Preview:

MOU average comprehensive school №100

RESEARCH WORK

TOPIC:

"SECRETS OF BIRTH,

LIFE AND DEATH

JEANNE d "Arc"

Done by: 10th grade student

Duck Anna

Checked by: Dryankova E.A.

NOVOKUZNETSK

2006

Plan:

Introduction Page 2

Main part:

I. Mystery of birth. Page 3

I.1. Origin of Joan of Arc Page 3

I.2. What is the gender of Joan of Arc? Page 5

I.3. Plan of Gilles De Re. Page 7

I.4. Predictions about the advent of the great Virgin. Page 8

II. The mystery of the death of Joan of Arc. Page 11

III. Life after death. Page 13

Conclusion Page 21

References Page 23

Introduction

The legend of Joan of Arc is one of the greatest falsifications in French history; perhaps the biggest lie of its kind. Robert Ambelain

There are two stories: official history, which is taught at school, and secret history, in which the true causes of events are hidden.Honore de Balzac.

Joan of Arc is an eternal topic that has been worrying researchers for almost six centuries, and in it, as is usually the case with eternal themes, everything is far from being as clear as one would like. In addition to the traditional (canonical), there are a lot of so-called alternative versions conditionally combined into two large directions.

One of them (in particular, the historians Jean Jacobi, author of the book The Secret of Joan of Arc, Edouard Schneider, Jean Bosler, and others) adhere to it

that Jeanne was not, as it is officially considered, the daughter of the peasant Jacques d "Arc and his wife Isabella Roma. She allegedly belonged to the royal dynasty, which explains her high status, her excellent knowledge of the court and the peculiarities of military affairs.

Adherents of this theory in French are called "batardists" (batardisants), that is, supporters of the fact of Jeanne's illegitimate birth.

Historians of another direction, the founder of which is Jean Grimaud, who published the book “Was Jeanne d'Arc Burned?” in 1952, are based on the fact that Jeanne could not have been burned at the stake in Rouen. According to this theory, she managed to escape, to marry and reappear under the name of Jeanne des Armois.This theory is supported by such respected historians as Jean de Saint-Jean (author of Jeanne, 1407-1452), Gerard Pem (author of Jeanne des Armois), Etienne Veil-Raynal (author of the book "The Double Secret of Jeanne the Virgin"), André Brice, Pierre de Sermoise, Florence Maquet and others.

Supporters of this theory are called "survivists" (survivistes), that is, supporters of the fact of Jeanne's salvation.

The main goal of our research:

Without pretending to finally resolve all these "strange" questions, in our study we tried to systematize many strange and contradictory events that occurred in the so-called (and, without any doubt, political) "Joan of Arc Case". reverse side history, the ambiguity of the solution of many contentious issues.

Research objectives:

1. Uncover the secret of the birth of Joan of Arc. Find out whether Joan of Arc was a simple girl from a peasant family or she belonged to a royal family, which determined her fate.
2. Try to solve the mystery of the death of Joan of Arc. Was she really burned at the stake in Rouen or did she continue to live after "death".

In our work, we were guided by the following methods:

1. The study of the actual documentary material.
2. Comparative analysis of sources.
3. On the basis of a comparative analysis, the conclusions were systematized.

I part. Mystery of birth.

I.1. Origin of Joan of Arc.

So, on a cold November night in 1407, to the village of Domremy, which was located on the border French kingdom on the banks of the Meuse River, a group of riders from Paris showed up at the house of Jacques d "Arc. The warriors of the Duke of Orleans, covered in snow and chilled, rode for eight days, and for this they had to have a very good reason. This good reason, as you might guess, there was a baby wrapped in scarves, who was held in her arms by Jeanne d "Arc, the widow of Nicolas d" Arc, the brother of Jacques d "Arc. By the way, her marriage to Nicolas d" Arc was the second, and her first husband was a knight Aude de Recy, which also confirms the difficult social level this surname.

Note that the woman who carried the baby was also called Joan of Arc and served as a nurse at the royal court. The fact that her name was exactly the same as our main character can be considered a coincidence, although, on the other hand, Jeans and Jeanne was called at that time, probably, half of the French.

So why did the royal nurse Joan of Arc suddenly need to rush to distant Domremy to her brother-in-law's house? What kind of mission did she perform?

Before answering this question, let's find out what Domremy is. For some reason, most historians believe that Domremy is a small village abandoned somewhere in Lorraine. Apparently, such an interpretation is convenient for them as an additional emphasis in the version of the “common” origin of Jeanne.

But this is completely false. Firstly, Domremy is not such a village (after all, there were thirty-four farms in it), and secondly, it is located not in Lorraine, but in the Duchy of Barrois, and this is next to Lorraine, at the junction of the present the French departments of Meurthe and Moselle, Meuse and Haute-Marne.

Why did the royal nurse suddenly need to rush to Domremy and what was her mission.

The explanation for this, along with the version of the illegitimate birth of the Virgin of Orleans from Queen Isabella of Bavaria and Duke Louis of Orleans, brother of King Charles VI, has its roots in early XIX century.

Now we can say that it is known for certain that on November 10, 1407, Queen Isabella gave birth to a child who, according to the chronicles, died shortly after birth. However, the grave and the remains of this baby could not be found. At the same time, in " General History French royal house The 1764 edition spoke of a boy named Philip. Surprisingly, in the two subsequent editions of this book - 1770 and 1783 - it was already said about the girl named Jeanne.

Be that as it may, the event represented big problem for the queen. Most historians agree that a child (whether a boy or a girl) could not have been a child of King Charles VI, who suffered from insanity, did not actually rule the country and did not “communicate” with his wife for many years.

In those distant times, illegitimate children with kings and princes were a very ordinary matter (the child was brought up with others, and he received a worthy position in society), but such a child with the queen put her in an uncomfortable and even dangerous position. The only real way out of this situation is to destroy the traces of the child, declaring him dead and sending him to the wet nurse.

Historian Paul Ruelle notes this interesting fact: there were two more people in the d "Arc family - some Guillaume and Yvon. Both of them in 1423 will become guardians and advisers of the born dauphin (that is crown prince, not yet crowned to the throne) Louis, son of King Charles VII and Mary of Anjou. In addition to the fact that this once again proves the difficult origin of the d "Arc family, it also suggests the following: there is no fundamental difference between one royal child placed in the care of representatives of the d" Arc family and another royal child, also given to be raised in the same family. Paul Ruelle writes:

“The difference is only in the publicity, perhaps associated with the ambiguity of ascertaining the sex of the child, which will remain in doubt until the moment of puberty. If it was definitely a girl, there would be no problem: she would be placed in a monastery, and then they would pick up a husband for her, “profitable” from the point of view of royal policy. As they say, a woman with a cart, a mare is easier! But if it turned out to be a boy, it was necessary to observe a minimum of decency. Therefore, it was necessary to entrust the child to the family traditionally in charge of royal custody, but it was necessary to do this as secretly as possible.

I.2. What is the gender of Joan of Arc?

With a child born to Isabella of Bavaria in November 1407, far from everything is clear. It is not even clear what gender he was, because they call him either a boy, or a girl, or Philip, or Jeanne. The chroniclers of that time agree that this child died before he lived even a day - so does it matter what gender he was and what his name was? But on the other hand, there was supposedly one curious document - a kind of “travel certificate” issued to the legitimate son of Louis of Orleans, Charles, with an order to deliver a certain baby from the Barbette Palace (Queen Isabella’s chambers in Paris) to Domremy. This certificate is dated late autumn 1407. All dates agree, and there is no doubt that it was the same baby - either Philip, or Jeanne. But, alas, this document disappeared, which gives the supporters of the canonical version the confidence that it never existed.

They say the same thing about the so-called "Book of Poitiers", supposedly existing in the secret funds of the Vatican. This book allegedly collected all the protocols of the investigation conducted by the royal commission in 1429 on the question of whether Jeanne the Virgin is who she claims to be, and whether she can be entrusted with the command of the troops.

Historians who have seen the “Book of Poitiers” claim that there are protocols there, from which it is clear that all the inhabitants of Domremy, where Jeanne was brought up, considered her the illegitimate daughter of Queen Isabella of Bavaria and Duke Louis of Orleans.

However, The Book of Poitiers is not currently available, and the Vatican claims that it does not exist and never has. It is easy to guess why officials from the Vatican need this: it is not at all appropriate for someone, but they, to defame the honest name of St. Joan, canonized in May 1920. Saint, and suddenly - the illegitimate daughter of a mother of dubious reputation, who brightened up her leisure time with younger brother husband? Horror! Catastrophe! It's impossible to let this happen...

But why, after all, did the chroniclers get confused in determining the sex of the child born to Isabella of Bavaria in November 1407? There is one consideration here that gave rise to new versions that identify the so-called Joan of Arc or, if you like, "Joan of Arc" (in quotation marks).

Here's the thing: two medical examinations to which Jeanne was subjected in 1429 showed that she was not only a virgin, but could not lose her virginity even theoretically. Such were, how to put it more delicately, the structural features of some of its external and internal organs.

Is it because, by the way, Bertrand de Poulangy, who accompanied Jeanne on the journey from Vaucouleurs to Chinon, who was not even forty years old, said:

“Every night she lay down next to me and Jean from Metz, without taking off her coat and boots. I was young then, but despite this, I did not feel any desire or bodily attraction ... "

The well-known French researcher of the biography of Jeanne d "Arc, Regine Pernu, also noted, arguing about the impressions of Jeanne's companions during a trip to Chinon:

“Throughout the whole journey ... she slept next to them at all stops, went to bed without undressing, without unbuttoning, without removing either her camisole or trousers; and they never had a "movement of the flesh" towards her.

However, there is irrefutable evidence that outwardly Jeanne was still a girl, with a pleasant face, graceful body and beautiful breasts, which she often showed to her soldiers without hesitation.

All this can only testify to one degree or another of the development of hermaphroditism - genetic disease, which is rare, although not to such an extent that these cases were completely unique.

As you know, in the case of hermaphroditism, it is extremely difficult to determine the sex of the baby. With complete hermaphroditism, this is completely impossible, since the signs of both sexes are combined in equally. But even with false hermaphroditism, and this is precisely what was observed, apparently, in our case, the signs of one sex begin to prevail only as they grow older, and in infancy it is very, very difficult to establish the sex.

Isn't this the source of Jeanne's unbridled desire to fight, endurance, reckless courage and even success in knightly tournaments?

I.3. Plan of Gilles De Re.

It must be said that Gilles de Rais was fabulously rich and willingly took on the costs of organizing banquets, hunting and other amusements that Karl adored so much. It is not surprising that Gilles de Rais was always welcomed in Chiynon as the most honored guest.

One day at dinner, the conversation once again turned to the new military operations of the Duke of Bedford. Karl once again began to complain about the lack of soldiers, about their lack of fighting spirit and belief in the possibility of victory over the British. True, Karl himself had little faith in this possibility.

And here Gilles de Rais proposed a plan, which was as follows. A simple village girl allegedly comes to the Dauphin, to whom the saints come and prophesy that, after Charles becomes king, France will again be united. Gilles de Rais himself undertook to finance the creation regular army and gave money to organize a militia.

I.4. Predictions about the advent of the great Virgin.

Karl liked the proposed plan, and he immediately began to develop it. True, to develop is loudly said, Karl did not know how to develop, but he guessed to seek advice from his beloved mother-in-law Yolande of Aragon, whom he revered more than his own mother.

Yolanda of Aragon knew well the old truth: miracles are where they are believed in, and the more they believe in them, the more often they happen.

By that time, the situation of the French, and especially the blockaded Orleans, this last serious outpost that prevented the advance of the British to the south of the country, was so bad that it could not be worse. Therefore, even in case of failure with the proposal of Gilles de Rais, Charles himself did not lose anything.

The question was only where to get this divine girl who will inspire people to fight against the British and elevate Charles to the throne? Who will perform all these miracles?

A very reliable candidate was needed, and it was then that Queen Yolande reminded Charles of the existence of his sister Jeanne, who, according to rumors, lived somewhere in the north of France. Here she is, a princess by blood, she could well play the role of the God-sent Virgin. If it is well prepared

to twist, she could well breathe fighting spirit into French soldiers, and besides, another important point was connected with her, which seemed

Yolande of Aragon is just a wonderful coincidence.

Jeanne was the same illegitimate child as Karl himself. Jeanne's father was Louis d'Orleans, many at the court of the late King Charles VI the Mad knew about this. But whose son was the Dauphin Charles himself - Louis of Orleans or a simple nobleman Louis de Bois-Bourdon?

In the first case, it was still possible to fight for his "legitimacy", after all, Louis of Orleans was the king's younger brother; in the second - in no way. It was then that Jeanne, the undoubted princess of the blood, was supposed to enter the stage. She should miraculously appear and confirm that "the son of adultery, the incarnation of the sin of his mother" is the dauphin, that is, the legitimate heir to the French throne.

Historian Robert Ambelain wrote about this:

"A whole scenario was drawn up, the purpose of which was to position the country in favor of Charles VII."

And this extremely simple idea was to be subsequently decorated with stories about "Joan the Virgin", about "Divine Voices", about "saving France", about " national identity" etc.

The basis of the conceived intrigue was the idea that the French people needed the legend of the Virgin to raise morale. Where did the idea come from that France would be ruined by a woman and reborn by a virgin?

The old prophecy, on which Yolanda of Aragon and her son-in-law Charles decided to rely, was based on the traditional opposition of a woman and a virgin. The researcher of the Jeanne phenomenon Vladimir Raitses, the author of the books “The Trial of Joan of Arc” (1964) and “Joan of Arc: Facts, Legends, Hypotheses” (1982), who studied the etymology of this prophecy, argued that it went back “to the fundamental Christian antithesis "Eva - Mary". As they say, Eve killed, and Mary saved.

Regarding the woman - the killer - here. Everything is clear. It could only be about the mother of Karl Isabella of Bavaria. The general rumor (in any case, in the lands that recognized Charles) had long placed on her the main blame for the disasters that befell France. It was she who went over to the British, she recognized the rights to the throne of her English grandson, thereby supporting the enemy occupation of half of the country (they allegedly came to maintain order in "their" kingdom).

Regarding the Virgin-savior - everything was somewhat more complicated. Vladimir Rayts wrote:

“The prediction of the coming of the Virgin Savior is a very complex phenomenon in its genetic nature. It, of course, affected the general growth of mystical moods on the basis of continuous disasters, military failures, social cataclysms, the ruin of the country, epidemics, hunger strikes, etc. There is no doubt that this prediction was associated with the cult of the savior of all human beings, which was widespread among the people. genus - the Virgin Mary.

In addition, the coming of the Virgin was predicted by the prophecies of the famous wizard Merlin, a character in many legends and chivalric novels, who lived in the 6th century at the court of the no less famous King Arthur. According to Merlin, the Virgin was to appear on the backs of the archers," and after she "takes the fortresses and dries up the sources of evil with her breath," she will be killed by "a deer with ten horns."

All of these prophecies were well known and based on them, a good performance could be put on. In principle, Jeanne was perfect for this role. On the one hand, she was "her own" person, on the other hand, she was not a "simple girl". In general, this was not bad, since the nobles would not reckon with an ordinary peasant woman. But then what about the prophecy that "God is pleased to act through a simple Virgin" (in Latin - Simplex Puella)? But a way out was found here too, because by “simplicity” one can understand not “low” social status, and the complex moral qualities: simplicity, purity of thoughts, chastity. Indeed, the Lord often chooses such “simple” people as his instrument, thus punishing human pride. In addition, the word “Virgin”, which has become a common cliche, had one of the meanings of the concept of “servant”, which could well be interpreted as “servant of the Lord God”.

No sooner said than done. Through her reliable associates and relatives, Queen Yolande made inquiries with some knowledgeable people, and they confirmed that sister Charles, the illegitimate daughter of Queen Isabella of Bavaria, really lives in the north at Domremy in the house of Jacques d "Arc.

On the advice of his mother-in-law, Charles quickly equipped a messenger named Colet de Vienne, gave him the Scottish archer Richard to accompany him, and sent them both to Vaucouleurs, the nearest city from Domremy, where his vassal Robert de Baudricourt ruled. Colet de Vienne carried with him fairly clear instructions about Jeanne.

PART II: THE MYSTERY OF THE DEATH OF JEANNE D'ARC

According to the canonical version, Jeanne was executed on May 30, 1431 in the Old Market Square in Rouen. However, rumors spread almost immediately that it was not Jeanne herself who was burned at the stake, but some completely different woman.

Who was this sufferer? Maybe a doppelgänger who was well aware of the fact that he would die a martyr's death under a false name in exchange for a direct path to paradise? Or maybe just an unfortunate woman not connected with Zhanna, accused of some kind of crime, who would have met death at the stake anyway?

It will remain a secret. So far, only one thing is clear: instead of Jeanne, another woman went to the fire.

There are many facts about this.

First of all, it struck everyone that the victim was sent to the stake with surprising haste, disregarding the strict rules of procedure usually adopted in the process of the Inquisition, without asking for a decision of the secular court.

The locals, who came to watch the execution, could not really see the victim, because a powerful cordon of eight hundred soldiers did not let the spectators go to the scaffold, and even the windows of the nearest houses of the Rouen authorities were ordered to close with wooden shutters.

Usually the convicts went to the fire with an open face and bare head, except for a paper cap smeared with a sulfuric composition. This time, the face of the condemned woman was completely covered.

Was this only a precautionary measure, fearing that an attempt would be made at the last moment to free Jeanne? This is unlikely, because the population of Rouen was on the side of the British. Consequently, the authorities could only be afraid of exposing the fact that not Jeanne, but some other woman, was brought to the fire.

Another very strange moment: on the eve of the execution, the convict was not unified, and in the 14th and 15th centuries no one was released from this, and especially criminals.

After the execution, Joan's jailer, Earl of Warwick, gave the order to collect the ashes of the victim and throw them into the Seine: there was no question of letting the crowd turn them into relics.

Of course, the stories about the heart preserved in the fire and about the white dove flying out of the fire towards France are all naive legends that have nothing to do with material laws nature, but the fact remains that the so-called Joan was not even dust left. Of course, executioners XV centuries and could not think of methods for identifying a person by his remains using the analysis of his DNA; they were guided by another - Jeanne had to disappear, and disappear forever and, if possible, without a trace.

And a very curious fact: with the strictest discipline and scrupulousness of the inquisitors, no record was found in their "accounting" books about the costs specifically for the execution of Jeanne. At the same time, records of sums of money for firewood and other "entourage" for other executions are available in full.

As you can see, this execution was stamped with mystery and some strange indistinctness: the procedures were carried out with obvious violations, no one saw the face of the executed, everything was done hastily, one might even say, clumsily. When, twenty-five years after the execution, the rehabilitation of Jeanne began, it turned out that none of the representatives of the judiciary had passed any sentence on the Virgin of Orleans. In addition, none of the participants in the trial could accurately tell how the trial and execution took place: some reported that they had not seen anything, others that they did not remember anything, and still others that they had left Rouen long before the execution. And even the date of the execution itself turned out to be not entirely accurate: contemporaries and historians called not only the day May 30, but also June 14, and July 6, and sometimes February 1432 (so, in any case, say the English chroniclers William Caxton and Polydor Virgilius).

From all that has been said, only one conclusion can be drawn: it was not Jeanne who was executed on the Old Market Square, but a figurehead who had nothing to do with her. And this should not have been noticed not only by numerous spectators, but also by the participants in the execution themselves.

III PART: LIFE AFTER DEATH.

III. 1. Mock execution

After a secret abduction, Jeanne was taken to the remote castle of Monroettier, located two leagues from the Savoyard city of Annecy, in which she was destined to spend the next few years of her life.

This castle was not chosen by chance, since since 1427 it belonged to the vassal of the Duke of Amadeus of Savoy, Pierre de Monton, the very one who was present at the feast of the Earl of Warwick on May 13, 1431. As you might guess, he was entrusted with the secret abduction of Jeanne from Rouen, her delivery to Montrottier and the organization of reliable protection.

It is also important to note that Pierre de Monton was not just one of the vassals of the Duke of Savoy, he was also his adviser and diplomatic mediator in negotiations between Charles VII, Philip the Good and Charles of Orleans.

As for the castle, located among the sheer cliffs, there is a room in its main tower, which for a long time was called the prison of the Virgin. The recluse marked the days of her stay there with dashes carved in the window opening, which correspond to the time Jeanne spent in Montrottier. Historian Robert Ambelain wrote:

“The one who was entrusted with the protection of a particularly valuable

Prisoner, couldn't think of a better prison."

Almost nothing is known about what exactly Jeanne did after her release and until 1436. Of course, she was kept under guard and had no freedom of movement. Charles VII, who took care of her rescue and actually exchanged her for John Talbot, needed time for the French to forget about their heroine, believing in her death.

Again, the trace of Jeanne appears only five years after the “burning of Rouen”. Five years is a long time, and a lot has happened over the years.

No one really knows what Jeanne did during these years, but in 1436 she showed up in Arlon, a small town on the border of modern Belgium with Luxembourg, and this fact is recorded in many sources.

The historian Robert Ambelain points out that it was Jean Poton de Xentray and his assistant Jean de Blanchefort who took Jeanne from Montrothier. No one really interfered with this “escape”.

In Arlon, Jeanne entered under the supervision of the powerful nobleman Jean de Rodmak. It is also known for certain that Jeanne was received by the Duchess of Luxembourg in Arlon.

Let's be clear: this Duchess of Luxembourg should not be confused, as, for example, Paul Ruelle does, with Jeanne of Luxembourg, who communicated with Jeanne at the very beginning of her stay in Burgundian captivity. In fact, the Duchess of Luxembourg is Elisabeth, cousin of Jean of Luxembourg. By her husband she was the Duchess de Görlitz. And Joan of Luxembourg, who at one time showed compassion for the prisoner of the castle of Beaurevoir, as we remember, died unmarried in 1430. She had two nephews, one of whom was Jean of Luxembourg, cousin of Elisabeth of Luxembourg and owner of the Beaurevoir castle.

The Duchess of Luxembourg was a very rich and influential lady, so it is unlikely that she would accept a girl whose origin would cause her any doubt. Quite the opposite, she gladly accepted Jeanne, feeling remorse for the months that Jeanne was forced to spend in custody with her relative.

In Arlon Castle, Jeanne lived in luxury, surrounded by the cares of the Duchess Elisabeth de Görlitz and her relatives, and after that she was taken away by Count Ulrich Warnemburg to the city of Cologne, where his father, the Duke of Warnemburg, lived. Historian Paul Ruelle claims that the Count "court" Jeanne, and Jeanne "allowed herself to be courted". Robert Ambelain goes even further, stating that "the named count fell in love with her very much."

In Cologne, she again began to wear men's clothes. In the book The Truth About Joan of Arc, published in Paris in 1895, it is said that Count Varnemburg gave her beautiful armor.

In Cologne, Jeanne "merrily feasted" with the Count of Warnembourg, and then began to actively intervene in the intrigues of local feudal lords. Such was her active nature, and neither being in captivity, nor a trial, nor five years in Montrottier, seems to have changed her.

Interesting information about the new appearance of Jeanne can be found in the old Chronicle of the Abbot of the Monastery of Saint Thibault de Metz, which states:

“In 1436 Mr. Philippin Marcou was the senior city councilor of the city of Metz. In the same year, on the twentieth of May, Jeanne the Virgin, who was in France, arrived at La Grange-aux-Ormes, not far from Saint-Privas. She came there to talk with several noble citizens of Metz ... And on the same day two brothers of the Virgin arrived there, one of whom, sir Pierre, was a knight, and the other, Jean Maly, was a squire. They thought she had been burned, but when they saw her, they recognized her, and she recognized them too.”

As you can see, the abbot of the monastery of Saint Thibault confirms that in 1436 Jeanne was recognized by her brothers and some nobles, not only in La Grange-aux-Ormes, but also in Metz, Type and in several other cities and villages. It is especially important that she was recognized by Ser Nicolas Louv, who was very closely acquainted with the "former" Jeanne.

There are mere evidences, and there are undeniable evidences. Nicolas Louv was at that time one of the most respected inhabitants of Metz. He was a knight of Charles VII and took part in his coronation at Reims. It simply would not have occurred to such a person to participate in any kind of hoax, recognizing the impostor Jeanne the Virgin. He also could not be mistaken, he knew Jeanne too well. By the way, he was elevated to the knighthood precisely thanks to her intercession, and all the gifts that he gave her were a manifestation of his infinite gratitude.

It is quite obvious that the abbot of the monastery of Saint Thibault sincerely considered the woman who appeared in 1436 to be a genuine Joan of Arc. We just need to add that there is another manuscript of his chronicle in which the author allegedly admits his mistake. It says the following:

"In this year a young girl appeared who called herself the Virgin of France and played her part in such a way that many were misled, especially the most elderly people."

This is very similar to an unqualified refutation of the first evidence, but is there any guarantee that this explanation of the so-called "self-proclaimed" is not a tendentious insertion made much later?

While in Metz, Jeanne wrote several letters, including to King Charles VII, who was in the castle of Loches. Jean d'Arc took these letters to the king, and we will return to this fact a little later.

But in 1436, the king did not even think of honoring Joan with an answer. Until I honor...

Oddly enough, for some reason no one asked Jeanne where she had spent the previous five years, which had passed since her alleged execution and miraculous salvation. She herself did not touch this issue.

Generally speaking, Jeanne's actions, if we assume that she was an impostor, are difficult to explain. Really, only a very self-confident person could behave so carelessly. The first obvious negligence is entering into correspondence with the king, and then meeting with his "brothers" from Domremy. Already at this stage, the impostor's career could have ended safely, without really starting. But further - more: Jeanne agreed to marry the seigneur des Armois, knowing full well that when marrying a nobleman, confirmation of her noble origin would be required.

III. 2. THE MARRIAGE OF JEANNE TO ROBERT DEZ ARMOISES

Jeanne really married the noble knight Robert des Armois, Seigneur de Tichemont. It happened in Metz at the beginning of November 1436. Some historians give a more accurate wedding date - November 7, 1436. There is an opinion that the recently widowed groom (his first wife was Alyx de Manonville, and from her he had a son Philip) Jeanne was picked up by the Duchess of Luxembourg herself.

Nothing impeding the marriage was found, and a magnificent wedding took place, after which Jeanne became known as Jeanne des Armois.

Let us ask ourselves the question, would Seigneur Robert, the son of Marshal Richard des Armois, even being in exile, marry a woman without family and tribe? Of course not. For a noble nobleman, this was simply out of the question. In any case, the des Armoises family still has a tradition of considering Jeanne the most glorious and revered of their ancestors.

Subsequently, they found marriage contract Jeanne des Armois and the deed of gift, according to which Robert des Armois transferred part of his possessions to his wife Jeanne, who was repeatedly called the "Virgin of France" in the text.

According to the professor and historian Albert Baye, in 1907 he personally held Jeanne's marriage contract in his hands, but then this priceless document was destroyed in February 1916 during the bombing of the town, where the castle of the seigneurs des Armois still towers. The signature of the wife of Seigneur Robert on it was completely identical to the signature on the letter of Joan of Arc to the inhabitants of Reims, dated March 16, 1430.

Apparently, a more reliable evidence of the authenticity of Jeanne is the reaction to her of the friends of Robert des Armois, who at one time knew Joan of Arc well.

So, for example, Jean de Toneltil and Joblet de Deng, who put their seals on the document transferring part of the possessions of Jeanne to her husband, knew the real Maid of Orleans. And they hardly had any reason to participate in their friend's deception. Or maybe they played a joke on him? Of course not. They were his true friends: the first was a powerful seigneur, and the second a royal judge in Marville, a small town northwest of Metz. Such people would not put their seals on dubious documents.

And finally, Robert des Armoises himself was a relative of Roberudet Baudricourt, the same captain who at one time facilitated the dispatch of Jeanne the Virgin from Vaucouleurs to Chinon (in 1425, Robert de Baudricourt married Alarda de Chamblay, cousin of Robert des Armois).

Why didn't Captain de Baudricourt open his cousin's eyes if some impostor intended to be his wife?

All this indicates that there was no impostor, and Jeanne of Domremy, the illegitimate daughter of the Duke of Orleans and Queen Isabella of Bavaria, raised in the family of Jacques d "Arc, really became the wife of Robert des Armois.

III. 3. THE MEETING OF JEANNE AND MARCHAL GILE DE RAY

Very little is known about what Jeanne did in 1437 and 1438. According to the available fragmentary information, having received no answer from Charles VII, she left for Italy.

The book The Truth About Joan of Arc tells that she arrived in Rome, "where she offered her services to Pope Eugene IV. She fought for him against the Duke of Milan and is said to have killed two soldiers with her own hand." , "having succeeded in the service of the pope and proud of his support, she returned to France."

According to Robert Ambelain, it was not at all like that. Jeanne was not in any Italy, and in December 1436 she left Metz and headed for Tiffauges, where, as she knew, her old acquaintance Gilles de Rais lived.

Jeanne ended up in Tiffauges in January 1437. After that, for almost two years, together with her old friend, admirer and patron Gilles de Rais, she fought against the British in southwestern France.

Gilles de Rais gathered a large army. Jean de Sikanville served as one of the commanders in this army.

On this occasion, Regine Pernu only remarks that Gilles de Rais "takes her with him to the war." According to some fragmentary information, not confirmed by serious documents, in this war Jeanne participated in the siege of La Rochelle, and then Bordeaux. Near Bordeaux, she was allegedly wounded.

It is impossible not to recognize the following fact even more unusual: in July; In 1439, that is, more than eight years after the official death of Jeanne, she herself came to Orleans.

Jeanne, and she was now called Madame des Armois, was met by an enthusiastic crowd of townspeople, among whom there were many people who knew their heroine well since the famous siege. Historical chronicles leave no doubt that the Orleans unconditionally mistook Jeanne des Armois for the Virgin of Orleans. Moreover, the account book directly states that on August 1, 1439, Jeanne was presented with a large sum of money (two hundred and ten livres, or eight thousand four hundred francs) with the wording "for the good she did to the city during the siege."

Many historians claim that the name of Jeanne in 1439 was used by a certain impostor. Well, there really were plenty of all kinds of impostors in history. In addition, how in those distant times was it possible to distinguish a real Virgo from a false Virgo? After all, there was no press, no television, no photographs then, and no one really knew the appearance of the real Jeanne in France ...

With France - it's understandable, but what about Orleans, where literally every resident remembered Jeanne by sight, not to mention her immediate associates? After all, they would immediately notice the substitution, especially since Jeanne was by no means hiding, but, on the contrary, took an active part in numerous social receptions arranged in her honor.

Do we have the right, having such evidence, to question the conclusion that Jeanne des Armois, who arrived in Orleans, was a real Orleans maiden? Do we have the right to dispute this conclusion without giving any reasons to explain what motivated all these people to participate in the collective hoax, or why and how they were misled?

French historian and academic Gerard Pem claims that he has found very important evidence. Until now, it was believed that Jeanne's adoptive mother, Isabella Rome, came to Orleans only in July 1440, that is, a year after the appearance of a woman who allegedly pretended to be her daughter. However, in the list of city expenses from March 6, 1440, there is a note about the payment to two persons for the maintenance and treatment of Isabella from July 7 to August 31. Here we can clearly talk only about 1439.

There is also a record of the payment of a pension established by the city of Isabelle Roma for September, October and November 1439. If the authenticity of these records is not questioned, then they indicate that the woman who raised Jeanne from birth was in Orleans at the time when Jeanne des Armois was solemnly received there. It is difficult to imagine the reasons why Isabella Roma would need to participate in the deception.

It should be noted that Jeanne's appearance has been described. In particular, specific signs were also known, which in those days (in the absence of plastic surgery) it was extremely difficult to copy: a dark birthmark behind the ear, scars - traces of injuries - in certain places of the body (Virgo was wounded several times in the neck and shoulder, later in the thigh; this should have left scars that are hardly possible fake).

The hospitality extended to Jeanne des Armois in Orleans allows only three interpretations: it could have been an involuntary mistake or the result of a collective hallucination, it could have been a conscious collective complicity in falsification, and, finally, Jeanne des Armois could really have been saved from execution by Jeanne.

The mistake of Jeanne's adoptive brothers is unlikely. Régine Pernu's conclusion that they expected to "use this adventuress to beg the king for money and try to get rich at her expense" is just a simple assumption.

Another thing is important: immediately after her appearance in Lorraine, Jeanne hastened to contact people who knew her from birth. On the part of the impostor, this would have been an unnecessarily bold step, if not to assume that it was not taken as a result of prior arrangement for which, however, there is no evidence. As for the numerous inhabitants of Orleans, it is generally difficult for them to find motives for complicity in deceit.

In his book Was Joan of Arc Burnt? Jean Grimaud concludes:

“The attitude of Robert des Armois and all his relatives, well known in Lorraine, the gifts presented to the du Lys brothers, the high honors they were awarded, and the impossibility of a mass hallucination among the inhabitants of Orleans - all these indisputable facts completely refute the point of view of those who believe Jeanne des Armois impostor. The chronicle of the rector of the Saint-Thibault church, the archives of the Orleans fortress, notarized papers - all this is a single and indestructible proof of the authenticity of her personality; all of this more than outweighs any speculation based on probability.”

But, as you know, for every hypothesis there is always its own counter-hypothesis. Articles by numerous supporters of the official version of the story of Joan of Arc immediately began to appear in newspapers and magazines against the book of Jean Grimet and his followers. Maurice Garson, Philippe Erlange, Charles Samaran and, of course, the recognized leader " traditionalists" Regine Pernu.

But what about the fact that the “imposter” was recognized by her relatives? Here is a quote from Anatole France:

"They believed it because they really wanted it to be that way."

The “scientific” approach of Regine Pernu is generally surprising with its impenetrability:

"All the arguments of pseudo-historians do not deserve to dwell on them for a long time."

Like this! No more and no less! And no explanation of who is considered pseudo-historians. Maybe. all those whose opinion is at least somewhat different from the generally accepted ...

III. 4. JEANNE'S ARRIVAL IN PARIS AND HER "REVEALING"

Inspired by the Orleans triumph and encouraged by Gilles de Rais, in 1440 Jeanne went to Paris.

The purpose of this trip is obvious: Jeanne dreamed of taking her rightful place next to her brother-king. This trip was the same attempt at “restoration” for Gilles de Rais, who hoped, with the assistance of Jeanne, to restore his shaken positions at court, and at the same time close the gaping holes in his budget.

But the question is, did Charles VII need such a double “restoration”? From his point of view, these two people had long since fulfilled their function, and their appearance in Paris seemed to him extremely undesirable. Why share glory with someone? After all, these are only those who have nothing, are ready to share with others ...

The Parliament of Paris, and at that time it was only a judicial institution, having received the instructions of the king, took measures to prevent the same enthusiastic reception of Joan as it was in Orleans.

And it would be better if you did not allow the reception at all, and it was not so difficult to do this. On the way to the capital, Jeanne was detained and taken to Parliament under guard. Paris is not a provincial Orleans, here almost no one knew Jeanne personally, and she had no one to count on. One conversation "with predilection" was enough for Jeanne to understand that the idea of ​​​​a triumphal entry into Paris was not the most successful. As Parliament demanded, Jeanne declared herself an impostor. Like, excuse me, the devil beguiled ...

What else was there for her to do? But after the recognition of "imposture" she was immediately released and sent home.

III. 5. THE LAST YEARS OF JEANNE'S LIFE

October 26, 1440 Gilles de Rais was executed. Deprived of support, Jeanne was sent home to Lorraine.

After that, her name is almost never mentioned again. In The Truth About Joan of Arc, it is only casually noted that "she returned to privacy". Where? At the castle of Jollny, five leagues from Metz. With whom? With her husband Robert des Armois.

Now a number of documents have been found, the authenticity of which is undeniable, through which, according to a number of indirect evidence, it is possible to calculate the life path of Jeanne after 1440. ---

Firstly, this is a notarial act dated July 29, 1443, which records the award of the Duke of Orleans, released from many years of captivity, to Pierre du Lis of the Ile-aux-Boeuf estate on the Loire "for faithful service to the king and the duke himself."

Some historians believe that Jeanne died; in 1446 at the age of thirty-nine. Historian Robert Ambelain claims that Jeanne died in the summer of 1449. He bases his assertion on the following. The official mother of Jeanne, Isabella Rome, was seriously ill for the last years of her life and lived in Orleans. The city authorities helped her as best they could "But what's interesting is that in the register of city expenses until 1449," Isabeau, mother of the Virgin ", and from September 1449 -" Isabeau, mother of the late Virgin ", is listed. From these purely accounting (and therefore most reliable) facts, two circumstances arise: firstly, Jeanne really died not in 1446, but in 1449, and secondly, she never considered Isabella Roma as her own mother - otherwise there is no way to explain her complete inattention to this elderly and sick woman who lived out her life in Orleans.

Jeanne had no children, and she was buried in the village of Pulligny. Her husband Robert des Armois died about a year after Jeanne. He was buried in the same grave with her, where memorial plaque The following inscription was engraved:

"Here lies the body of Jeanne des Armois with her jewels, as well as the body of her husband, the knight Robert des Armois, in his armor."

There is evidence that the coat of arms of Jeanne the Virgin was carved on a stone vault next to the grave. During the Great french revolution by decree of 1793, it was barbarously destroyed.

The versions put forward that at the end of her life Jeanne was engaged in raising her children do not stand up to criticism. Jeanne simply could not have children. As for the children, they were, but they were not the children of Jeanne and Robert, but of Philippe des Armois, a relative of Jeanne's husband, and Isabella du Fe. The childless Jeanne was imbued with tender feelings for her young nephews and became the godmother of their firstborn, named Louis, in honor of her father Louis of Orleans (before that, none of the children in the des Armois family had such a name).

CONCLUSION

At the end of 2003, a sensational statement by the Ukrainian anthropologist Sergey Gorbenko passed through the media, claiming that the famous Joan of Arc was allegedly not burned at the stake, but lived to be fifty years old, that she was not a simple peasant woman, as the legend says, she came from the royal family of Valois and that there was no Joan of Arc at all, but the French themselves invented it at one time.

To understand the seriousness of this statement, it is enough to say that Sergey Gorbenko works at the Institute of Anthropology in Lvov and, being the successor of the Theories of the famous Soviet scientist Mikhail Gerasimov, is engaged in plastic reconstruction of the appearance from the skulls and skeletons of people of past eras.

Being a world-famous specialist, Sergey Gorbenko was invited by the French government to study the remains of members of the royal family. Having examined the tomb of the French monarch Louis XI in the Basilica of Notre Dame de Clery near Orleans, Sergei Gorbenko discovered that the female skull, which was kept together with the skull of the king, did not belong to Queen Charlotte of Savoy, who died at thirty-eight, but to a completely different woman.

A Ukrainian scientist told the London newspaper Independent:

“By opening the graves, I received information that led me to conclusions that I myself could hardly believe.”

One of the skeletons struck him the most.

“The skeleton belonged to a woman who wore heavy ammunition and had well-developed muscles. In the Middle Ages, only knights wearing steel armor could have such muscles.

Sergey Gorbenko came to the conclusion that these are the remains of the so-called Joan of Arc, who in reality was an illegitimate princess of the Valois royal family.

As you know, the death of Joan of Arc, burned at the stake on charges of heresy and witchcraft, which was put forward by the British and their allies from the Catholic Church, is one of the main components of the French national spirit.

Sergey Gorbenko said:

“I am sure that a group of nobles drew up a plan that was supposed to influence the French people and the army and demoralize the British. We must not forget that at that time people were deeply religious and believed in a miracle. The conspirators needed a woman sent by God to save France. The myth of Joan of Arc spread, gaining a reputation as an indisputable truth. At that time, the French throne was shaky, and the monarchy urgently needed a “heroic” figure who could not only mobilize to fight the invaders, but also support the claims of the heir to the throne. However, such a figure could hardly be a country girl like the Maid of Orleans from the legend.

But, as it turned out, the illegitimate princess played her part much better than anyone could have imagined. She became too powerful a figure in the eyes of her followers, which is why she herself began to pose a threat to the French throne.

Dr. Gorbenko, who believes that after the illegitimate princess was removed from the stage, a completely different woman who became a martyr took her place at the stake, concluded:

"I think that if she had declared her belonging to the Valois dynasty, she could have overthrown the Dauphin himself."

Bibliography:

LEWANDOVSKY. P. Joan of Arc. M., 1962.

MEREZHKOVSKY D. S. Jeanne d "Arc / / Faces of the Saints from Jesus to Us. M., 1999.

RAITSES V. I. Jeanne d "Arc: facts, legends, hypotheses. St. Petersburg, 2003.

TWAIN Mark. Joan of Arc (translated from English). Minsk, 1961.

AMBELAIN Robert. Drames et secrets de 1 "histoire. Paris, 1981.

ANDRE Francis. La verite sur Jeanne d "Arc, ses ennemis, ses auxilieres et sa mission d" apres les chroniques du XVe siecle. Paris, 1895.

GRIMAUD Jean. Jeanne d "Arc a-t-elle ete brulee? Paris, 1952.

GUILLEMIN Henri. Jeanne dite Jeanne d "Arc. Paris, 1970.

LAMYMichel. Jeanne d "Arc. Paris, 1987.

Pernoud Regine. J "ai nom Jeanne la Pucelle. Paris, 1994.

PESME Gerard. Jeanne d "Arc n" a pas ete brulee. Paris, 1960.

QUICHERAT Jules. Proces de condamnation et de rehabilitation de Jeanne d "Arc, dite la Pucelle. 5 vol. Paris, 1841-1849.

SAVE Gaston. Jeanne des Armoises, Pucelle d "Orleans. Nancy, 1893.

SERMOISE Pierre de. Les missions secretes de Jeanne la Pucelle. Paris, 1970.

WEILL-RAYNAL Etienne. Le double secret de Jeanne la Pucelle revele par des documents de 1 "epoque. Paris, 1972.

On February 21, 1431, the trial of Joan of Arc began. Maid of Orleans was not only political enemy, she heard the voices of the Saints, ancient prophecies spoke about her. She was accused of witchcraft, but burned for heresy.

secret goals

Contrary to popular belief, Jeanne was not a poor peasant girl. Her native home in Domremy may not have been a luxurious palace, but for the 15th century it was quite comfortable and spacious. Jeanne even had her own room. The Orleans maiden belonged on her mother's side to a noble, but impoverished aristocratic family. In addition, by the time of the meeting with Charles VII, she was fluent in weapons and kept in the saddle, which was absolutely unusual for a girl of that time. These facts suggest that she was prepared for this in advance. Some researchers believe that the urban fraternities of St. Marseille and St. Michel were behind the appearance of Jeanne, who were the "voices of the Maid of Orleans." They entrusted her with a diplomatic rather than a military task, their goal was to “educate” their king, to enthrone the third son of the king, the future Charles VII, in order to later use him for their own purposes. Jeanne had, first of all, to provide financial support Dauphin. This is what her banner allegedly spoke of, which is interpreted as follows: “Give silver for the coronation so that Charles can fight the English; bolder, Marcel will keep his word." Karl did not remain in debt, in parliament new rights were granted to the third estate - the burghers. Only now Jeanne was no longer needed, on the contrary, she had become too dangerous a figure to be left alive.

Merlin's Prophecy

The Inquisition had enough reasons to "grind" at Jeanne and without political motives. Some rumors about the "prophecy of Merlin" are worth something. Modern historians, in particular Olga Togoeva, argue that the girl prepared in advance for the first meeting with the Dauphin. Imagine France in the 15th century - a country by no means democratic. Also during the Hundred Years War. The prince should have had sufficient reason to listen to a simple girl from the people, even if she claimed to be sent by heaven. There were quite a few of them at that time of general decline. But Jeanne had an ace up her sleeve. One of the witnesses at the process of Jeanne's rehabilitation mentioned the "prophecy of Merlin", in which the legendary wizard predicts the arrival of a maiden from the Oak Forest in Lorraine, who will appear "on the backs of the archers and go against them", that is, against the British. Another contemporary of the events, Jean Barben spoke about the prediction of Mary of Avignon about the coming of a maiden in armor. Obviously, during her lifetime, Jeanne heard these legends and successfully operated on them, which later gave the church a reason to accuse her of idolatry.

Virgin in Armor

In addition to pagan prejudices, Jeanne also resorted to Christian images, likening herself to the Virgin Mary. She was contrasted with the "perverse ruler" Isabella of Bavaria, who actually ruled the state under her husband Charles VI the Mad and went down in history as the "destroyer of France." Virginity was the force that kept Jeanne popular. Of all the women of that time, only a queen or a saint could lead an army. The heroine herself was repeatedly examined by specially invited matrons, who confirmed the fact of her virginity, and her opponents, the British, tried to accuse Jeanne of debauchery. However, her innocence, which so supported her during her success, cost her side during the Rouen captivity. According to the protocols of the rehabilitation process, during the inquisitorial investigation, the Maid of Orleans was abused several times. Subsequently, many English authors, including William Shakespeare, will argue that Jeanne not only lost her innocence by the time of her execution, but was also pregnant. The British and the inquisitors needed to "deprive" Jeanne of her virginity in order to turn her into a "public woman", in which there is nothing more sacred, which can be done without causing God's wrath and popular unrest, accuse of heresy and burn.

Karl's betrayal

One of the main mysteries of the Joan of Arc case is the silence of King Charles VII, who owed so much to the Maid of Orleans. As you know, the king himself was not involved in her death. Joan of Arc was captured during the Burgundian siege of the city of Compiègne. She was betrayed by raising the bridge to the besieged city and left face to face with a large army of enemies who, after the battle, sold her to the British. Even contemporaries saw here a carefully planned operation, in which Guillaume de Flavy, the captain of Compiègne, was accused: “Due to the betrayal of the military leaders, who could not bear the girl to dominate and that the victory again went to her, she was eventually sold to the British by the Lorraine bastard, who treason took her prisoner. But even before the last defeat, the Maid of Orleans was already "out of work." Her disagreements with the king began immediately after the coronation, after which Joan's rising influence turned into a threat to his power, which he had long sought. What is interesting is how Charles VII initiated the process of Joan's rehabilitation. Secretly! After the liberation of Rouen, he wrote to his adviser: "A certain process was carried out in this city, organized by our ancient enemies, the English." This hint was the reason for the revision of the process.

Broken sword of Charles Martell

Charles had every reason to be afraid of Jeanne, whom the people, and most importantly, the soldiers, loved so much. There was a legend about the legendary sword of the heroine. It was believed that it was owned by Charles Martell, who personally left it in the abbey after the victory over the Saracens in the autumn of 732. It is very important that Charles Martel was not a Frankish king, but an all-powerful mayor who was the de facto ruler under the weakened Merovingians. The acquisition of the legendary sword in ancient times played a special role in the initiation royalty and continued its story in courtly French novels. Thus, with the sword of Charles Martel, Jeanne once again emphasized what her real place was under the Dauphine. Already during the rehabilitation process, even under Karl, a story appeared that Jeanne, like with a stick, drove prostitutes around the camp with this sword, and broke it on the back of some girl. This rumor showed that, despite all her successes, Joan could not be worthy of a king and her morals did not differ from the lower class, which had no idea what to do with the symbols of royal power.

Jeanne's Demons

Jeanne's original "sin" in the eyes of the Inquisition was not heresy at all, but witchcraft. The main reason for this was the "voices" that Jeanne allegedly heard. The Orleans maiden claimed that the "angels of heaven" told her what to do, it was they who sent her to the Dauphin. But the inquisitors did not believe in her angels. They prescribed these speeches now to demons, now to fairies. Jeanne's homeland - the village of Domreri was known for its ancient Celtic sanctuaries. The Orleans maiden was asked about the local fairies, about the rites of the village, about the magical knowledge that she could inherit. Subsequently, the inquisitors reported that they had obtained a confession from Jeanne in relations with Richard and Catherine of Larochelle, whom rumors accused of witchcraft. They "proved" that this trinity of witches walked at the sabbaths, and once tried to see a certain "white lady" together. The version of Joan's witchcraft was worked out much more carefully than in heresy, but for some reason, it first faded into the background, and then disappeared altogether from the accusation.

The Last Word of the Inquisition

That the Maid of Orleans should not only be condemned, but sentenced to death penalty everyone understood. Therefore, the accusation could only be the heaviest. What, then, did not fit the accusation of witchcraft, because at that time the “witch hunt” had already begun? But there was a small loophole in the inquisitorial treatises for witches. Witchcraft could be recognized as superstition, which did not entail the death penalty. Only heresy remained, but according to the laws, a person convicted of it could sign a renunciation and get off with imprisonment. In addition, the accused himself must confess his sin. Therefore, the judges went to the trick. The head of the tribunal, Bishop Cauchon, promised Jeanne to save her life if she would renounce heresy and swear obedience to the Church. The illiterate Zhanna was read one text, and she signed another, in which she completely renounced all her delusions. Of course, Cauchon did not keep his promise, the “sinner” was again thrown into the same cell, and a few days later, under the pretext that Jeanne had again donned a man’s dress, she was accused of falling into heresy again. The fire became inevitable.

“This is a unique case in the history of mankind - Joan of Arc is the only woman who has taken place as the supreme commander of the armed forces of the nation at the age of seventeen.” (Lajos Kossuth)

The most famous world leader, Joan of Arc, is the subject of French admiration. Joan's military campaign lasted a year; then another year of imprisonment - in this short period, despite all the difficulties, she liberated France from the English invaders. What do we actually know about Joan of Arc's real life?

She led French army, held a series of impressive military successes, led the army to victory. Scientists, historians, religious figures, psychologists are studying this extraordinary phenomenon, trying to explain the incredible fortitude of the French heroine. To show courage in the fateful years, when the majority of fellow citizens lose hope and courage - isn't this the secret of Joan of Arc?

At 17, she left home, at 19 she was burned at the stake (May 30, 1431) - her name becomes a national symbol: Joan of Arc was declared a saint in 1920, and during World War II - the image became the emblem of the French resistance. Joan is not a product of legend, not an extrapolation of the imagination - her path is well known.

The France of Joan's time was in a deplorable position: the country was at war with England for 115 years (1338 to 1453) - the Hundred Years' War with numerous truce intervals. English occupation and Civil War tearing the country apart.

The body of Joan of Arc was burned by the British three times: at the stake in Rouen, she died of carbon monoxide poisoning. The Cardinal of Winchester orders it to be burned a second time. When the organs survived this fire, the third burning was supposed to completely destroy the body. The ashes from the foot of the fire and her remains were to be thrown into the Seine.

However, in 1867 the ashes and remains of Joan of Arc were found in the attic of a Parisian apothecary. They were transferred to the Chinon Museum, where they are still preserved.

An illiterate peasant girl from the small village of Domremy, Lorraine, in eastern France, Joan of Arc disguised herself as a man in order to participate in military campaigns against English troops and the army of the Duke of Burgundy. Joan assured that she heard the voices of the saints - she was convinced of her mission to save France from enemies. She had to overcome the resistance of her father, who was dissatisfied with her daughter's determination: he believed that only girls of dubious virtue could be in a male army society and assumed that her act could become a shame for the family.

Joan of Arc enters the historical stage at the beginning of 1429. Armed with a sword and accompanied by a small escort, she left Vaucouleurs on February 13, and passed over 60 miles of enemy territory. The chances were slim. However, Joan arrived in Chinon at noon and greeted the people - it was like a miracle.

Orleans was already considered lost - the city was under siege for 7 months, and its inhabitants negotiated surrender with the British. Charles VII was depressed materially and morally. Jeanne knelt before the Dauphin and declared that he would be the true king of France.

Jeanne d'Arc lifted the siege of Orleans in 9 days, put the enemy to flight. It was the long-awaited revenge of the French army.

The brilliant and quick victories of the Maid of Orleans opened the gates of Burgundian cities such as Troyes, Châlons-sur-Marne and Reims - this led to the coronation of the king in Reims.

The English garrisons were expelled from Château-Thierry, Soissons, Creil, Pont-Saint-Maxence, Senlis, Beauvais and Compiègne. Jeanne skillfully controlled a spear and a sword, but preferred to hold a banner in her hands - to be an inspiring talisman for men. At least twice she was wounded in battle: by an arrow in the shoulder at the battle of Orleans and by a crossbow projectile in the thigh during the liberation of Paris.

Father's surname Tark or Dark - recorded in official documents that time. The surname has acquired a noble form d'Arc in our days. Jeanne d'Arc is directly involved in the development military strategy and diplomatic decisions. She is advancing with troops (the ultimate goal is Normandy) - Armagnacs are pursuing the English army in the Loire Valley.

On June 18, the famous battle took place near the village of Patay. The French vanguard attacked a unit of English archers, blocking the road. The rout consistently destroyed the bulk of the English army, killed or captured most of their commanders. Fastolf fled with a small group of soldiers and became a scapegoat for a humiliating English defeat. British losses - 6,000 people. The French suffered minimal losses.

The unsolved mystery of Joan of Arc

In those days, there was a belief that a virgin would save France. "Maid of Orleans" - under this name her contemporaries knew her. Now this term seems strange, but she called herself Jeanne the Virgin and became angry when her virginity was questioned and ridiculed. She was often insulted: one "noble" knight ordered her to "return to her cows." According to the testimony of the squire, to the words that she was not a virgin, but a whore, Joan replied: “Now I am in a hurry, but when I return, you will no longer be alive - death is close to you.” On the same day, the offender drowned in the river.

Among the historical facts there are records that indicate that she had the gift of foresight. So, when loading barges, a headwind was blowing, which prevented successful progress. But Jeanne told them to continue loading, because the direction of the wind would soon change - and so it happened.

From her prophecies: In March 1429, Joan told Charles VII “My mission should last a year, and a little longer. We must have time to do a good job this year to expel the British." She later said that she would be captured in the middle of summer, but did not know the exact date: "I fear nothing but betrayal."

On May 23, 1430, she was captured during an attack on Camp Margny, a nearby fortification of Compiègne, by members of the Burgundian faction. The kidnappers, Jean de Luxembourg, a member of the Council of Duke Philip of Burgundy, paid the sum of 10,000 livres Tournois to get her. She was later turned over to the British and then to the court of the pro-English Bishop of Beauvais, Pierre Cauchon, with 70 charges brought against her, ranging from witchcraft to horse theft.

She made several escape attempts, including jumping from a tower 21 meters high. The Armagnacs tried to save her several times by undertaking military campaigns towards Rouen while she was there: one in the winter of 1430-1431, another in March 1431, the last at the end of May, shortly before her execution. These attempts were unsuccessful. Charles VII threatened to "avenge" the Burgundians and the British for her.

The lawsuit became a battle of wits. Against the accusations of the tribunal, the girl defended herself. The assembled lawyers and theologians were sure that they could easily confuse a girl who was not strong in theology during cross-examination. Judicial interrogations lasted ten weeks, but the charges dropped one by one. When asked by a priest who spoke a poor regional dialect, “what language did the voices communicate with her,” she replied: “They spoke French better than you!”

In exchange for penance, she was offered a life sentence and dressed in women's clothing. But soon, she puts on men's clothes again, as she could be abused by the guards. This was taken by the judges as a relapse of the heretic. The execution took place the very next day. The executioner, Geoffroy Thérage, later stated that he was very afraid of being damned.

The trial and execution were an act more political than religious.

In all history textbooks and in most encyclopedic articles it is written that the French folk heroine Joan of Arc was a simple peasant woman who, by the will of fate or God, led the army of King Charles VII at a young age and raised the whole of France to fight against the English invaders.

Vision of Joan of Arc. Jules Bastien-Lepage, 1879

However, even at the first glance at the name of the heroine, a vague doubt creeps in. Some kind of very unpeasant surname she has. After all, surnames with the particle "de" or "d '" at all times belonged to the nobles in France. Although the surname d'Arc literally translates as "from Arc", usually surnames of this kind did not denote the place where the person comes from, but the place that he owns (or that his family once owned).

Shtilke Herman Anton. Apparition of Saints Catherine and Michael to Joan of Arc.
(left side of the triptych "The Life of Joan of Arc") 1843 Hermitage.

But maybe Jeanne received this surname not at birth, but only later, when the king granted her and her brothers the nobility? Or even later. After all, it is known that during her lifetime the heroine was never called Joan of Arc. Her only name was Jeanne the Virgin or the Maid of Orleans. And the name Jeanne d'Arc first pops up only in the process of her rehabilitation, many years after the death of the heroine.

Laure de Chatillon.

But no! It is well known what the names of Jeanne's parents were. Her father was Jacques d'Arc and her mother was Isabella de Vuton. Let's pay attention - the particle "de" is found in both names. True, some textbooks claim that Jeanne's mother's name was Isabella Rome. But this is also easy to explain. Isabella de Vuton was nicknamed Roma (“Roman”), because in the village of Domremy, where she lived with her husband, there were rumors that the pious Isabella made a pilgrimage to Rome. Some historians believe that this was indeed the case, but most scientists are inclined to believe that the rumors were somewhat exaggerated, and Isabella de Vuton visited only French shrines on her pilgrimage trips.

J.E. Milles. Joan of Arc. 1865

What happens? In the village of Domremi lives a family in which the husband and wife wear noble families, and the wife has the opportunity to make pilgrimages to distant shrines. But that's not all. If you delve into historical documents, it turns out that Jacques d'Arc is not a simple resident of Domremy. He is the commandant of the fortress, commander of a detachment of archers, dean (headman) of the Vaucouleurs district and a close friend of the most influential local feudal lord, Robert de Baudricourt. Moreover, it is known that Jacques d'Arc had a coat of arms, but his family lost the right to transfer the coat of arms by inheritance. That is why the Jeanne brothers subsequently received a new coat of arms from the king and new surname- du Lee.

Jeanne d "Arc. Miniature of the 15th century.

The reason for the loss of the coat of arms is quite transparent. The d'Arc family was too impoverished and could not fulfill one of the most important laws of the feudal service. According to this law, in case of war, every nobleman had to put up for the king's army the so-called "spear" - a small military detachment consisting of the nobleman himself, his squire and several servants. Moreover, for each person in this detachment, it was supposed to have at least one combat and one spare horse. If a nobleman could not put up such a detachment, then he was deprived of the nobility. But this did not make him a simple peasant at all. And to say that Joan of Arc is a poor peasant woman is like saying that the notorious Charles de Bats Castelmore d'Artagnan is a Gascon shepherd.

Shtilke Herman Anton. Jeanne d Arc in battle.
(the central part of the triptych "The Life of Joan of Arc") 1843 Hermitage.

Jacques d'Arc grew poorer, but did not at all lose his connections in the circle the mighty of the world this. And one little-known but significant fact speaks eloquently about how wide these ties are. The fact is that french queens never breastfed their children. This was done for them by nurses - specially selected young noblewomen. And so amazing coincidence! For several generations, the royal nurses at the French court invariably bore the surname d'Arc. And the woman who breastfed the Dauphin Charles, who later became King Charles VII, was generally the full namesake of the Virgin of Orleans. This nurse was called Joan of Arc. In the French archives, invoices for her maintenance and payment for her services have been preserved. It is hard to believe in such coincidences. And if the parents of Jeanne the Virgin were related to the royal nurses, then everything falls into place. And it is not at all surprising that the ease with which Jeanne got an appointment with the king. At the same reception that opened the way for the heroine to her great deeds.

Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres "Joan of Arc at the Coronation of Charles VII"

Joan of Arc was not burned at the stake.

Ukrainian anthropologist Sergei Gorbenko claims that Joan of Arc was not burned at the stake and lived to be 57 years old. He came to this conclusion after examining the skulls of the family french king Louis XI in the Basilica of Notre Dame de Clery near Orleans. The skull, which was considered the remains of the king, according to the researcher, belonged to a woman. And the skull of the king turned out to be another, previously considered the skull of his wife Charlotte of Savoy. Later, Gorbenko found out that the king's wife had died at the age of 38, and the discovered skull belonged to a woman aged 55-57.

George William.

After examining other remains, correspondence of members of the royal family, engravings and chronicles, it became clear that "the woman whose skull for almost 100 years was considered the skull of King Louis XI, 600 years ago was known as the Maid of Orleans - Joan of Arc," says the scientist. To this conclusion, the Ukrainian was prompted by doubts about the ability of a 16-year-old peasant woman to wear knightly armor. The surviving letters of d "Arc testify to her deep and extensive knowledge and, above all, that she could not be an illiterate peasant woman from Lorraine.

Jeanne d "Arc at the walls of Compiègne. Miniature of the 15th century.

A completely different woman, and not Joan of Arc, was captured by the British and burned at the stake, Gorbenko believes. Several facts speak in favor of the fact that the Orleans maiden was buried and not burned. In particular, during the burning of a woman 30 May 1431, who played the role of d "Arc, her face was covered. There is also a tombstone, which clearly shows the coat of arms of the Maid of Orleans.

Shtilke Herman Anton. Joan of Arc at the stake
(right part Triptych "Life of Joan of Arc" 1843 Hermitage.