Joan of Arc's Trial - Motives & Conduct
Excerpts from the Testimony On This Subject At the Appeal.
by: Allen Williamson
Here are a few representative samples of the testimony (during the postwar appeal of Joan of Arc's case) concerning
1) the pro-English nature of the tribunal and English control of the
trial, and 2) the coercion used against any tribunal members who
developed scruples about the process.
The chief trial notary, Guillaume Manchon, summed up the situation
concisely when he said: "I was compelled to serve as notary in this
matter, and I did so against my will, because I would not have
dared to oppose an order given by the lords of the Royal Council.
And the English conducted this trial, and by their expense. I
believe however that the Bishop of Beauvais [the
pro-English Pierre Cauchon] was not forced to prosecute Joan, nor was
the Promoter [Jean d'Estivet]; on the contrary they did it voluntarily.
Concerning the assessors and other advisors, I believe they would not
have dared to put up any opposition, and there wasn't a single one
who was not afraid." (From Manchon's fourth deposition, May 12, 1456;
for the original language and other translations, see: Quicherat's "Procès...", Vol III, p. 137;
DuParc's "Procès en Nullité...", Vol I, pp. 417 - 418;
Oursel's "Les Procès de Jeanne d'Arc", p. 310;
Pernoud's "The Retrial of Joan of Arc", p. 180)
Most of the other clergy said the same:
From the third deposition [May 12, 1456] of Jean Massieu, bailiff
at the trial:
From the deposition (May 9, 1452) of Richard de Grouchet, Canon of the Church
of Le Saussaye, who had served as an assessor during her trial;
approx. 60 years old at the time of his testimony:
From the deposition (May 12, 1456) of Jean Riquier; at the time of his testimony below
he was a priest in the parish of Heudicourt:
From the first deposition (March 5, 1450) of Isambart de
la Pierre (another assessor), a Dominican Friar from the convent of Saint Jacques in
Rouen:
From the first deposition (May 8, 1452) of Nicolas de Houppeville (assessor),
bachelor of theology, aged approx. 60 at the time of his testimony:
Here is Guillaume Manchon again (4th deposition, May 12, 1456),
on the violence attempted against
one of the clergy who made the mistake of saying something in Joan's
favor:
From the third deposition [May 9, 1452] of Friar Martin Ladvenu (assessor),
on the fear which
prevented the clergy from advising her (despite some of the modern popular
treatments of the subject, the standard rule in Inquisitorial
trials was that the accused was supposed to be allowed advice from the
clergy. The lack of this counsel was one of the
many violations of procedure which was later cited by Inquisitor Jean
Bréhal at the retrial):
From the deposition [March 5, 1450] of Jean Toutmouillé,
a Dominican Friar who accompanied Isambart de la Pierre during
the trial:
From the 2nd deposition (May 12, 1456) of Jean LeFevre (assessor),
professor of theology, about 70 years old.
From the deposition (May 12, 1456) of Jean LeMaire (not to be confused with Jean LeMaitre the Vice-Inquisitor, two very different people).
At the time of her trial LeMaire had been a theology student at the English-controlled
University of Paris, which had helped initiate the trial; at the time of
his testimony he was about 45 years old,
serving as a priest at Saint-Vincent church in Rouen:
From the deposition [May 9, 1452] of Thomas Marie, a Benedictine Monk, Prior
of the convent of Saint Michel:
From the first deposition (May 2, 1452) of Pierre Miget (assessor), Prior of Longueville-le-Giffard:
From the deposition (March 5, 1450) of Jean Beaupère (assessor), 70 years
old, Canon of Rouen, Master of Theology at the University of Paris.
From the deposition (April 2, 1456) of Guillaume de la Chambre, a physician
who was called in to take care of Joan during her illness; he was about
48 years old at the time of his testimony:
From the testimony [April 2, 1456] of the Bishop of Noyon, Jean de
Mailly, who had taken part in Joan's trial and, like Cauchon, had
served as an advisor to the English occupation government:
Translations and other content Copyright (c) 2005 - 2014, Allen Williamson.
"... Indeed the Bishop [Cauchon] was staunchly supportive
of the English faction, and many of the
counselors [assessors] were in great fear, and were not able to
judge freely; for Master Nicolas de Houppeville, who didn't want to take part in the
deliberations after seeing what was going on, was banished along with a number of others...
Master Jean LeMaitre [Vice-Inquisitor for Northern France], who was placed as Inquisitor in this trial, had declined
many times to take part in the trial, and did his utmost to not attend the
trial; but it was said to him by some persons of his acquaintance
that unless he took part, he would be in
danger of death; and he did so, thus forced by the English, as I had
often heard from LeMaitre himself, who told me: "I see that unless
one acts in this matter according to
the wishes of the English, death is imminent." And
I myself was in great danger, because while bringing
Joan to and from [the hearings], I came across a certain Englishman called Anquetil,
cantor in the King of England's chapel, who asked
me what I thought of Joan. And when I replied that I didn't
know of anything but good in her, and that she seemed to be a
good woman, the cantor reported this to the Earl of Warwick,
who was angry with me, and I had a great deal of trouble because of this;
but I nevertheless managed to get out of it by making excuses for myself."
(Quicherat, Vol III, pp. 152 - 154;
DuParc, Vol I, pp. 430 - 431; Vol IV, pp. 110 - 111;
Oursel, pp. 318 - 319).
"... In my opinion, one portion of those who took part in the
trial did so willingly and in a spirit of bias. Others were coerced
and unwilling, and many fearful; certain of these fled, not wishing
to take part in the trial; and among others, Master Nicolas
de Houppeville was in great danger. Also Jean Pigache and Pierre
Minier, as I heard from them, and myself who was with them - it was
from fear, threats, and terror that we gave our opinions and took
part in the trial, and we had the intention to flee. I frequently
heard from the mouth of Master Pierre Maurice that, since he had warned
her to stand firm in her good resolutions after the first sermon,
the English were displeased and he was in great danger of a beating,
as he said."
(Quicherat, Vol II, pp. 356 - 357;
DuParc Vol I, p. 228;
Oursel pp. 190 - 191;
Pernoud, p. 181)
"... and among others I heard Master Pierre Maurice and Master Nicolas Loiseleur
[two assessors at the trial], and
others who I don't remember, say that the English feared her to such a degree
that they didn't dare - she being still alive - to lay siege to the town
of Louviers until she was dead, and that it was necessary to please
them, that a case against her must quickly be made, and a pretext for her
execution should be devised." (Quicherat, Vol III, p. 189;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 460;
Oursel, p. 338;
Pernoud, p. 177)
"[after he advised Joan to submit to the Council of Basel] ...
immediately, in great anger and indignation, the Bishop of Beauvais
began to shout: 'Be quiet, in the Devil's name!' and told the notary
that he should be certain to never write down the submission she had
made to the General Council of Basel. As a result of these things
and several others, the English and their officers threatened me
horribly that if I did not keep my mouth shut they would throw me
in the Seine."
(Quicherat, Vol II, pp. 4 - 5;
Pernoud, p. 241)
And from his 2nd deposition (May 3, 1452):
"Considering the trial and the things that were done during the trial,
I believe that the English prosecuted her out of hatred and bitterness,
and they sought nothing but her death."
(Quicherat, Vol II, pp. 302 - 303;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 185;
Oursel, p. 158;
Pernoud, p. 176)
And from his third deposition (May 9, 1452): "Some of those
involved in the trial, namely the Bishop of Beauvais, proceeded
from a motive of bias; whereas some, such as the English theologians
[e.g., William Haiton],
from spite and vengeance; and others, the Parisian theologians,
were bought through bribery. Still others were
induced by fear, such as the Vice-Inquisitor [Jean LeMaitre]
and some others whom I do not recall. And this [the trial] was
done at the instigation of the King of England, the Cardinal of Winchester, the
Earl of Warwick, and other Englishmen, who paid the expenses
in this trial." (Quicherat, Vol II, p. 348;
DuParc Vol I, p. 221;
Oursel pp. 185 - 186;
Pernoud, p. 182)
"[Concerning Article IV] My lord Jean of good memory, at that time
Bishop of Avranches, was threatened by Master Jean Benedicite
[d'Estivet, called "Benedicite"], then the promoter for the case,
because he refused to give his opinion in this matter; and also
Master Nicolas de Houppeville was in
danger of being exiled because he didn't want
to take part in the trial nor give his opinion." (Quicherat, Vol II, pp. 348 - 349;
DuParc Vol I, pp. 221 - 222;
Oursel p. 186).
"In my judgment, the judges and assessors were for the most
part willing; and as for the others I believe that many were
afraid... Moreover, I heard that threats were made by the
Earl of Warwick against Friar Isambart de la Pierre of the Order
of Preaching Friars [Dominicans], who took part in the trial,
saying that he would be drowned unless he kept quiet,
for the reason that he had guided Joan with words, then she
repeated them to the notaries. I believe I heard of this from
Friar Jean LeMaitre of the Dominican Order, at that time
Vice-Inquisitor. One day at the beginning of the trial I was
summoned but didn't come since I was detained by other matters;
and upon arriving on the second day I wasn't allowed in, but instead
was barred by the Lord Bishop of Beauvais; and because I had
previously said, while conferring with Master Michel [sic: should
be "Guillaume"] Colles that it was dangerous to undertake this trial
for a number of reasons, statements which were relayed to the Bishop;
for which reason the Bishop had me thrown into the Royal prison at
Rouen, from which I was freed at the request of the Lord Abbot of
Fécamp. And I heard that it was decided, upon the advice of certain
people whom the Bishop had summoned for this purpose, that I would
be exiled to England or somewhere else outside the city of Rouen,
but the Abbot and certain of my friends intervened.
I know for certain that the Vice-Inquisitor was in great fear,
and many times I saw him looking troubled during the trial."
(Quicherat, Vol II, pp. 325 - 326;
DuParc, Vol I, pp. 203 - 204;
Oursel, pp. 171 - 172;
Pernoud, p. 236)
"According to my perception, as I felt then and still feel,
it [the trial] would be better labeled an intentional and studied
persecution rather than a judicial process."
(Quicherat, Vol II, p. 328;
DuParc Vol I, p. 205;
Oursel p. 173;
Pernoud, p. 237)
And from his second deposition (May 13, 1456):
"Around the beginning of the trial, I was present at a few
deliberations in which I was of the opinion that neither the Bishop
nor any of those who wanted judicial responsibility
could [lawfully] serve as judges; nor did it seem to me a proper procedure
for those who belonged to the opposite faction to serve as judges,
considering that she had already been examined by the clergy of Poitiers
and by the Archbishop of Rheims, the Archbishop directly above the
Bishop of Beauvais himself. As a result of this opinion
I incurred the great anger of the Bishop, so that he had me summoned
before him. I appeared before him, stating that I was not
subject to him, and that he was not my judge but rather it was only
the Ecclesiastic Judge of Rouen [who could serve in that role]; and
thus I left. In the end, however, as I
wanted to go before the Ecclesiastic Judge of Rouen concerning
this matter, I was arrested and brought to the chateau, and then
to the Royal prison; and when I asked why I had been arrested,
they told me it was at the request of the Bishop of Beauvais."
(Quicherat, Vol III, p. 171;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 445;
Oursel, pp. 328 - 329;
Pernoud, p. 238)
"On one occasion when someone, whose name I don't recall, said
something about Joan that displeased the Lord of Stafford [Humphrey,
Earl of Stafford], the Lord of Stafford chased him to a place of
sanctuary with drawn sword, so that, were it not for the fact
that Stafford was told that this location was a holy place of sanctuary,
he would have stabbed him."
(Quicherat, Vol III, pp. 139 - 140;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 420;
Oursel, p. 311;
Pernoud, p. 178)
"I know for certain that Joan had no director, counselor, or
defender up to the end of the trial, and that no one would have
dared apply themselves to counseling, directing, or defending
her, from fear of the English; and I heard it said that some of
those who went to the chateau [i.e., her prison in Rouen],
under orders from the judges to counsel and advise Joan, were
roughly driven away and threatened."
(Quicherat, Vol II, p. 364;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 234;
Oursel, p. 196;
Pernoud, p. 196)
And from his fourth deposition, May 13, 1456:
"...one time during the trial, some were sent by order of the
judges to advise Joan; but were driven away by the English,
and threats made against them. Furthermore, I know that Friar Jean
LeMaitre, Vice-Inquisitor, who took part in the trial, and with whom
I frequently went, was coerced into taking part in the trial;
for instance, when Friar Isambart de la Pierre, who was
a companion of the Vice-Inquisitor, wanted to advise her on
one occasion, he was told that he should keep quiet
and refrain from [advising her] in the future, otherwise
he would be drowned in the Seine."
"...[Concerning Article IX] I only know that Joan was in a secular
prison [i.e., rather than a Church prison], in shackles and bound with
chains, and no one could speak with her except by permission of
the English, who guarded her day and night."
(Quicherat, Vol III, pp. 166 - 167;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 441;
Oursel, p. 326).
"... public report said that they had persecuted her out of a
perverse desire for revenge... prior to her death, the English had
intended to lay siege to Louviers but they soon changed their mind,
saying that they would never place the town under siege until the
Maiden had been put on trial: clear proof of this was provided by
what followed, for immediately after her burning they went to besiege
Louviers, figuring that while she was still living they wouldn't
have had any glory or success in war." (Quicherat, Vol II, p. 3;
Pernoud, p. 177)
"... the English proceeded against her from the hatred they had
for her, because they greatly feared her; but whether the judges
proceeded from hatred or bias, I know nothing; however I know that
the trial was conducted at English expense. And I certainly know that
all those who took part in the trial were not at full liberty,
for no one dared say anything lest they be held in ill repute; for,
once when Joan was questioned by someone whether she was in
a state of grace, and I had said that this was a grave question,
and that Joan was not bound to answer such a question, the Bishop of
Beauvais said to me, 'It would have been better for you if you had
kept your mouth shut!'
... it greatly bothered some of the assessors
that Joan had not been placed in the prisons of the Church, and
a number of times I muttered complaints under my breath, because it
didn't seem to me a proper procedure to abandon her into the hands of
laymen, and especially the English, considering that she had been
given into the hands of the Church. Many were of this opinion; but no
one dared to speak of it."
(Quicherat, Vol III, pp. 174 - 175;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 448;
Oursel, p. 330;
Pernoud, (included piecemeal on pp. 188, 196)).
"...I arrived in the town of Rouen on the day when the sermon
was made [to Joan] at Saint-Ouen by Master Guillaume Erard, where
I saw Joan... The public opinion in Rouen at that time was
that the English had caused the trial to be conducted against Joan
due to the hatred and fear that they had of her. I have no doubt
that concerning the form and manner of the trial and the subsequent
sentences handed down, the cause of justice was gravely wronged.
And at that time I heard it
said that many of the assessors at the trial were
greatly disgusted by this trial, and discontented with the
procedure; and that for some of them their own lives were in great danger,
especially the late Master Pierre Maurice, the Abbot of Fécamp [Gilles de Duremort], Master Nicolas Loiseleur, and a number of others.
(Quicherat, Vol III, pp. 177 - 178;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 450;
Oursel, p. 332).
"... some took part in the trial out of fear and others as a
result of bias." (Quicherat, Vol II, p. 370;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 239;
Oursel, p. 200;
Pernoud, p. 181)
"Since Joan had worked marvels during the war,
and since the English are generally superstitious, they figured there
was something sinister about her; for that reason, I
believe, they desired her death in all their deliberations and otherwise."
(Quicherat, Vol II, p. 370;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 238;
Oursel, p. 199;
Pernoud, p. 175)
"I certainly think that if the English had a similar woman, they
would have greatly honored her and not treated her [as they did during the trial]".
(Quicherat, Vol II, p. 372;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 240;
Oursel, p. 201;
Pernoud, p. 178)
"If not for the fact that she had been harmful to the English,
she would never have been thus treated or condemned; since they feared
her more than a large army." (Quicherat, Vol II, p. 301;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 184;
Oursel, p. 157;
Pernoud, p. 175)
From his final deposition, May 12, 1456:
"...And as I heard from a certain English knight, the English feared
her more than a hundred men-at-arms; and they claimed that she used
sorcery, fearing her because of the victories that had been
won by her; and they decided to bring a judicial action against her
which, in my view, the judges undertook under pressure and provocation
from the English, since the English always detained her in their
own custody and did not allow her to be held in ecclesiastic prisons."
(Quicherat, Vol III, p. 130;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 412;
Oursel, p. 306).
"... my lord of Beauvais, judge, sent myself and Master Nicolas
Midi in the hope of speaking to Joan to instruct and admonish her
that she should persevere and maintain the good purpose
she had had on the platform, and that she should take care not to
relapse; but we couldn't find the one who had the key
to the prison, and while we were waiting for the prison guard,
threatening words were said by some Englishmen in the chateau's
court, as Midi told me - to wit, that anyone who would throw both
of us into the river would be doing well. For which reason we turned back
after having heard these words, and on the chateau's bridge
Midi heard, as he told me, similar words spoken by other
Englishmen; for which we were dismayed, and we came away without
speaking to Joan." (Quicherat, Vol II, p. 21;
Pernoud, p. 227)
"...concerning the zeal possessed by the judges, I refer that
to their own consciences; however I know I never gave an opinion during
the trial, although I signed because I was
forced by the Lord Bishop of Beauvais; and a number of times I
excused myself to the Bishop, saying that it was not of my profession
to judge such a matter; finally I was told that if I
didn't sign as the others had, then it was to my misfortune that I had
come to Rouen; and I signed because of this. Threats were additionally
brought against Master Jean Louhier and Master Nicolas de Houppeville,
under penalty of drowning because they didn't want to take part in
the trial." (Quicherat, Vol III, p. 50;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 350;
Oursel, p. 265;
Pernoud, pp. 199-200.)
"...the Earl of Warwick told us [the witness and the
other doctors] that Joan was ill, as he had been told, and he ordered
us to look into the matter, because the King [of England] didn't want
her to die a natural death... and didn't want her to die except by
judicial action, and by burning..."
(Quicherat, Vol III, p. 51;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 351;
Oursel, p. 266;
Pernoud, p. 187).
"... I know however that the Bishop of Beauvais did not fund
the trial from his own money, but from the money of the King of England,
and the expenses paid out were paid by the English."
(Quicherat, Vol III, p. 56;
DuParc, Vol I, p. 355; Vol IV, p. 39;
Oursel, p. 268).
All rights reserved.