Romm F.
Chapter 2

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
Ссылки:
Школа кожевенного мастерства: сумки, ремни своими руками Типография Новый формат: Издать свою книгу
 Ваша оценка:

   Chapter 2. Joan in Domremy
  
   Joan by the eyes of the witnesses. In Chapter 1 we have considered some mysteries of the Hundred Years' war before the appearance of The Maid of Orleans. Now let us talk about our main heroine.
   Descriptions of Joan are available from many witnesses who lived in her time. She was a tall, slender, black-eyed brunette. She frequently laughed and not rarely wept, was very sincere, as all normal girls. She was moderate in eating and almost did not drink alcohol.
   Was she beautiful? All witnesses characterized Joan as a very beautiful girl. Of course, the comprehension of beauty in her time was very different from ours. However, the model of beauty 15th century - Agnes Sorel - would have looked as a very attractive woman also today (see Fig. 2.1).
  
  
[]
   Fig. 2.1. Portrait of Agnes Sorel /1/
  
   Many painters painted Joan. Moreover, in many cases the features of her face were attributed to saints. However, we do not possess any reliable portrait of Joan. That is yet another mystery related to The Maid of Orleans. The image in Fig. 2.2 maybe more or less resembles the face of Joan.
  
  
[]
   Fig. 2.2. A bas-relief possibly presenting Joan in a helmet.
  
   Today, some painters suggest their vision of the portrait of Joan (Figs. 2.3-2.6)
  
  
[]
   Fig. 2.3. Portrait of Joan suggested by Virginia Lindsley-Frohlick, version 1
  
  
[]
   Fig. 2.4. Portrait of Joan suggested by Virginia Lindsley-Frohlick, version 2
  
  
[]
   Fig. 2.5. Portrait of Joan suggested by Virginia Lindsley-Frohlick, version 3
  
  
[]
   Fig. 2.6. Portrait of Joan suggested by an anonymous painter.
  
   Village of Domremy and the Hundred Years' war. Domremy, the village where Joan was born and grew up, was positioned by the side of a road along the Maas river. This was an ancient road, constructed long time back, in the days of Rome. That was very important for communications between Flanders, Burgundy and Province. Many merchants, knights and soldiers walked through Domremy, frequently met the night in the village, were welcome and fed by inhabitants of Domremy. As a payment for good treatment, they told stories about the events in France and in other countries /2/. In such way the residents of Domremy received news from outside, including the news about the Treaty of Troyes. They sympathized with poor dauphin Charles, deprived by his evil mother.
   Sometimes the war touched Domremy, ruining and devastating the village. Though this territory was not occupied by the English, Domremy was abused by marauders and feudal lords from Lorraine and Burgundy. Once the castle of Vaucouleurs was under a siege, but did not fall.
   That was the situation in which the girl, that later saved France, had grown.
   The Mystery of the name. The reader may have noticed that we still avoid using the commonly accepted name of Joan - "of Arc". The reason follows.
   Historian V.I.Raitses /2/:
   "In her village, she was called Janette. She was a daughter of peasant Jack d'Arc and his wife Isabelle Romee, the fourth child and the elder daughter. When she was asked in 1429 about her age, she answered: 17 or 19. Hence, she was born in 1410 or 1412. Most of historians find the second date much more probable.
   We write her name with an apostrophe " ' ". In the time of Joan, her name was written as `Darc'. Moreover: then there was no apostrophe, and the "noble" indices "de", "du", "d' " and "des" (all translated into English as "of" - comment of the author) were written together with the main name. The last name of Joan was spelled not only as Darc but also sometimes as Tarc, Dare and Daye. Such disorder in spellings of names was typical for the Middle Ages, when passports and other identification documents did not exist. The form "d'Arc" (of Arc) came into use by a 16th th century Orleans poet, who wished "to ennoble" Joan, and thus transformed her name into the form that we use now." /2/.
   Let us note that not only Joan's name was written in various forms. The last name of one of her men, squire Bertrand, is some times written "Poligny", and in other times as "Poulengey".
   Thus, the correct spelling of the name of Joan is "Darc". Let us note, as a comparison, that the correct spelling of the name of the French captain mentioned in Chapter 1 as `du Guesclin' is `Duguesclin'. One may object that spelling Joan's name as "of Arc" is not forbidden today, since we do write "of Guesclin". No, that would be a serious error, because it would imply that Joan was of a noble family, which possessed a familial property Darc. On the other hand, the Duguesclin were a noble family indeed, and did have a familial property, the Guesclin.
   Revisionists of the biography of Joan Darc use the erroneous spelling of her name as a "proof" of her noble origin.
   Let us note that nowadays the French usually write, as a compromise, "D'arc", while in English both forms - "of Arc" and "Darc" - are found.
   Therefore, in the further text we use the correct form of spelling of the last name of Joan, Darc, though this form is not dominating.
   Let us note the following mystic aspect of the mistake related to the traditional form of writing the name Darc. Many peoples have a sacred taboo on the use of real names of an exceptional hero. The French, as other European peoples, have no such taboo. However, the mistake of the above mentioned poet from Orleans practically created the same taboo for the name of Joan Darc. Let us recall the above-mentioned fact of the missing detailed portraits of Joan: painting exceptional heroes is also a taboo for some peoples. Of course, in both cases, that results from eventual factors. However, such coincidence does seem quite mystic. Let us return to the aspect of these hypothetic taboos in further chapters.
   The family of Joan. Jack Darc, father of Joan, was a key person in his village, had about 20 hectares of land and was a juridical representative of Domremy by records of 1423 and 1427. In 1419, joining other families of Domremy, he rented fort Chateau d'Ile /2/. However, very soon after the execution of Joan, the Darc family left Domremy and resided in Orleans, where they received municipal pensions.
   The biographies of the parents of Joan and of her brothers Jack, Jean and Pierre are well known. Jack had an illness and died young, leaving no children. Jean and Pierre participated in the war and had children. In years 1450th they and Isabelle initiated the trial of Nullification of the condemnation of Joan. Jack Darc, the father, died very soon after the execution of Joan. That was probably because of an illness of heart caused by the news about the terrible death of his daughter. Isabelle died soon after the condemnation of Joan was nullified.
   Thus, the biographies of the parents and of the brothers of Joan are known well enough. But what about her sister...
   The first name of the sister of Joan was probably Catherine. She is not less mysterious than Joan.
   First of all, it is not clear whether the sister of Joan was older or younger than Joan. According to some sources, Catherine was three years younger than Joan. According to others, she was older. There is even an opinion that Joan had two sisters.
   The destiny of Catherine Darc is absolutely unclear. According to some data, in 1429 she was forced by her parents to marry Colin, the mayor of Greux, then vanished or died of illness or at childbirth, in 1429 or 1430.
   Let us agree that such a misty biography of Catherine Darc looks very strange on the background of so many details that are known about the other members of her family. Was it so difficult for the biographers of Joan to inquire either her mother, brothers, and Colin of Greux for more details about Catherine? Or did these have a reason to keep silence about Catherine? The latter suggestion seems to be the most probable.
   Of course, residents of Greux might just ignore the destiny of Catherine. Colin himself might have reasons of his own to remain silent about Catherine. But why didn't her mother and brothers shed some light about Catherine? If Catherine just died young, why wasn't this fact registered, as was the case with the death of her brother Jack? Or was it something in the behavior of Catherine that made her family build a wall of silence around her? Let us leave Catherine Darc for a while. We will come back to her later, when we come to analyze the mysteries related to Joan after her death.
   Now let us talk about the beginning of the life of young Jeanette, or more exactly - her birth.
   One of the numerous legends related to Joan tells that on the night of her birth the cocks crowed before the daybreak. In Domremy that was considered as a sign of a great joy coming. Historians note that this is just a legend. The birth of Joan was not understood in Domremy as an extraordinary event. Moreover, until 1428 Joan looked as an ordinary girl, attractive, patient, devout and dreamy. In the age of 16 she was nearly forced by her parents to marry a man she did not love. When she informed her relatives about the intention to go to Vaucouleurs to accomplish a mission of saving France, her father Jack was very angry with her and even threatened to kill her. One can imagine the feelings of father Jack Dark somewhat later, when his daughter accomplished what she had intended and became the national heroine of France. And - what did he feel when he recalled his own behavior of 1428, after he was informed about her execution? No wonder that he died very soon after.
   The alternative version of the origin of Joan. There is, however, an alternative version of the birth of Joan: revisionist or batardisant (from French word "bБtard", meaning an illegitimately child born, a bastard) /3-6/. This version emerged in the period before the nullification of the condemnation of Joan and aimed to prove her noble origin. The modern revisionism is mostly attributed to an esoterician occultist Robert Ambelain, which is sometimes considered also as an historian.
   Ambelain suggested that the mysteries of Joan were related to a secret Order. He also referred to the Bible, and used methods of the mystic science of Kabbalah. He believed that there was no exploit or execution, only a falsification, organized by leaders of England, France, Burgundy and the Church.
   First of all, let us consider the idea of the codes of Kabbalah, also known as the Bible Codes.
   Kabbalah is based on specific features of Hebrew and of documents written in Hebrew, first of all of the Holy Book - the Torah (the first part of Bible). The Bible Codes are based on ELS - Equidistant Letter Sequences. If the original Hebrew text of the Holy Book, with all spaces removed, is scanned by a special computer program selecting letters located within a given fixed distance from each other (e.g., each 10th letter), one may sometimes obtain meaningful texts. These texts are mostly very short and usually do not contain very detailed and original information.
   Different opinions exist about the Bible Codes. The opinions range from deep skepticism to total acceptance. For example, Harold Gans, a senior cryptologist mathematician from the Pentagon, in a public statement made in June 3rd, 1997, admitted that he found an "extremely strong statistical evidence for the existence of the encoding of great Jewish sages' names and dates of birth and death in the Hebrew text of the book of Genesis". At the same time, even Harold Gans was aware of the fact that given a large volume of data, any short message can be derived from it by means of ELS. The "strong statistical evidence" in the case above was supported by correlation of meaningful data that belong together in a relatively small volume of text - the names and the dates of birth and death of the sages were found in close proximity to each other - such that in no way could occur randomly time after time, for a number of famous people (the sages). There are other examples of sets of ELS that are found in such proximity and context that make it impossible to explain them by randomness.
   No strong correlation of any straightforward meaningful data was ever found about Joan, surely not in a limited volume of text that would have put the data in a similar context.
   Every explorer who investigated the "Codes of Torah" knows that they allow to obtain any short text (in Hebrew) if the program tries enough options. Moreover, the transcription of non-Hebrew names with Hebrew letters allows additional manipulations. E.g., the name "Joan Darc" can be re-written as:
   1) joandarc,
   2) darcjoan...
   and so on, and on top of that one has to take into account the numerous possibilities for spelling her name and nicknames, such as "Maid Joan" and "The Maid of Orleans". Since Hebrew does not have exact analogue of letter "j", this can be replaced with "z" (zain) or "g" (guimel). The vowels "a", "o" etc. can be just removed or replaced with mute vowels - alef and ayin (also letter "hei" is mute in the end of a word). The sound "k" can be given with letters Koof or Caf. Thus, before the scanning program runs, we already have thousands of variants for spelling the name and the nicknames of Joan Darc. As a result, it is only a normal thing to expect finding strings of text like "Merlin's Prophecy" which was mentioned in Chapter 1. The fact that such text is found using ELS does not mean that somebody foresaw the heroic exploit of Joan at the time when the Torah was written, whoever wrote the Holy Book. The fact that some of these messages are found only means that the computer techniques offer excellent opportunities to those who can use them.
   Let us note that before the computer era, none of known revisionists claimed to possess a proof of Joan's noble origin or of the heroic exploit of Joan - by methods of Kabbalah.
   Hence, if somebody claims that he has succeeded, using techniques from the Kabbalah, to make an extraordinary discovery or revelation, such statement should not be trusted too easily. Arguments of his opponents should be considered too. And, of course, arguments of both sides should be tested with the best expert - logic.
   Let us analyze another suggestion of revisionists - that the exploit of Joan was organized by some mysterious / religious Order (usual reference is to Franc masonry or Franciscan Third Order).
   Of course, activities of a secret order, as every secret organization, are covered with silence, otherwise it is not secret. However, its goals are obvious: power and money (one being related to the other). All other things - mysteries, traditions, rituals, symbols, special effects in Hollywood style - all these are just a camouflage making it easier to advance toward the main goals. The camouflage impresses every person that does not have enough experience, but covers only an empty space.
   Advancing towards its main goals (mentioned above), a secret Order collides with various forces and authorities. Of course, some collaboration exists too, but none yields his power voluntarily. As a result, if during the Hundred Years' war some Order played games related to Joan Darc, it should have permanently collided with authorities of England, France, Burgundy and the Church. While some of their leaders might cooperate with the Order, interests of one mostly opposed those of others. Therefore, if the order liked to intervene in the events, the resistance it met would be much stronger than the support.
   One may object that the Order might be so powerful that it could easily command all kings and popes. In such case, why did this Order allow the Hundred Years' war and then the War of Roses to happen? Why did not the Order stop the English and French kings as soon as they intended to take weapons into their hands? Who is the powerful governor allowing waste of human and other resources without a good reason? Nobody but a psychopath with a mania of destruction. Psychopaths rarely get the power and, if they do, they very soon lose it.
   Moreover: the events around Joan Darc characterize too badly England, France, Burgundy and the Church. Why would the powerful Order do that to its faithful servants?
   On the other hand: taking profit from an objective historical process in order to reinforce their prestige in the eyes of unsuspecting simpletons and that way getting their money and support - that would be a normal, easy and useful thing for chiefs of some Order to do. Without influencing in any way the events of Hundred Years' war, without intervening into the tragic destiny of the heroine, representatives of the Order might have spread rumors saying that they had given the mission to Joan Darc, and that then they had saved her. Not saving Joan Darc, but stealing her glory.
   After all, it is difficult to ignore the information found on the Internet - that Ambelain himself is related to the Franc masonry. If this is true, his theoretical explorations may aim to support his Order. Nevertheless, much more probable is the version that Ambelain was just making his money. The man did not find any better business.
   After all, most of revisionists avoid references to Kabbalah and are not sure at all about secret Orders. Some of their arguments are funny. E.g., as a proof that Joan was related to a secret Order, they refer to one of her signatures - a ring. As revisionists suggest, that is a symbol used by some of secret orders. That reminds the cover-up of Russian serfdom peasants. When they prepared a complaint against their landlord, they signed the paper in such a manner that the signatures formed a ring. Of course, such collective signature did not allow anyone to figure out who signed first. Does that mean that Russian serfdom peasants were Franc Masons?
   The main version of the modern revisionism is as follows:
   An illegitimate child was born to French queen Isabel of Bavaria on November 10, 1407. This child was baptized as Philip and soon after was declared dead. His father was the duke of Orleans, or some other noble man. Then contradictions between revisionist versions begin. Some of them suggest that the child was initially hermaphrodite that transformed later into a woman /4/. Others believe that the child was initially a normal girl, but she was recorded as a boy in order to conceal the fact of the birth of an illegitimate child; how might that help, the revisionists do not explain /5, 6/. However, all revisionists agree that the child was declared dead and was then given to the peasant Darc family, who gave her the name Joan /4-6/.
   Thus, according to the concept of revisionism, Joan Darc was a daughter of queen Isabel of Bavaria, half-sister of the English queen Catherine and the aunt of English king Henry VI. Fighting against England, "Princess Joan" destroyed the policy of her family. Not bad?
   To support this version, revisionists use the following strange arguments:
      -- Joan did not know her exact age (well, in those days many other people did not - e.g., queen Isabel of Bavaria and Agnes Sorel);
      -- Joan was a good horse rider. (Why not - as a daughter of a rich peasant?!)
      -- Joan had never given her last name. (Of course! As all "non-noble" French, she always gave her first name, later also her nickname - Maid Joan!)
      -- There were no papers about the birth of Joan of Arc of parents Jack and Isabel. (But that is true about all children of Domremy!)
      -- The revisionists claim that someone taught Joan to use weapons. (But she never used them!)
      -- As a support to their hypothesis, the revisionists cite Joan's words to the Duke of Alencon: "The more royal blood join us, the better for the case of France". So - why should that mean any royal blood in Joan? What is the relation to "the princess"?
   It is very strange that "the princess" was not educated in the house of her father - if this was not Jack Darc. Let us note that "Le BБtard d'OrlИans" (the Bastard of Orleans, Dunois), was educated in the home of his father, the Duke of Orleans. Who would seek for the mother if the illegitimately born child was educated in the house of the father, like the Vicomte of Bragelonne with Atos (in the stories of A. Dumas)?
   Why was a peasant family invited to intervene in the affairs of the queen? Even if the Darc family was credible enough and did not talk too much, the neighbors certainly would notice the appearance of the child from nowhere. Why did queen Isabel give a pretext for gossips?
   After all, it is a very strange fact that father Jack Darc behaved with Joan like a normal peasant father would have behaved with his normal daughter of that time: he tried to force her to marry according to his choice and even threatened to kill her. Why would have he cared for the behavior of a princess educated in his house - if she was? And why did not the men of the queen explain to the peasant how should he talk to a princess?
   As we show below, Joan took care of the household since her childhood, worked with a needle and grazed cattle. It is very strange that "the princess" was not given lessons in reading and writing, but remained illiterate. Also strange was it that she was asked to go to the war - instead of The Dauphin Charles. Is it not too strange that the princess learned riding and using weapons but not reading and writing? And, certainly, cleaning of peasant house was not very appropriate for a princess.
   Now let us return to those chapters in the history of Joan Darc that do not cause any doubt.
   Childhood of Joan Darc. As Raitses wrote /2/, the childhood of Joan was similar to that of other peasant children. From her mother, she learned three prayers, and that was all instruction she got. Later, when she was in the royal palace, she learned also to sign her first name. Since a very young age, she learned to work at house and to use a needle. Later, she was sent to work in field. As all children of Domremy, Joan helped adult herdsmen to graze cattle of the villagers /2/.
   Jeanette had many friends. On holidays, boys and girls of Domremy usually met outside the village near an old beech tree called the "Wood of fairies". A legend told that long ago fairies had walked there and danced in rings, but once the priest of Domremy had dropped there some holy water, and they had vanished.
   On winter nights, Janette went to her friend Mangette, or Mangette came to the house of the Darc. The girls worked with spindle and wool, and talked /2/.
   In those days, many villages around Domremy were in flame. The peasants watched from the belfries, escaped from marauders to castles, kept cattle and goods in secluded places. The fear and feeling of danger were permanent. None knew where next trouble would come from /2/.
   In 1428, the Burgundians attacked Domremy, and villagers took refuge in the castle of NeufchБteau. The marauders ruined the empty houses and burned the church /2/.
   That was the childhood and the adolescence of Joan Darc - in the years of the war, in the permanent menace, near flames, blood and suffering of innocent people.
   The suffering of French people touched the soul of the girl and inflamed her heart with a great desire to help her country. As Joan said, she felt pity to "sweet France" /2/. Let us remember this sentence, it will allow us to suggest below an explanation for one of most important mysteries of Joan Darc.
   "The Voices". One of the most extraordinary mysteries of Joan is the phenomenon she called "The Voices". Joan told that since the age of 13, she heard voices of saints, then later the saints came to her sight. Joan believed that they were St. Michael-Archangel, St. Catherine and St. Marguerite. Of course, such young girl might have various fantasies, and they could be dismissed, if not the extraordinary biography of Joan herself.
   First of all: what do we know about The Voices? As Joan told, St. Michael-Archangel, St. Catherine and St. Marguerite talked with her, gave advices, initially abstract and similar to usual religious instructions, later more concrete. Her first contact with The Voices Joan described as follows: one day, when she was grazing cattle, a voice told her that God had pity of the people of France and that she (Joan) would need to go soon to France. When she heard that, Joan wept. The voice said that she should go to Vaucouleurs, where she would find the captain that would lead her to France, and that she should not hesitate /7/.
   Later The Voices told Joan that it was her a mission to save France and to crown dauphin Charles. The Voices seemed to predict some events, give recommendations about the military events - campaigns, battles. During the Rouen Trial of Condemnation, The Voices suggested to Joan how to answer the questions of the judges.
   Let us leave meanwhile the aspects of military, juridical and theological recommendations of The Voices - those will be analyzed in next chapters. Let us analyze now the general aspects of this phenomenon.
   The first, simplest explanation: the permanent images of suffering of French caused Joan some kind of madness, and therefore she saw various silly things. Sorry, but this explanation does not work at all. Mad people do not win battles, nor do they win theoretical debates with professionals. Moreover: as we show in next chapters, Joan had a very stable psyche. Let us add that during her short life Joan predicted many events, all of which realized, sometimes tragically for the girl. Therefore, the explanation about madness, while very simple, is absolutely not acceptable. Let us try other explanations.
   During the Condemnation Trial (Rouen, 1431) the judges of Joan suggested the following explanation of The Voices: that was a real contact with upper forces, though not Saints but evil. Such explanation did not work even then and was nullified soon by The Nullification Trial (1456). Leaving alone arguments of The Nullification Trial, let us just note that devilish forces certainly would not aim to save some millions of innocent French people and would not act to stop the bloody war - as The Voices did. Hence, also this explanation is not valid.
   The Catholic version assumes that The Voices were actually Saints sent by God, and that Joan really accomplished the wish of Heavens. Of course, such explanation is very good for every Catholic and for most of other Christians. However: if The Voices were sent by God, we should then conclude that they consciously led the girl to the painful death. Could not God invent anything better? The answer "the ways of God are out of our grasp" may seem good for some Christians, but not for all people.
   The Voices chose a destiny that was not good enough not only for Joan but also for France. As we show in one of next chapters, just after the campaign of Loire, Joan could easily conquer Paris and finish the war very soon. Instead of that, The Voices advised her to go to Reims and to crown there dauphin Charles. Not only did that result in the terrible death of Joan, but it also prolonged the war for some tens of years.
   The near coronation of Charles might have been the desire of illiterate Joan, to offer the lawful monarch to France. But why did the Saints wish the same thing?
   The version of revisionists is based on the presumption that The Voices were men of queen Isabel of Bavaria. They became The Teachers for Joan and gave her advices.
   Let us imagine the first meeting of Joan with The Teachers playing the role of The Voices.
   Jeanette, 13 years old, with other children of Domremy, grazes cattle near the forest. Suddenly the children see well dressed gentlemen approaching them and saying something like this:
   - Well! Everyone except Joan - do not listen! Joan, you listen very attentively! We work for queen Isabel of Bavaria. We have to inform you that you are not a simple peasant but an illegitimately born princess of royal blood!
   Jeanette is certainly surprised:
   - Wow! What does it mean - an illegitimately born princess?
   The Teachers are confused:
   - Well, that is not exactly a princess. That is more similar to The Batard of Orleans (Dunois), but of female gender. Your mother is queen Isabel, while your father is... well, let us talk about him later. You must know that, according to the decision of the Royal Council and Franciscan Third Order, in next three or four years you will accomplish a very important mission...
   An interesting thought: would the girl have trusted them so easily? Wouldn't she have taken them for madmen, filchers or kidnappers? Was she not afraid, did she not escape or call the adults to help her? Did she not ask for any proof? If she did, how did it look, such proof?
   Did nobody in Domremy pay attention to these unknown visitors - The Teachers?
   And maybe that was a very simple thing - maybe the Teachers were introduced to Joan by her father Jack Darc? But how does that correlate with his further behavior? Moreover, in such case also Joan would describe her first contact with The Voices very differently.
   We have noted above that The Teachers did not even teach Joan to read and write. They probably did not wish her to read books, from which she could learn that the normal thing for an illegitimately born princess has been to marry at least an earl, rather than to seal gaps in the national defense. Well... but maybe The Teachers themselves were illiterate?
   Instead of teaching reading and writing to Joan, The Teachers persuaded her to fulfill instructions of Church and to prepare herself to the mission of saving France. Very strange! Why did they require such things from an illiterate girl that, according to instructions of Church, should first of all obey her parents and then her future husband? The Teachers would have done much better if they charged with the same mission the poor Dauphin Charles, and persuaded him to show himself as a man and a knight, one who takes care of his kingdom.
   On the contrary to Joan, dauphin Charles could read and write. He should have learned to use weapons in order to protect his people and to prove his rights to the kingdom. Thus, The Teachers do not look intelligent enough to teach anything to anyone.
   Now let us imagine the reaction of the 13 years old "princess Jeanette" from the revisionist version, when she was informed about her "real family" - French queen Isabel and dauphin Charles, English queen Catherine - and about her duties to learn riding and fight, and to go very soon to fight against the soldiers of her English nephew.
   "Princess Jeanette" from the revisionist version was certainly an angel if she did not ask The Teachers to walk very far away and did not claim her dissatisfaction because of living so far from palaces, in a village in wilderness where her duties were to deal with dung and to accept births from mares and sows. She really might also require her share of the familiar royal silvery. Why not?
   "Princess Jeanette" from the revisionist version would be very right if she inquired what would her reward be, once she had accomplished all the wishes of the Royal Council and the Franciscan Third Order. It is too difficult to believe that a princess of royal bloods would so easily agree to spend some months with rough soldiers, to sleep in battlefields, to risk her life and to be wounded a number of times. Why all that? To allow her beloved brother-dauphin that she had never seen before to ascend his respected arse onto the French throne? To make a fool of her English nephew? To be imprisoned in the terrible towers of Burgundian and English castles where she would wear heavy shackles instead of dresses and jewelry appropriate to a noble lady? We do not even mention the perspective of the bonfire.
   The obvious conclusion follows: the main assumption of the revisionism - about "princess Jeanette" - sounds too much like the tale of Cinderella. That is also the reason why it may appeal to some of the readers.
   The most probable, in the opinion of the author of this book, is the following version.
   Joan imagined The Voices, invented them, made them up for herself, persuaded herself in their existence and convinced the other French. Why did she do it? Because she felt pity and compassion to "sweet France". She did not see another way to stop the terror of war, but only by deceiving the French in order to save them from the death. That is the reason why she invented The Voices, took onto herself the responsibility for consequences of her imagination and followed to the end the way shown by her hot heart that refused to tolerate the injustice and suffering of innocent people. The Voices invented by Joan correlate too well to "Merlin's prophecy" analyzed in Chapter 1.
   Does that mean that Joan could not have any contacts with upper forces (originating from the Heaven)? Let us analyze this question in next chapters.
   One may object that the witnesses characterized Joan as a very honest girl. However, historians refer to some situations when Joan "lied" to her judges in the Condemnation Trial in Rouen (1431), of which we will talk more in Chapter 8. The purpose of this "lie" was to save some men from persecutions. If she "lied" to save some men that she knew, why couldn't she invent The Voices in order to save France? Of course, such "lie" differs absolutely from the lie we usually condemn, such that is aimed to grab power and money, a lie that often means disaster for others.
   It is a normal thing when a young girl dreams of wonderful countries, princes on white horses, etc. Can Joan be reproached for her dreams of the liberation of her country?
   Thus, we have a portrait of the heroic girl whose hot heart could not tolerate suffering of France. This heroic girl "lied" to her people, aiming to save them. This heroic girl saved her people and paid for that with her own painful death.
   Adolescence of Joan Darc. As follows from above, the adolescence age of Joan was under the sign of self-preparation to the mission of liberating France. We do not find enough details about that in historic publications. One may suggest that the girl spent much time in various kinds of training, especially horseback riding. Of course, that did not require any Teachers.
   That period was more or less calm for France. The English offensive came to nothing under permanent attacks of partisans in the occupied territories. Although, in spring and summer of year 1428 the offensive restarted, this time targeting Orleans. Joan was ready then to accomplish her mission. Her plan probably was as follows: she hoped to persuade partisans of Dauphin Charles that she was The Maiden from "Merlin's prophecy", to get their support for the journey to the dauphin, to persuade him and then to convince French soldiers to fight. She certainly did not intend to command the army. The life made major corrections to this part of her plans.
   In May 1428, Joan asked her uncle Durand Laxart to drive her to Vaucouleurs. At May 13, 1428 they got an audience with Sir Robert of Baudricourt. That was the first time she met poor squire Bertrand of Poligny (Poulengey) - which accompanied at that time Robert of Baudricourt. She asked Robert of Baudricourt to send her with an escort to the castle of Dauphin Charles. She also said that the dauphin should avoid unnecessary battles with the English /7/.
   Many authors believe that Joan had the ability to convince /7/. However, the analysis of her biography leads to a contrary conclusion: people listened to Joan only when the country was threatened with an immediate disaster. In other cases they mocked her. That was the case in May 1428. Robert of Baudricourt believed her mad, laughed and ordered Laxart to drive her back, to punish her and to find a good husband for her. Joan tried to insist, but to no avail. Despite the failure of her first attempt, simple people talked about the maiden-liberator which was promised by Merlin and which would come very soon.
   To correct the behavior of their daughter, parents Darc decided to force her to marry a fellow of Domremy. However, this time the usually patient girl showed her character, refused and did not yield. The fellow sued her in the court of Church. The court ruled in favor of Joan, and she was not forced to marry /2/. Revisionists use this fact as a support to their suggestions: they believe that Joan informed the court that she was a princess and therefore should not marry a simple peasant. That seems too doubtful. If that was right, why did not Joan tell Robert of Baudricourt about her noble origin? That would have saved her from the trial and would make it easier and sooner for her to meet Dauphin Charles... if revisionists have been right. That is the main problem.
   Joan was able to succeed in the court even without being a princess. Even her parents could not force her to marry without the formal bridal "yes" uttered in the church during the wedding ceremony. In principle, the pretender to her hand might accuse her of violation of a promise. As follows from various sources, he did it, but Joan easily proved that he had lied.
   In summer 1428, family Darc and other residents of Domremy had to take refuge in the castle of NeufchБteau, when they escaped Burgundian marauders. That was practically the end of Joan's adolescence. Only some weeks later, she left Domremy to meet her exploit, martyrdom and eternal glory.
  
   REFERENCES
  
   1. V.Tropeiko, M.Nechitailov. Hundred Years' War (Russian: Вадим Тропейко, Максим Нечитайлов. Столетняя война.) http://www.vadimus.by.ru/index.htm
   2. V.I.Raitses. The trial of Joan of Arc. (Russian: В.И.Райцес. Процесс Жанны д'Арк. М.-Л., 1964.)
   3. R. Ambelain. Drames Et Secrets De L'histoire, 1306-1643. R. Laffont, 1981.
   4. Paul Rouelle. Jeanne d'Arc: cessez le feu! http://www.cafe.umontreal.ca/crb/paul/jeanne.html
   5. Jean Roche. Jeanne d'Arc a-t-elle ИtИ brШlИe ? http://perso.wanadoo.fr/daruc/divers/jeanne.htm
   6. Jeanne d'Arc encore et toujours. http://site.voila.fr/jdarc/index.html
   7. Regine Pernoud, Marie-Veronique Clin. Joan of Arc: Her Story (Paperback). Published by St. Martin's Press, New York - 1998
  
 Ваша оценка:
Связаться с программистом сайта.

Новые книги авторов СИ, вышедшие из печати:
О.Болдырева "Крадуш. Чужие души" М.Николаев "Вторжение на Землю"

Как попасть в этoт список

Кожевенное мастерство | Сайт "Художники" | Доска об'явлений "Книги"