Part 94 (2/2)
”I knew neither the day nor the hour when I should be taken, nor when it should happen.”[2145]
[Footnote 2145: _Ibid._, p. 200.]
A young fellow, one Pierre Cusquel, who worked for Jean Salvart, also called Jeanson, the master-mason of the castle, through the influence of his employer, was permitted to enter the tower. He also found Jeanne bound with a long chain attached to a beam, and with her feet in shackles. Much later, he claimed to have warned her to be careful of what she said, because her life was involved in it. It is true that she talked volubly to her guards and that all she said was reported to her judges. And it may have happened that the young Pierre, whose master was on the English side, wished to advise her and even did so.
There is a suspicion, however, that like so many others he was merely boasting.[2146]
[Footnote 2146: _Trial_, vol. iii, p. 179.]
The Sire Jean de Luxembourg came to Rouen. He went to the Maid's tower accompanied by his brother, the Lord Bishop of Therouanne, Chancellor of England; and also by Humphrey, Earl of Stafford, Constable of France for King Henry; and the Earl of Warwick, Governor of the Castle of Rouen. At this interview there was also present the young Seigneur de Macy, who held Jeanne to be of very modest bearing, since she had repulsed his attempted familiarity.
”Jeanne,” said the Sire de Luxembourg, ”I have come to ransom you if you will promise never again to bear arms against us.”
These words do not accord with our knowledge of the negotiation for the purchase of the Maid. They seem to indicate that even then the contract was not complete, or at any rate that the vendor thought he could break it if he chose. But the most remarkable point about the Sire de Luxembourg's speech is the condition on which he says he will ransom the Maid. He asks her to promise never again to fight against England and Burgundy. From these words it would seem to have been his intention to sell her to the King of France or to his representative.[2147]
[Footnote 2147: Morosini, vol. iii, p. 236.]
There is no evidence, however, of this speech having made any impression on the English. Jeanne set no store by it.
”In G.o.d's name, you do but jest,” she replied; ”for I know well that it lieth neither within your will nor within your power.”
It is related that when he persisted in his statement, she replied:
”I know that these English will put me to death, believing that afterwards they will conquer France.”
Since she certainly did not believe it, it seems highly improbable that she should have said that the English would have put her to death. Throughout the trial she was expecting, on the faith of her Voices, to be delivered. She knew not how or when that deliverance would come to pa.s.s, but she was as certain of it as of the presence of Our Lord in the Holy Sacrament. She may have said to the Sire de Luxembourg: ”I know that the English want to put me to death.” Then she repeated courageously what she had already said a thousand times:
”But were there one hundred thousand _G.o.dons_ more than at present, they would not conquer the kingdom.”
On hearing these words, the Earl of Stafford unsheathed his sword and the Earl of Warwick had to restrain his hand.[2148] That the English Constable of France should have raised his sword against a woman in chains would be incredible, did we not know that about this time this Earl of Stafford, hearing some one speak well of Jeanne, straightway wished to transfix him.[2149]
[Footnote 2148: _Trial_, vol. iii, pp. 121, 123.]
[Footnote 2149: _Ibid._, p. 140.]
In order that the Bishop and Vidame of Beauvais might exercise jurisdiction at Rouen it was necessary that a concession of territory should be granted him. The archiepiscopal see of Rouen was vacant.[2150] For this concession, therefore, the Bishop of Beauvais applied to the chapter, with whom he had had misunderstandings.[2151]
The canons of Rouen lacked neither firmness nor independence; more of them were honest than dishonest; some were highly educated, well-lettered and even kind-hearted. None of them nourished any ill will toward the English. The Regent Bedford himself was a canon of Rouen, as Charles VII was a canon of Puy.[2152] On the 20th of October, in that same year 1430, the Regent, donning surplice and amice, had distributed the dole of bread and wine for the chapter.[2153] The canons of Rouen were not prejudiced in favour of the Maid of the Armagnacs; they agreed to the demand of the Bishop of Beauvais and granted him the formal concession of territory.[2154]
[Footnote 2150: C. de Beaurepaire, _Recherches sur le proces de cond.a.m.nation de Jeanne d'Arc_, in _Precis des travaux de l'Academie de Rouen_, 1867-1868, pp. 470-479. U. Chevalier, _L'abjuration de Jeanne d'Arc_, p. 29.]
[Footnote 2151: De Beaurepaire, _Notes sur les juges_, p. 17.]
[Footnote 2152: _Gallia Christiana_, vol. ii, p. 732. Vallet de Viriville, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. ii, pp. 213, 214. S. Luce, _Jeanne d'Arc a Domremy_, p. ccxcv.]
[Footnote 2153: C. de Beaurepaire, _Recherches sur le proces de cond.a.m.nation de Jeanne d'Arc_, _loc. cit._ A. Sarrazin, _Jeanne d'Arc et la Normandie_, pp. 168, 171.]
[Footnote 2154: 28 December, 1430. _Trial_, vol. i, pp. 20, 23. De Beaurepaire, _Notes sur les juges_, p. 46.]
On the 3rd of January, 1431, by royal decree, King Henry ordered the Maid to be given up to the Bishop and Count of Beauvais, reserving to himself the right to bring her before him, if she should be acquitted by the ecclesiastical tribunal.[2155]
<script>