Part 96 (1/2)
[Footnote 2183: _Trial_, vol. i, pp. 117, 300.]
Sundry clerks introduced into her prison gave her to believe that they were men-at-arms of the party of Charles of Valois.[2184] In order to deceive her, the Promoter himself, Maitre Jean d'Estivet, disguised himself as a poor prisoner.[2185] One of the canons of Rouen, who was summoned to the trial, by name Maitre Nicolas Loiseleur, would seem to have been especially inventive of devices for the discovery of Jeanne's heresies. A native of Chartres, he was not only a master of arts, but was greatly renowned for astuteness. In 1427 and 1428 he carried through difficult negotiations, which detained him long months in Paris. In 1430 he was one of those deputed by the chapter to go to the Cardinal of Winchester in order to obtain an audience of King Henry and commend to him the church of Rouen. Maitre Nicolas Loiseleur was therefore a _persona grata_ with the Great Council.[2186]
[Footnote 2184: _Trial_, vol. ii, p. 362.]
[Footnote 2185: _Ibid._, vol. iii, p. 63.]
[Footnote 2186: De Beaurepaire, _Notes sur les juges_, pp. 72-82. A.
Sorel, _loc. cit._, pp. 243, 247.]
Having concerted with the Bishop of Beauvais and the Earl of Warwick, he entered Jeanne's prison, wearing a short jacket like a layman. The guards had been instructed to withdraw; and Maitre Nicolas, left alone with his prisoner, confided to her that he, like herself, was a native of the Lorraine Marches, a shoemaker by trade, one who held to the French party and had been taken prisoner by the English. From King Charles he brought her tidings which were the fruit of his own imagination. No one was dearer to Jeanne than her King. Thus having won her confidence, the pseudo-shoemaker asked her sundry questions concerning the angels and saints who visited her. She answered him confidingly, speaking as friend to friend, as countryman to countryman. He gave her counsel, advising her not to believe all these churchmen and not to do all that they asked her; ”For,” he said, ”if thou believest in them thou shalt be destroyed.”
Many a time, we are told, did Maitre Nicolas Loiseleur act the part of the Lorraine shoemaker. Afterwards he dictated to the registrars all that Jeanne had said, providing thus a valuable source of information of which a memorandum was made to be used during the examination. It would even appear that during certain of these visits the registrars were stationed at a peep-hole in an adjoining room.[2187] If we may believe the rumours current in the town, Maitre Nicolas also disguised himself as Saint Catherine, and by this means brought Jeanne to say all that he wanted.
[Footnote 2187: _Trial_, vol. ii, pp. 10, 342; vol. iii, pp. 140, 141, 156, 160 _et seq._]
He may not have been proud of such deceptions, but at any rate he made no secret of them.[2188] Many famous masters approved him; others censured him.[2189]
[Footnote 2188: _Ibid._, vol. iii, p. 181.]
[Footnote 2189: _Ibid._, p. 141.]
The angel of the schools, Thomas de Courcelles, when Nicolas told him of his disguises, counselled him to abandon them.
Afterwards the registrars pretended that it had been extremely repugnant to them thus to overhear in hiding a conversation so craftily contrived. The golden age of inquisitorial justice must have been well over when so strict a doctor as Maitre Thomas was willing thus to criticise the most solemn forms of that justice. Inquisitorial proceedings must indeed have fallen into decay when two notaries of the Church dream of eluding its most common prescriptions. The clerks who disguised themselves as soldiers, the Promoter who took on the semblance of a poor prisoner, were exercising the most regular functions of the judicial system inst.i.tuted by Innocent III.
In acting the shoemaker and Saint Catherine, if he were seeking the salvation and not the destruction of the sinner, if, contrary to public report, far from inciting her to rebellion, he was reducing her to obedience, if, in short, he were but deceiving her for her own temporal and spiritual good, Maitre Nicolas Loiseleur was proceeding in conformity with established rules. In the _Tractatus de Haeresi_ it is written: ”Let no man approach the heretic, save from time to time two persons of faith and tact, who may warn him with precaution and as having compa.s.sion upon him, to eschew death by confessing his errors, and who may promise him that by so doing he shall escape death by fire; for the fear of death, and the hope of life may peradventure soften a heart which could be touched in no other wise.”[2190]
[Footnote 2190: _Tractatus de haeresi pauperum de Lugduno_, apud Martene, _Thesaurus anecd._, vol. v, col. 1787. J. Quicherat, _Apercus nouveaux_, pp. 131, 132.]
The duty of registrars was laid down in the following manner:
”Matters shall be ordained thus, that certain persons shall be stationed in a suitable place so as to surprise the confidences of heretics and to overhear their words.”[2191]
[Footnote 2191: Eymeric, _Directorium_, part iii, _Cautelae inquisitorum contra haereticorum cavilationes et fraudes_.]
As for the Bishop of Beauvais, who had ordained and permitted such procedure, he found his justification and approbation in the words of the Apostle Saint Paul to the Corinthians: ”I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.” ”_Ego vos non gravavi; sed c.u.m essem astutus, dolo vos cepi_” (II Corinthians xii, 16).[2192]
[Footnote 2192: L. Tanon, _Histoire des tribunaux de l'inquisition en France_, p. 394.]
Meanwhile, when Jeanne saw the Promoter, Jean d'Estivet, in his churchman's habit she did not recognise him. And Maitre Nicolas Loiseleur also often came to her in monkish dress. In this guise he inspired her with great confidence; she confessed to him devoutly and had no other confessor.[2193] She saw him sometimes as a shoemaker and sometimes as a canon and never perceived that he was the same person.
Wherefore we must indeed believe her to have been incredibly simple in certain respects; and these great theologians must have realised that it was not difficult to deceive her.
[Footnote 2193: _Trial_, vol. ii, pp. 10, 342.]
It was well known to all men versed in science, divine and human, that the Enemy never entered into dealings with a maid without depriving her of her virginity.[2194] At Poitiers the French clerks had thought of it, and when Queen Yolande a.s.sured them that Jeanne was a virgin, they ceased to fear that she was sent by the devil.[2195] The Lord Bishop of Beauvais in a different hope awaited a similar examination.
The d.u.c.h.ess of Bedford herself went to the prison. She was a.s.sisted by Lady Anna Bavon and another matron. It has been said that the Regent was hidden meanwhile in an adjoining room and looking through a hole in the wall.[2196] This is by no means certain, but it is not impossible; he was at Rouen a fortnight after Jeanne had been brought there.[2197] Whether the charge were groundless or well founded he was seriously reproached for this curiosity. If there were many who in his place would have been equally curious, every one must judge for himself; but we must bear in mind that my Lord of Bedford believed Jeanne a witch, and that it was not the custom in those days to treat witches with the respect due to ladies. We must remember also that this was a matter in which Old England was greatly concerned, and the Regent loved his country with all his heart and all his strength.
[Footnote 2194: Vallet de Viriville, _Nouvelles recherches sur Agnes Sorel_, pp. 33 _et seq._ Du Cange, _Glossaire_, at the word _Matrimonium_.]