Part 123 (2/2)
372.]
Meanwhile the English government had declared for the Pope and against the Council.[2695] My Lord Pierre Cauchon, who had become Bishop of Lisieux, was Henry VI's amba.s.sador at the Council. And at Bale a somewhat unpleasant experience befell him. By reason of his translation to the see of Lisieux he owed Rome annates to the amount of 400 golden florins. In Germany he was informed by the Pope's Treasurer that by his failure to pay this sum, despite the long delays granted to him, he had incurred excommunication, and that being excommunicate, by presuming to celebrate divine service he had committed irregularity.[2696] Such accusations must have caused him considerable annoyance. But after all, such occurrences were frequent and of no great consequence. On churchmen these thunderbolts fell but lightly, doing them no great hurt.
[Footnote 2695: De Beaurepaire, _Les etats de Normandie sous la domination anglaise_, pp. 66, 67, 185, 188. De Beaucourt, _loc. cit._ p. 362.]
[Footnote 2696: De Beaurepaire, _loc. cit._, p. 17. _Notes sur les juges et a.s.sesseurs du proces de cond.a.m.nation_, p. 117. _Recherches sur le proces_, p. 124.]
From 1444, the realm of France, disembarra.s.sed alike of adversaries and of defenders, was free to labour, to work at various trades, to engage in commerce and to grow rich. In the intervals between wars and during truces, King Charles's government, by the interchange of natural products and of merchandise, also, we may add, by the abolition of tolls and dues on the Rivers Seine, Oise, and Loire, effected the actual conquest of Normandy. Thus, when the time for nominal conquest came, the French had only to take possession of the province. So easy had this become, that in the rapid campaign of 1449,[2697] even the Constable was not beaten, neither was the Duke of Alencon. In his royal and peaceful manner Charles VII resumed possession of his town of Rouen, just as twenty years before he had taken Troyes and Reims, as the result of an understanding with the townsfolk and in return for an amnesty and the grant of rights and privileges to the burghers. He entered the city on Monday, the 10th of November, 1449.
[Footnote 2697: De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. v, ch.
i.]
The French government felt itself strong enough even to attempt the reconquest of that essentially English province, Aquitaine. In 1451, my Lord the b.a.s.t.a.r.d, now Count of Dunois, took possession of the fortress of Blaye. Bordeaux and Bayonne surrendered in the same year.
In the following manner did the Lord Bishop of Le Mans celebrate these conquests, worthy of the majesty of the most Christian King.
”Maine, Normandy, Aquitaine, these goodly provinces have returned to their allegiance to the King. Almost without the shedding of French blood hath this been accomplished. It hath not been necessary to overthrow the ramparts of many strongly walled towns, or to demolish their fortifications or for the inhabitants to suffer either pillage or murder.”[2698]
[Footnote 2698: Lanery d'Arc, _Memoires et consultations en faveur de Jeanne d'Arc_, p. 249.]
Indeed Normandy and Maine were quite content at being French once more. The town of Bordeaux was alone in regretting the English, whose departure spelt its ruin. It revolted in 1452; and then after considerable difficulty was reconquered once and for all.
King Charles, henceforth rich and victorious, now desired to efface the stain inflicted on his reputation by the sentence of 1431. He wanted to prove to the whole world that it was no witch who had conducted him to his coronation. He was now eager to appeal against the condemnation of the Maid. But this condemnation had been p.r.o.nounced by the church, and the Pope alone could order it to be cancelled. The King hoped to bring the Pope to do this, although he knew it would not be easy. In the March of 1450, he proceeded to a preliminary inquiry;[2699] and matters remained in that position until the arrival in France of Cardinal d'Estouteville, the legate of the Holy See. Pope Nicolas had sent him to negotiate with the King of France a peace with England and a crusade against the Turks. Cardinal d'Estouteville, who belonged to a Norman family, was just the man to discover the weak points in Jeanne's trial. In order to curry favour with Charles, he, as legate, set on foot a new inquiry at Rouen, with the a.s.sistance of Jean Brehal, of the order of preaching friars, the Inquisitor of the Faith in the kingdom of France. But the Pope did not approve of the legate's intervention;[2700] and for three years the revision was not proceeded with. Nicolas V would not allow it to be thought that the sacred tribunal of the most holy Inquisition was fallible and had even once p.r.o.nounced an unjust sentence. And there existed at Rome a stronger reason for not interfering with the trial of 1431: the French demanded revision; the English were opposed to it; and the Pope did not wish to annoy the English, for they were then just as good and even better Catholics than the French.[2701]
[Footnote 2699: _Trial_, vol. ii, pp. 1, 22.]
[Footnote 2700: _Gallia Christiana_, vol. iii, col. 1129 and vol. xi, col. 90. De Beaucourt, _Histoire de Charles VII_, vol. v, p. 219. Le P. Ayroles, _La Pucelle devant l'eglise de son temps_, ch. vi.]
[Footnote 2701: De Beaurepaire, _Les etats de Normandie sous la domination anglaise_, pp. 185, 188.]
In order to relieve the Pope from embarra.s.sment and set him at his ease, the government of Charles VII invented an expedient: the King was not to appear in the suit; his place was to be taken by the family of the Maid. Jeanne's mother, Isabelle Romee de Vouthon, who lived in retirement at Orleans,[2702] and her two sons, Pierre and Jean du Lys, demanded the revision.[2703] By this legal artifice the case was converted from a political into a private suit. At this juncture Nicolas V died, on the 24th of March, 1455. His successor, Calixtus III, a Borgia, an old man of seventy-eight, by a rescript dated the 11th of June, 1455, authorised the inst.i.tution of proceedings. To this end he appointed Jean Jouvenel des Ursins, Archbishop of Reims, Guillaume Chartier, Bishop of Paris, and Richard Olivier, Bishop of Coutances, who were to act conjointly with the Grand Inquisitor of France.[2704]
[Footnote 2702: _Trial_, vol. v, p. 276.]
[Footnote 2703: _Ibid._, vol. ii, pp. 108, 112.]
[Footnote 2704: _Ibid._, p. 95. Le P. Ayroles, _La Pucelle devant l'eglise de son temps_, p. 607. J. Belon and F. Balme, _Jean Brehal, grand inquisiteur de France et la rehabilitation de Jeanne d'Arc_, Paris, 1893, in 4to.]
From the first it was agreed that certain of those concerned in the original trial were not now to be involved, ”for they had been deceived.” Notably it was admitted that the Daughter of Kings, the Mother of Learning, the University of Paris, had been led into error by a fraudulent indictment consisting of twelve articles. It was agreed that the whole responsibility should be thrown on to the Bishop of Beauvais and the Promoter, Guillaume d'Estivet, who were both deceased. The precaution was necessary. Had it not been taken, certain doctors very influential with the King and very dear to the Church of France would have been greatly embarra.s.sed.
On the 7th of November, 1455, Isabelle Romee and her two sons, followed by a long procession of innumerable ecclesiasties, laymen, and worthy women, approached the church of Notre Dame in Paris to demand justice from the prelates and papal commissioners.[2705]
[Footnote 2705: _Trial_, vol. ii, pp. 82, 92.]
Informers and accusers in the trial of the late Jeanne were summoned to appear at Rouen on the 12th of December. Not one came.[2706] The heirs of the late Messire Pierre Cauchon declined all liability for the deeds of their deceased kinsman, and touching the civil responsibility, they pleaded the amnesty granted by the King on the reconquest of Normandy.[2707] As had been expected, the proceedings went forward without any obstacle or even any discussion.
[Footnote 2706: _Ibid._, pp. 92, 112.]
[Footnote 2707: _Ibid._, pp. 193, 196.]
<script>