Part 71 (1/2)
[Footnote 1634: _Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris_, pp. 170, 171.
Monstrelet, vol. iv, p. 96. _Livre des trahisons_, pp. 167, 168.]
While she was before the Gascon, there in sight of her were brought forth several craftsmen, held to ransom, who, unable to pay, were straightway despatched to be hanged or drowned. At this spectacle a great fear for her husband came over her; nevertheless, her love for him gave her heart of courage and she paid the ransom. As soon as the Duke's men had counted the coins, they dismissed her saying that her husband had died like the other villeins.
At those cruel words, wild with sorrow and despair, she broke forth into curses and railing. When she refused to be silent, the b.a.s.t.a.r.d of Vauru had her beaten and taken to the Elm-tree.
There she was stripped to the waist and tied to the Tree, whence hung forty to fifty men, some from the higher, some from the lower branches, so that, when the wind blew, their bodies touched her head.
At nightfall she uttered shrieks so piercing that they were heard in the town. But whosoever had dared to go and unloose her would have been a dead man. Fright, fatigue, and exertion brought on her delivery. The wolves, attracted by her cries, came and consumed the fruit of her womb, and then devoured alive the body of the wretched creature.
In 1422, the town of Meaux was taken by the Burgundians. Then were the b.a.s.t.a.r.d of Vauru and his cousin hanged from that Tree on which they had caused so many innocent folk to die so shameful a death.[1635]
[Footnote 1635: _Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris_, p. 170. According to Monstrelet (vol. iv, p. 96), Denis de Vauru, the b.a.s.t.a.r.d's cousin, was beheaded in the Market of Paris.]
For the poor peasants of these unhappy lands, whether Armagnac or Burgundian, it was all of a piece; they had nothing to gain by changing masters. Nevertheless, it is possible that, on beholding the King, the descendant of Saint Louis and Charles the Wise, they may have taken heart of courage and of hope, so great was the fame for justice and for mercy of the ill.u.s.trious house of France.
Thus, riding by the side of the Archbishop of Reims, the Maid looked with a friendly eye on the peasants crying ”Noel!” After saying that she had nowhere seen folk so joyful at the coming of the fair King, she sighed: ”Would to G.o.d I were so fortunate as, when I die, to find burial in this land.”[1636]
[Footnote 1636: _Trial_, vol. iii, pp. 14, 15. _Chronique de la Pucelle_, p. 326.]
Peradventure the Lord Archbishop was curious to know whether from her Voices she had received any revelation concerning her approaching death. She often said that she would not last long. Doubtless he was acquainted with a prophecy widely known at that time, that the maid would die in the Holy Land, after having reconquered with King Charles the sepulchre of our Lord. There were those who attributed this prophecy to the Maid herself; for she had told her Confessor that she would die in battle with the Infidel, and that after her G.o.d would send a Maid of Rome who would take her place.[1637] And it is obvious that Messire Regnault knew what store to set on such things. At any rate, for that reason or for another, he asked: ”Jeanne, in what place look you for to die?”
[Footnote 1637: Eberhard Windecke, pp. 108, 109, 188, 189.]
To which she made answer: ”Where it shall please G.o.d. For I am sure neither of the time nor of the place, and I know no more thereof than you.”
No answer could have been more devout. My Lord the b.a.s.t.a.r.d, who was present at this conversation, many years later thought he remembered that Jeanne had added: ”But I would it were now G.o.d's pleasure for me to retire, leaving my arms, and to go and serve my father and mother, keeping sheep with my brethren and sister.”[1638]
[Footnote 1638: _Trial_, vol. iii, pp. 14, 15. It is Dunois who is giving evidence, and the text runs: _In custodiendo oves ipsorum, c.u.m sorore et fratribus meis, qui multum gauderent videre me_. But there is reason to believe she had only one sister, whom she had lost before coming into France. As for her brothers, two of them were with her.
Dunois' evidence appears to have been written down by a clerk unacquainted with events. The hagiographical character of the pa.s.sage is obvious.]
If she really spoke thus, it was doubtless because she was haunted by dark forebodings. For some time she had believed herself betrayed.[1639]
Possibly she suspected the Lord Archbishop of Reims of wis.h.i.+ng her ill. But it is hard to believe that he can have thought of getting rid of her now when he had employed her with such signal success; rather his intention was to make further use of her. Nevertheless he did not like her, and she felt it. He never consulted her and never told her what had been decided in council. And she suffered cruelly from the small account made of the revelations she was always receiving so abundantly. May we not interpret as a subtle and delicate reproach the utterance in his presence of this wish, this complaint? Doubtless she longed for her absent mother. And yet she was mistaken when she thought that henceforth she could endure the tranquil life of a village maiden. In her childhood at Domremy she seldom went to tend the flocks in the field; she preferred to occupy herself in household affairs;[1640] but if, after having waged war beside the King and the n.o.bles, she had had to return to her country and keep sheep, she would not have stayed there six months. Henceforth it was impossible for her to live save with that knighthood, to whose company she believed G.o.d had called her. All her heart was there, and she had finished with the distaff.
[Footnote 1639: _Trial_, vol. ii, p. 423.]
[Footnote 1640: _Ibid._, vol. i, pp. 51, 66.]
During the march on La Ferte and Crepy, King Charles received a challenge from the Regent, then at Montereau with his baronage, calling upon him to fix a meeting at whatsoever place he should appoint.[1641] ”We, who with all our hearts,” said the Duke of Bedford, ”desire the end of the war, summon and require you, if you have pity and compa.s.sion on the poor folk, who in your cause have so long time been cruelly treated, downtrodden, and oppressed, to appoint a place suitable either in this land of Brie, where we both are, or in l'ile-de-France. There will we meet. And if you have any proposal of peace to make unto us, we will listen to it and as beseemeth a good Catholic prince we will take counsel thereon.”[1642]
[Footnote 1641: Monstrelet, vol. iv, pp. 340, 344.]
[Footnote 1642: Monstrelet, vol. iv, p. 342.]
This arrogant and insulting letter had not been penned by the Regent in any desire or hope of peace, but rather, against all reason, to throw on King Charles's shoulders the responsibility for the miseries and suffering the war was causing the commonalty.
Writing to the King crowned in Reims Cathedral, from the beginning he addresses him in this disdainful manner: ”You who were accustomed to call yourself Dauphin of Viennois and who now without reason take unto yourself the t.i.tle of King.” He declares that he wants peace and then adds forthwith: ”Not a peace hollow, corrupt, feigned, violated, perjured, like that of Montereau, on which, by your fault and your consent, there followed that terrible and detestable murder, committed contrary to all law and honour of knighthood, on the person of our late dear and greatly loved Father, Jean, Duke of Burgundy.”[1643]
[Footnote 1643: _Ibid._, pp. 342, 343.]
My Lord of Bedford had married one of the daughters of that Duke Jean, who had been treacherously murdered in revenge for the a.s.sa.s.sination of the Duke of Orleans. But indeed it was not wisely to prepare the way of peace to cast the crime of Montereau in the face of Charles of Valois, who had been dragged there as a child and with whom there had remained ever after a physical trembling and a haunting fear of crossing bridges.[1644]
[Footnote 1644: Georges Chastellain, fragments published by J. Quicherat in _La Bibliotheque de l'ecole des Chartes_, 1st series, vol. iv, p.