*Proces, v. 115.
**Proces, i. 100.
To return to the Voices. After her race, Jeanne was quasi rapta et a sensibus alienata ("dissociated"), then juxta eam affuit juvenis quidam, a youth stood by her who bade her "go home, for her mother needed her."
"Thinking that it was her brother or a neighbour" (apparently she only heard the voice, and did not see the speaker), she hurried home, and found that she had not been sent for. Next, as she was on the point of returning to her friends, "a very bright cloud appeared to her, and out of the cloud came a voice," bidding her take up her mission. She was merely puzzled, but the experiences were often renewed. This letter, being contemporary, represents current belief, based either on Jeanne"s own statements before the clergy at Poictiers (April 1429) or on the gossip of Domremy. It should be observed that till Jeanne told her own tale at Rouen (1431) we hear not one word about saints or angels. She merely spoke of "my voices," "my counsel," "my Master." If she was more explicit at Poictiers, her confessions did not find their way into surviving letters and journals, not even into the journal of the hostile Bourgeois de Paris. We may glance at examples.
The "Journal du Siege d"Orleans" is in parts a late doc.u.ment, in parts "evidently copied from a journal kept in presence of the actual events."* The "Journal," in February 1429, vaguely says that, "about this time" our Lord used to appear to a maid, as she was guarding her flock, or "cousant et filant." A St. Victor MS. has courant et saillant (running and jumping), which curiously agrees with Boulainvilliers. The "Journal," after telling of the Battle of the Herrings (February 12th, 1429), in which the Scots and French were cut up in an attack on an English convoy, declares that Jeanne "knew of it by grace divine,"
and that her vue a distance induced Baudricourt to send her to the Dauphin.** This was attested by Baudricourt"s letters.***
*Quicherat. In Proces, iv. 95.
**Proces, iv. 125.
***Proces, iv. 125.
All this may have been written as late as 1468, but a vague reference to an apparition of our Lord rather suggests contemporary hearsay, before Jeanne came to Orleans. Jeanne never claimed any such visions of our Lord. The story of the clairvoyance as to the Battle of the Herrings is also given in the "Chronique de la Pucelle."* M. Quicherat thinks that the pa.s.sage is amplified from the "Journal du Siege." On the other hand, M. Vallet (de Viriville) attributes with a.s.surance the "Chronique de la Pucelle" to Cousinot de Montreuil, who was the Dauphin"s secretary at Poictiers, when the Maid was examined there in April 1429.** If Cousinot was the author, he certainly did not write his chronicle till long after date. However, he avers that the story of clairvoyance was current in the spring of 1429. The dates exactly harmonise; that is to say, between the day of the battle, February 12th, and the setting forth of the Maid from Vaucouleurs, there is just time for the bad news from Rouvray to arrive, confirming her statement, and for a day or two of preparation.
But perhaps, after the arrival of the bad news, Baudricourt may have sent Jeanne to the King in a kind of despair. Things could not be worse.
If she could do no good, she could do no harm.
*Proces, iv. 206.
**Histoire de Charles VII., ii. 62.
The doc.u.ments, whether contemporary or written later by contemporaries, contain none of the references to visions of St. Margaret, St.
Catherine, and St. Michael, which we find in Jeanne"s own replies at Rouen. For this omission it is not easy to account, even if we suppose that, except when giving evidence on oath, the Maid was extremely reticent. That she was reticent, we shall prove from evidence of d"Aulon and Dunois. Turning to the Maid"s own evidence in court (1431) we must remember that she was most averse to speaking at all, that she often asked leave to wait for advice and permission from her voices before replying, that on one point she constantly declared that, if compelled to speak, she would not speak the truth. This point was the King"s secret. There is absolutely contemporary evidence, from Alain Chartier, that, before she was accepted, she told Charles SOMETHING which filled him with surprise, joy, and belief.* The secret was connected with Charles"s doubts of his own legitimacy, and Jeanne at her trial was driven to obscure the truth in a mist of allegory, as, indeed, she confessed. Jeanne"s extreme reluctance to adopt even this loyal and laudable evasion is the measure of her truthfulness in general. Still, she did say some words which, as they stand, it is difficult to believe, to explain, or to account for. From any other prisoner, so unjustly menaced with a doom so dreadful, from Mary Stuart, for example, at Fotheringay, we do not expect the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
The Maid is a witness of another kind, and where we cannot understand her, we must say, like herself, pa.s.sez outre!
*Proces, v. 131. Letter of July 1429. See supra, "The False Pucelle."
When she was "about thirteen," this is her own account, she had a voice from G.o.d, to aid her in governing herself. "And the first time she was in great fear. And it came, that voice, about noonday, in summer, in her father"s garden" (where other girls of old France hear the birds sing, "Marry, maidens, marry!") "and Jeanne had NOT fasted on the day before.*
She heard the voice from the right side, towards the church, and seldom heard it without seeing a bright light. The light was not in front, but at the side whence the voice came. If she were in a wood" (as distinguished from the noise of the crowded and tumultuous court) "she could well hear the voices coming to her." Asked what sign for her soul"s health the voice gave, she said it bade her behave well, and go to church, and used to tell her to go into France on her mission. (I do not know why the advice about going to church is generally said to have been given FIRST.) Jeanne kept objecting that she was a poor girl who could not ride, or lead in war. She resisted the voice with all her energy. She a.s.serted that she knew the Dauphin, on their first meeting, by aid of her voices.** She declared that the Dauphin himself "multas habuit revelationes et apparitiones pulchras." In its literal sense, there is no evidence for this, but rather the reverse. She may mean "revelations" through herself, or may refer to some circ.u.mstance unknown. "Those of my party saw and knew that voice," she said, but later would only accept them as witnesses if they were allowed to come and see her.***
*The reading is NEC not ET, as in Quicherat, Proces, i. 52, compare i. 216.
**Proces, i. 56.
***Proces, i. 57.
This is the most puzzling point in Jeanne"s confession. She had no motive for telling an untruth, unless she hoped that these remarks would establish the objectivity of her visions. Of course, one of her strange experiences may have occurred in the presence of Charles and his court, and she may have believed that they shared in it. The point is one which French writers appear to avoid as a rule.
She said that she heard the voice daily in prison, "and stood in sore need of it." The voice bade her remain at St. Denis (after the repulse from Paris in September 1429), but she was not allowed to remain.
On the next day (the third of the trial) she told Beaupere that she was fasting since yesterday afternoon. Beaupere, as we saw, conceived that her experiences were mere subjective hallucinations, caused by fasting, by the sound of church-bells, and so on. As to the noise of bells, Coleridge writes that their music fell on his ears, "MOST LIKE ARTICULATE SOUNDS OF THINGS TO COME." Beaupere"s sober common-sense did not avail to help the Maid, but at the Rehabilitation (1456) he still maintained his old opinion. "Yesterday she had heard the voices in the morning, at vespers, and at the late ringing for Ave Maria, and she heard them much more frequently than she mentioned." "Yesterday she had been asleep when the voice aroused her. She sat up and clasped her hands, and the voice bade her answer boldly. Other words she half heard before she was quite awake, but failed to understand."*
*Proces, i. 62.
She denied that the voices ever contradicted themselves. On this occasion, as not having received leave from her voices, she refused to say anything as to her visions.
At the next meeting she admitted having heard the voices in court, but in court she could not distinguish the words, owing to the tumult. She had now, however, leave to speak more fully. The voices were those of St. Catherine and St. Margaret. Later she was asked if St. Margaret "spoke English." Apparently the querist thought that the English Margaret, wife of Malcolm of Scotland, was intended. They were crowned with fair crowns, as she had said at Poictiers two years before. She now appealed to the record of her examination there, but it was not in court, nor was it used in the trial of Rehabilitation. It has never been recovered. A witness who had examined her at Poictiers threw no light (twenty years later) on the saints and voices. Seven years ago (that is, when she was twelve) she first saw the saints. On the attire of the saints she had not leave to speak. They were preceded by St. Michael "with the angels of heaven." "I saw them as clearly as I see you, and I used to weep when they departed, and would fain that they should have taken me with them."
As to the famous sword at Fierbois, she averred that she had been in the church there, on her way to Chinon, that the voices later bade her use a sword which was hidden under earth--she thinks behind, but possibly in front of the altar--at Fierbois. A man unknown to her was sent from Tours to fetch the sword, which after search was found, and she wore it.
Asked whether she had prophesied her wound by an arrow at Orleans, and her recovery, she said "Yes."
This prediction is singular in that it was recorded before the event.
The record was copied into the registre of Brabant, from a letter written on April 22nd, 1429, by a Flemish diplomatist, De Rotselaer, then at Lyons.* De Rotselaer had the prophecy from an officer of the court of the Dauphin. The prediction was thus noted on April 22nd; the event, the arrow-wound in the shoulder, occurred on May 7th. On the fifth day of the trial Jeanne announced that, before seven years were gone, the English "shall lose a dearer gage than Orleans; this I know by revelation, and am wroth that it is to be so long deferred." Mr. Myers observes that "the prediction of a great victory over the English within seven years was not fulfilled in any exact way." The words of the Maid are "Angli demittent majus vadium quam fecerunt coram Aurelianis," and, as prophecies go, their loss of Paris (1436) corresponds very well to the Maid"s announcement. She went on, indeed, to say that the English "will have greater loss than ever they had, through a great French victory," but this reads like a gloss on her original prediction. "She knew it as well as that we were there."** "You shall not have the exact year, but well I wish it might be before the St. John;" however, she had already expressed her sorrow that this was NOT to be. Asked, on March 1st, whether her liberation was promised, she said, "Ask me in three months, and I will tell you." In three months exactly, her stainless soul was free.
*Proces, iv. 425.
**Proces, i. 84.
On the appearance, garb, and so on of her saints, she declined to answer questions.
She had once disobeyed her voices, when they forbade her to leap from the tower of Beaurevoir. She leaped, but they forgave her, and told her that Compiegne (where she was captured on May 23rd, 1430) would be relieved "before Martinmas." It was relieved on October 26th, after a siege of five months. On March 10th an effort was made to prove that her voices had lied to her, and that she had lied about her voices.
The enemy maintained that on May 23rd, 1430, she announced a promised victory to the people of Compiegne, vowing that St. Margaret and St.
Catherine had revealed it to her. Two hostile priests of Compiegne were at Rouen, and may have carried this tale, which is reported by two Burgundian chroniclers, but NOT by Monstrelet, who was with the besieging army.* In court she said n"eust autre commandement de yssir: she had no command from her voices to make her fatal sally. She was not asked whether she had pretended to have received such an order. She told the touching story of how, at Melun, in April 1430, the voices had warned her that she would be taken prisoner before midsummer; how she had prayed for death, or for tidings as to the day and hour. But no tidings were given to her, and her old belief, often expressed, that she "should last but one year or little more," was confirmed. The Duc d"Alencon had heard her say this several times; for the prophecy at Melun we have only her own word.
*I have examined the evidence in Macmillan"s Magazine for May 1894, and, to myself, it seems inadequate.
She was now led into the allegory intended to veil the King"s secret, the allegory about the Angel (herself) and the Crown (the coronation at Rheims). This allegory was fatal, but does not bear on her real belief about her experiences. She averred, returning to genuine confessions, that her voices often came spontaneously; if they did not, she summoned them by a simple prayer to G.o.d. She had seen the angelic figures moving, invisible save to her, among men. The voices HAD promised her the release of Charles d"Orleans, but time had failed her. This was as near a confession of failure as she ever made, till the day of her burning, if she really made one then.* But here, as always, she had predicted that she would do this or that if she were sans empeschement. She had no revelation bidding her attack Paris when she did, and after the day at Melun she submitted to the advice of the other captains. As to her release, she was only bidden "to bear all cheerfully; be not vexed with thy martyrdom, thence shalt thou come at last into the kingdom of Paradise."
*As to her "abjuration" and alleged doubts, see L"Abjuration du Cimetiere Saint-Ouen, by Abbe Ph. H. Dunard; Poussielgue, Paris, 1901.
To us, this is explicit enough, but the poor child explained to her judges that by martire she understood the pains of prison, and she referred it to her Lord, whether there were more to bear. In this pa.s.sage the original French exists, as well as the Latin translation.
The French is better.
"Ne te chaille de ton martire, tu t"en vendras enfin en royaulme de Paradis."
"Non cures de martyrio tuo: tu venies finaliter in regnum paradisi."
The word hinc is omitted in the bad Latin. Unluckily we have only a fragment of the original French, as taken down in court. The Latin version, by Courcelles, one of the prosecutors, is in places inaccurate, in others is actually garbled to the disadvantage of the Maid.
This pa.s.sage, with some others, may perhaps be regarded as indicating that the contents of the communications received by Jeanne were not always intelligible to her.
That her saints could be, and were, touched physically by her, she admitted.* Here I am inclined to think that she had touched with her ring (as the custom was) a RELIC of St. Catherine at Fierbois. Such relics, brought from the monastery of Sinai, lay at Fierbois, and we know that women loved to rub their rings on the ring of Jeanne, in spite of her laughing remonstrances. But apart from this conjecture, she regarded her saints as tangible by her. She had embraced both St.
Margaret and St. Catherine.**
*Proces, i. 185.