. N. Valois, _Un nouveau temoignage sur Jeanne d'Arc_, pp. 8, 13.]

[Footnote 2777: Reproduced in chromo in Wallon's _Jeanne d'Arc_.]

Standing, her head, neck, and shoulders covered with a kind of furred hood and tippet fringed with black, her gauntlets and shoes of mail, girt above her red tunic with a belt of gold, Jeanne may be recognised by her name inscribed over her head, and also by the white banner, embroidered with _fleurs-de-lis_, which she raises in her right hand, and by her silver shield, embossed in the German style; on the shield is a sword bearing on its point a crown. A three-lined inscription in French is on the steps of the throne, whereon sits the Virgin Mary. Although the inscription is three parts effaced and almost unintelligible, with the aid of my learned friend, M. Pierre de Nolhac, Director of the Museum of Versailles, I have succeeded in deciphering a few words. These would convey the idea that the inscription consisted of prayers and wishes for the salvation of Jeanne, who had fallen into the hands of the enemy. It would appear therefore that we have here one of those _ex voto_ hung in the churches of France during the captivity of the Maid. In such a case the nimbus round the head of a living person and the isolated position of Jeanne would be easily explained; it is possible that certain excellent Frenchmen, thinking no evil, adapted to their own use some picture which originally represented the Virgin between two personages of the Church Triumphant. By a few touches they transformed one of these personages into the Maid of God. In so small a panel they could find no place more suitable to her mortal state, none like those generally occupied at the feet of the Virgin and saints by the kneeling donors of pictures. This too might explain perhaps why Saint Michael, the Virgin and the Maid have their names inscribed above them. Over the head of the Maid we read _ane darc_. This form _Darc_ may have been used in 1430.[2778] In the inscription on the steps of the throne I discern _Jehane dArc_, with a small _d_ and a capital _A_ for _dArc_, which is very curious. This causes me to doubt the genuineness of the inscription.

[Footnote 2778: The form _Darc_ occurs in the condemnation trial (_Trial_, vol. i, p. 191, vol. ii, p. 82). But side by side we find also _Dars_ (document dated March 31, 1427), _Day_ (patent of nobility), _Daiz_ (communicated to me by M. Pierre Champion) and _Daix_ (_Chronique de la Pucelle_).]

The _bestion_ tapestry[2779] in the Orleans Museum,[2780] which represents Jeanne's arrival before the King at Chinon, is of German fifteenth-century workmanship. Coarse of tissue, barbarous in design, and monotonous in colour, it evinces a certain taste for sumptuous adornment but also an absolute disregard for literal truth.

[Footnote 2779: Tapestry representing small animals.--W.S.]

[Footnote 2780: Reproduced in chromo in Wallon's _Jeanne d'Arc_, _cf._ J. Quicherat, _Histoire du costume en France depuis les temps les plus recules, jusqu' la fin du XVIII'e siecle_, Paris, 1875, large octavo, p. 271.]

Another German work was exhibited at Ratisbonne in 1429. It represented the Maid fighting in France. But this painting is lost.[2781]

[Footnote 2781: _Trial_, vol. v, p. 270.]

INDEX

AARON, i. 207

Arras, Bishop of, ii. 51

Abbeville, ii. 99, 197

Absalom, i. 138

Achilles, ii. 28

AEnius Sylvius, ii. 378

Aetius, i. 119

Ahasuerus, i. 339

Ahaz, i. 213

Aimery, Guillaume, examines Jeanne, i. 189, 193, 194

Aisne, The, i. 460; ii. 1, 142

Aix, ii. 407

Alain du Bey, i. 235

Alain, Jacques, i. 88, 89

Albi, Consuls of, i. 240, 398

Albigenses, The, ii. 157

Albret, Charles, Sire d', i. 137, 447; ii. 22, 63, 78, 164 Jeanne in charge of ii. 84, 94, 96

Alencon, Bailie of, i. 124 Dame of, i. 185 Duchy of, i. 106 Duke of, i. ix, xii, 255, 389; ii. 78 and Jeanne, i. 183, 186, 190, 195; ii. 92 at Beaugency, i. 363-367 at Blois, i. 243 at Reims, i. 446, 447, 450 career of, i. 183 commands the army, i. 347-355, 362; ii. 8, 36, 44, 49, 53, 63 consults Jeanne before Patay, i. 370, 378 evidence of, i. xxviii, xxix, xliv, xlix; ii. 382, 387, 392 heads attack on Paris, ii. 63, 70, 73 skirmishes round Paris, ii. 49, 53, 61 uses Jeanne as a mascotte, ii. 83 imprisoned, ii. 197

Alespee, Jean, ii. 208, 340

Alexander the Great, i. 181, 226, 475

Alexandria, i. 36, 40, 198, 239

Alison du Mai, i. 93, 94

Allee, Pierre d', ii. 71, 130

Alphonso of Aragon, ii. 39, 40

Amazons, The, i. 191, 329

Ambleny, plain of, ii. 2

Ambleville, i. 252, 276 detained by English, i. 295

Amboise, i. 363

Amedee of Savoie, Prince, i. 381; ii. 155, 361

Amiens, ii. 197

_Amiete_, ii. 74

Amos, ii. 166

Ampulla, the Sacred, i. liv, 390, 391, 393, 445-448, 459

Amydas, King, ii. 133

Ananias, a hermit, i. 36

Andelot, i. 16; ii. 210

Andouillette, Lord Guillaume, i. 428

Andre, Lieutenant, ii. 415

Andrieu, Robert, ii. 92

Angers, i. 63, 108, 132, 240; ii. 139, 184

Angerville, i. 138

Anis, i. 219

Anjou, i. 149, 150, 218, 389 Duchess of, i. 147

Anne of Austria, ii. 410

Annunciation, The, i. 219

Antichrist, coming of, i. 412

Antoine de Lorraine, Lord of Joinville, i. 96

Antonio de Rho, i. 384

Apollodorus, i. 322

Appleby, William, i. 124

Apples, cause of war, i. 92

Apremont, Lord of, ii. 365

Aquitaine, ii. 383

Aragon, i. 121

_Arbre-des-Dames_, or _Arbre-des-Fees_, romance of, i. 12

Arc, Catherine d', i. 4, 9, 35, 60 family ennobled, i. xvii; ii. 102, 212 Isabelle d', i. 68, 218, 358; ii. 353 origin of mother of Jeanne, i. 3 at Puy, i. 218, 220, 252 demands rehabilitation, ii. 385 Jacques d', i. xvii, 3, 9 home of, i. 6 freeman or serf, i. 17 rents fortress of Domremy, i. 19 his duties as village elder, i. 25 visits Vaucouleurs, i. 57 his anxiety about Jeanne, i. 68 simplicity of, i. 95 at Reims, i. 451 Jacques or Jacquemin d', brother of Jeanne, i. 4, 20 Jean d', i. 4; ii. 353 joins Jeanne, i. 252 enters Orleans, i. 267, 269, 272 believes Jeanne to be alive, ii. 353-376 demands rehabilitation, ii. 385 M. Lanery d', i. vii, xxii Nicolas d', i. 5 Pierre d', i. 7, 451; ii. 353, 375, 376 joins Jeanne, i. 252 enters Orleans, i. 267, 269, 272 taken prisoner, ii. 152 demands rehabilitation, ii. 385

Archambaud of Villars, i. 121, 144, 169

Arcis, i. 435

Areopagite, The, ii. 48

Arezzo, i. 384

Argenson, M. d', ii. 411

Aristotle, i. 181, 322, 383

Arles, i. 119; ii. 360

Arlon, ii. 359, 365

Armagnac Conspiracy to enter Paris, ii. 128-130 Count of, _see_ Jean IV

Armagnacs and Burgundians, war between, i. 21 _et passim_

Armoises, Robert des, Lord of Tichemont, ii. 365, 374

Arnaud of Corraze, Raimond, i. 121

Arnolin, Messire, i. 65

Arnoul, Madame, ii. 412

Arnoult of Aulnoy, i. 98

Aronde, The, ii. 145

Arras, i. 458 Jeanne at, ii. 191-196, 420 Franquet d', ii. 275

Artaxerxes, i. 409

Arthur of Brittany, _see_ Count of Richemont

Artois, Bailie of, i. 458

Arundel, Earl of, ii. 348

Ascension Day, i. 291-294; ii. 65

Astarac, ii. 38

Astrologers, i. 166, 473; ii. 409 foretell the death of Salisbury, i. 127 _see_ Nostradamus

Attila, i. 119, 208, 238

Aube, The, i. 100, 435

Aubriot, Hugues, ii. 54

Aubrit, Jannet, i. 5 Jeanne, i. 5, 13

Augsburg, i. 221

Augustinians, i. 109, 220

Aulnoy, i. 98

Aulon, Jean d', Squire to Jeanne, i. xiv, xxix, xxx, xxxiv, 252, 259, 269, 277, 283, 284, 364; ii. 119, 160, 366, 388, 401 at St.-Loup, i. 285, 287 at Les Tourelles, i. 297, 299, 308 questions Jeanne as to her Council, i. 341 at St. Pierre-le-Moustier, ii. 84, 85 taken prisoner, ii. 152

Aunoy, Jean d', i. 61 Marguerite d', i. 61

Autun, i. 113; ii. 106

Auvergne, i. 137, 139, 149, 240

Aurelian, the Emperor, i. 109

Auxerre, i. 100, 410, 465, 472 Bishop of, i. 404 Charles VII at, i. 403-407

Avignon, i. 161, 464; ii. 178

Avioth, hill of, ii. 136

Avranches, ii. 49 Bishop of, i. 30; ii. 209

Ayroles, Le Pere, i. xxxvii

Azincourt, i. 145, 154, 229, 358; ii. 178

BABYLON, i. 260, 414

Baignart, Robert, i. 355

Bailiet, i. lvii

Balaam's Ass, i. 175

Bale, Council of, ii. 176, 252, 364, 378

Bar, i. 13, 389 ravaged by La Hire, i. 24 Cardinal, Duke of, i. 92; ii. 1, 8, 53, 73, 178

Bar-sur-Aube, i. 100

Bar-sur-Seine, i. 100

Baratin, Pierre, ii. 360

Barbazan, ii. 196, 199

Barbezieux, M. de, ii. 408

Barbier, Canon, ii. 210

Barbin, Guillaume, i. 167

Barcelona, i. 40

Baretta, Bartolomeo, ii. 118, 124, 147, 148, 155, 193

Barrere, Jean, i. xlvi, ii. 41

Barrey, Edite, i. 5 Jean, godfather of Jeanne, i. 5

Barrois, i. 81

Barron, ii. 20

Basque, The, upholds the standard, i. 308-310

Bassigny, i. 24, 26

Bastard of Granville, i. 279 of Orleans, i. xiii, lvi, 105, 190, 251, 258, 333, 347, 349, 389;