Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wtfiv (talk | contribs) at 19:36, 7 May 2022 (removed duplicate links). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Saint Joan of Arc
Historiated initial depicting Joan of Arc from Archives Nationales, Paris, AE II 2490, allegedly dated to the second half of the 15th century, but it may be a later art forgery.
Holy Virgin
Born	c. 1412 Domrémy, Duchy of Bar, Kingdom of France
Died	30 May 1431 (probably aged 19) Rouen, Normandy (then under English rule)
Venerated in	Roman Catholic Church Anglican Communion
Beatified	18 April 1909, Saint Peter's Basilica, Rome by Pope Pius X
Canonized	16 May 1920, Saint Peter's Basilica, Rome by Pope Benedict XV
Feast	30 May
Patronage	France; martyrs; captives; military personnel; people ridiculed for their piety; prisoners; soldiers, women who have served in the WAVES (Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service); and Women's Army Corps

Joan of Arc (Template:Lang-fr pronounced [ʒan daʁk]; c. 1412 – 30 May 1431) is considered a heroine of France for her role in lifting the siege of Orléans and enabling the coronation of Charles VII of France during the Hundred Years' War. She was captured by the Burgundians and sold to the English, convicted as a heretic and burnt at the stake. Her conviction was overturned, and she was canonized by the Roman Catholic Church.

Joan was born to a peasant family at Domrémy in northeast France. In 1428, she traveled to Vaucouleurs and requested to be taken to Charles, later testifying that she had received visions from the archangel Michael, Saint Saint Margaret, and Saint Catherine instructing her to support Charles and recover France from English domination. Her request to see the king was rejected twice, but she was finally given an escort to meet Charles at Chinon. After their interview, Charles sent Joan, who was about 17 years old, to the siege of Orléans as part of a relief army. She arrived at the city on 29 April 1429, and quickly gained prominence during the fighting. The siege was lifted nine days after her arrival. Joan participated in the Loire Campaign, which culminated in the decisive defeat of the English at the Battle of Patay. The French army advanced on Reims and entered the city on 16 July. The next day, Charles was coronated as the King of France in Reims Cathedral with Joan at his side. These victories boosted French morale and paved the way for the final French victory in the Hundred Years' War at Castillon in 1453.

After Charles's coronation, Joan and John II, Duke of Alençon's army besieged Paris. An assault on the city was launched on 8 September. It failed, and Joan was wounded. The French army withdrew and was disbanded. In October, Joan was participating in an attack on the territory of Perrinet Gressart, a mercenary who had been in the service of the English and their French allies, the Burgundians. After some initial successes, the campaign ended in a failed attempt to take Gressart's stronghold. At the end of the 1429, Joan and her family were ennobled by Charles.

In early 1430, Joan organized a company of volunteers to relieve Compiègne, which had been besieged by the Burgundians. She was captured by Burgundians troops on 23 May and exchanged to the English. She was put on trial by the pro-English bishop, Pierre Cauchon, on a charge of heresy. She was declared guilty and burned at the stake on 30 May 1431, dying at about 19 years of age. In 1456, Pope Callixtus III authorized an inquisitorial court to investigate the original trial. The court nullified the trial's verdict, declaring it was tainted by deceit and procedural errors, and Joan was exonerated. Since her death, Joan has been popularly revered as a martyr. After the French Revolution she became a national symbol of France. She was canonized in 1920, and declared a secondary patron saint of France in 1922. Joan of Arc remains a popular figure in modern literature, painting, sculpture and music, and cultural depictions of her continue to be created.

Birth and historical background

Joan of Arc was born sometime around 1412 in Domrémy, a small village in the Meuse valley, which is now located in the Vosges department within the historical region of Lorraine, France. Her parents were Jacques d'Arc and Isabelle Romée. Joan had at least three brothers and a sister; all but one of the brothers was older. Her father was a peasant farmer of some means. The family had about 50 acres (20 ha) of land, and her father supplemented the family income with a minor position as a village official, collecting taxes and heading the local watch.

Joan was born during the Hundred Years' War, a conflict between the kingdoms of England and France that had begun in 1337. The cause of the war was an inheritance dispute over the French throne. Nearly all the fighting had taken place in France, and its economy was devastated. At the time of Joan's birth, France was divided politically. The French king Charles VI had suffered from bouts of mental illness and was often unable to rule. The king's brother Louis, Duke of Orléans, and the king's cousin John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy, quarreled over the regency of France. The conflict climaxed with the assassination of the Duke of Orléans in 1407 on the orders of the Duke of Burgundy. This assassination began a civil war. Supporters of Charles of Orléans, who succeeded his father as duke and was placed in the custody of his father-in-law Bernard, Count of Armagnac, became known as "Armagnacs"; supporters of the Duke of Burgundy became known as "Burgundians".

Henry V of England took advantage of France's internal divisions when he invaded the kingdom in 1415, winning a dramatic victory at the Battle of Agincourt. Paris was taken by the Burgundians in 1418. During this time, the future French king Charles VII, who was associated with the Armagnacs, had assumed the title of Dauphin (heir to the throne) after the deaths of his four older brothers. In 1419, the Dauphin began peace negotiations with the Duke of Burgundy, but the duke was assassinated by Armagnac partisans during a meeting with Charles that was under a truce. The new duke of Burgundy, Philip the Good, entered into an alliance with the English. In 1420 the queen of France, Isabeau of Bavaria, agreed to the Treaty of Troyes, permitting Henry V to marry Charles VI's daughter Catherine of Valois, granting the succession of the French throne to his heirs, and effectively disinheriting Charles. This revived suspicions that the Dauphin was the illegitimate product of Isabeau's rumored affair with the late Duke of Orléans rather than the son of King Charles VI. In 1422, Henry V and Charles VI died within two months of each other. This left an infant, Henry VI of England, the nominal king of the Anglo-French dual monarchy, but the Dauphin also claimed his right to the French throne.

Just before Joan joined the conflict in 1429, the English had nearly achieved their goal of an Anglo-French dual monarchy. Henry V's brothers, John of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Bedford and Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester had continued the English conquest of France. Nearly all of northern France, Paris, and parts of the southwestern France were under Anglo-Burgundian control. The Burgundians controlled Reims, which had served as the traditional site for the coronation of French kings. This was important, as Charles had not yet been crowned, and doing so at Reims would help legitimize his claim to the throne. During this time, there were two prophecies circulating around the French countryside. One promised that a maid from the borderlands of Lorraine would come forth to work miracles, and the other was that France has been lost by a woman, but would be restored by a virgin.

Early life

During Joan's youth, Domrémy was a border village in eastern France whose precise feudal relation was unclear. Much of it lay in the Duchy of Bar. Though surrounded by pro-Burgundian lands, its people were loyal to the Armagnac cause. By 1419, the war had begun to affect the area. In 1425, the village's cattle were stolen by an unaligned brigand named Henri D'Orly. In 1428, the region was raided by a Burgundian force under Antoine de Vergy, who set fire to the town and destroyed its crops.

Joan had her first vision during this time. Joan testified that when she was thirteen, around 1425, a figure she identified as Saint Michael surrounded by angels appeared to her in her father's garden. After the vision, she reported weeping because she wanted them to take her with them. Throughout her life, she continued to have visions of Saint Michael, as well as Saint Margaret the Virgin, and Saint Catherine of Alexandria. In 1428, a young man from her village alleged that she had broken a promise of marriage. The case was brought before an ecclesiastical court in the city of Toul and dismissed.

According to Joan's later testimony, it was around this period that her visions told her that she must leave Domrémy to help the Dauphin. At the beginning of 1428, the English had been besieging Orléans and had nearly isolated it from the rest of Charles's territory by capturing many of the smaller bridge towns across the Loire River. The fate of Orléans was critical to the survival of the Armagnac kingdom because its strategic position along the Loire made it the last obstacle to an assault on the remainder of Charles's territory. In May 1428, Joan asked a relative named Durand Laxart to take her to the nearby town of Vaucouleurs, where she petitioned the garrison commander, Robert de Baudricourt, for an armed escort to take her to the Armagnac court at Chinon. Baudricourt's sarcastic refusal did not deter her. She returned the following January and was once more refused, but she gained the support of two of Baudricourt's soldiers: Jean de Metz and Bertrand de Poulengy. Meanwhile, she was summoned to Nancy under safe-conduct by Charles II, Duke of Lorraine, who was ill and thought Joan may be able to cure him. She offered no cures, but reprimanded the duke for living with his mistress.

Baudricourt agreed to a third interview with Joan in February, around the time the English captured an Armagnac relief convoy for Orléans at the Battle of the Herrings. Metz and Poulengy's enthusiastic support for her, as well as her personal conversations with Baudricourt, convinced him to allow her to go to Chinon for an audience with the Dauphin. Joan traveled with a small escort of six soldiers. She chose to wear men's clothes, which were provided by her escorts and the people of Vaucouleurs.

Chinon

Joan's first meeting with Charles VII took place at the Royal Court in Chinon in late February or early March 1429. She was aged seventeen and Charles twenty-six. Joan told him that she had come to raise the siege of Orléans and to lead him to Reims for his coronation. They had a private exchange that made a strong impression on Charles, but Charles and his council needed more assurance. They sent her to Poitiers to be examined by a council of theologians to verify her morality and ensure her orthodoxy. The council declared her a good person and a good Catholic. The theologians at Poitiers did not render a decision on the source of Joan's inspiration, but agreed that sending her to Orléans could be useful to the king and would test if her inspiration was of divine origin. Afterwards, she was sent on to Tours, where she was physically examined by women directed by Charles's mother-in-law Yolande of Aragon, who verified her virginity. After her examinations, the dauphin commissioned plate armor for her, she received a banner of her own design, and had a sword brought for her from underneath the altar in the church at Sainte-Catherine-de-Fierbois. Around this time, she began calling herself "Jeanne la Pucelle" (Joan the Maiden), emphasizing her virginity, which was a sign of her mission.

Before Joan's arrival at Chinon, the Armagnac strategic situation was bad but not hopeless. The Armagnac forces were prepared to survive a prolonged siege at Orléans. The Burgundians had recently withdrawn from the siege due to disagreements about territory, and the English were unsure about continuing it. But the Armagnac leadership's morale was despairing.

The effect of Joan's presence on Armagnac morale was immediate. She effectively turned the longstanding Anglo-French conflict into a religious war, inspiring devotion and the hope of divine assistance. Before she had joined the siege, Joan had dictated a letter to the Duke of Bedford warning him that she was sent by God to drive him out of France. In the last week of April, Joan set out from Blois as part of an army ladened with supplies for the relief of Orléans.

Military campaigns

Orléans

Joan of Arc
Joan on horseback in a 1505 illustration
Allegiance	Kingdom of France
Conflict	Hundred Years' War
Major battles and notable locations 200km 125miles Rouen Chinon Domrémy 12 9 8 Paris7 Reims6 5 4 3 2 Orléans1    Orléans and Loire Campaign  March to Reims and Siege of Paris  Campaign against Perrinet Gressard  Compiègne  Notable locations

Joan arrived at Orléans on 29 April 1429, meeting the commander Jean de Dunois, acting head of the ducal family of Orléans on behalf of his captive half-brother. Because Orléans was not completely cut off, Dunois was able to get her into the city, where she was greeted with great enthusiasm. Joan was initially treated as a figurehead to raise morale, flying her banner on the battlefield. She was not given any formal command and was excluded from military councils. But she quickly gained the faith of the Armagnac troops, who believed she could bring them to victory. Over time, some of the Armagnac commanders would accept the advice she gave them.

On 4 May, the Armagnacs went on the offensive, attacking the outlying bastille de Saint-Loup (fortress of Saint Loup). Joan was not informed of the attack. Once she learned of it, she rode out with her banner to the site of the battle a mile east of Orléans. She arrived just as the Armagnac soldiers were retreating after a failed assault. Her appearance rallied the soldiers, who launched another assault and took the fortress. On 5 May, no combat occurred since it was Ascension Thursday, a feast day Joan deemed too holy for fighting. Instead, she told a scribe to record a letter to the English warning them to leave France. She had it tied to an arrow that was shot by a crossbowman.

The Armagnacs resumed their offensive on 6 May. They captured Saint-Jean-le-Blanc, which the English had deserted. Though the Armagnac commanders wanted to stop, Joan encouraged them to launch an assault against an English fortress built around a monastery called les Augustins. It was successfully captured. After the capture of les Augustins, the Armagnac commanders wanted to consolidate their gains, but Joan again argued for immediate offensive action. On the morning of 7 May, The Armagnacs attacked the main English stronghold, les Tourelles. Joan was wounded by an arrow between the neck and shoulder while holding her banner in the trench outside the wall on the south bank of the river, but later returned to encourage the final assault that took the fortress. The English retreated from Orléans on 8 May, ending the siege.

At Chinon, Joan had declared that she was sent by God. At Poitiers, when she was asked to show a sign demonstrating this claim, she replied a sign would be given if she were brought to Orléans. The lifting of the siege was interpreted by many people to be that sign. Prominent clergy such as Jacques Gelu, Archbishop of Embrun, and the theologian Jean Gerson wrote treatises in support of Joan immediately following this event. In contrast, the English saw the ability of this peasant girl to defeat their armies as proof she was possessed by the Devil.

Loire Campaign

After the victory at Orléans, Joan insisted that the Armagnac forces should advance without delay toward Reims to coronate the Dauphin. Charles was persuaded and allowed her to accompany the army under the command of John II, Duke of Alençon, who collaboratively worked with Joan and regularly heeded her advice. Before advancing toward Reims, the Armagnacs needed to clear the way between Chinon and Orléans by recapturing the bridge-towns along the Loire: Jargeau, Meung-sur-Loire, and Beaugency.

Political debates about strategy, as well as the need to recruit additional soldiers, delayed the start of the campaign to clear the Loire towns. The Armagnac forces arrived at Jargeau on 11 June, and forced the English to withdraw into the town's walls. Joan sent a message to the English to surrender, but they refused. Joan advocated for a direct assault on the city walls, which was done the next day. Joan's helmet was struck by a stone while she was beneath the town's walls. By the end of the day, the town was taken. The Armagnac took few prisoners and many of the English who did surrender were executed. The Armagnac army advanced on Meung-sur-Loire. On 15 June, they took control of the town's bridge, and the English garrison withdrew to a castle on the Loire's north bank. Most of the army continued on the south bank of the Loire to besiege the castle at Beaugency.

In the meantime, the English army from Paris under the command of Sir John Fastolf had linked up with the garrison in Meung and traveled along the north bank of the Loire to relieve Beaugency. Unaware of the approach of Fastolf's army, the English garrison at Beaugency surrendered on 18 June. The main English army retreated toward Paris. Joan urged the Armagnacs to pursue, and the two armies clashed southwest of the village of Patay later that day. At the Battle of Patay, the English had prepared their forces to receive the Armagnac attack and ambush it with hidden archers. Instead, the Armagnac vanguard detected the archers and scattered them. A rout ensued that decimated the English army. Fastolf escaped with a small band of soldiers, but many of the English leaders were captured. Although Joan arrived at the battlefield too late to participate in the decisive action, her encouragement to pursue the English had made the victory possible.

March to Reims and Siege of Paris

After the destruction of the English army at Patay, some Armagnac leaders argued for an invasion of English-held Normandy. But Joan remained insistent that Charles must be crowned. The Dauphin agreed, and the army left Gien on 29 June to march on Reims. The advance was nearly unopposed. The Burgundian-held city of Auxerre surrendered on 3 July after three days of negotiations. Other towns in the army's path returned to Armagnac allegiance without resistance. Troyes, which had a small garrison of English and Burgundian troops, was the only one to put up opposition. After four days of negotiation, Joan directed the placement of artillery at points around the city and ordered the soldiers to fill the town's moat with wood. Fearing an assault, Troyes negotiated terms of surrender. Reims opened its gates on 16 July 1429. Charles, Joan and the army entered in the evening, and Charles's consecration took place the following morning. Joan was accorded a place of honor at the ceremony, announcing that God's will had been fulfilled.

After the consecration, the royal court negotiated a truce of fifteen days with the Duke of Burgundy, who promised he would try to arrange the transfer of Paris to the Armagnacs while continuing negotiations for a more definitive peace. At the end of the truce, the Duke of Burgundy reneged on his promise. Joan and the Duke of Alençon favored a quick march on Paris, but the divisions in Charles's court and continued peace negotiations with Burgundy led to a slow advance.

As the Armagnac army approached Paris, many of the towns along the way surrendered without a fight. On 15 August, the English forces under the Duke of Bedford confronted them near Montépilloy in a fortified position that the Armagnac commanders thought were too strong to assault. Joan personally rode out in front of the English positions in an attempt to provoke them to attack. They refused, resulting in a standoff. The English retreated the following day. The Armagnacs continued their advance and launched an assault on Paris on 8 September. During the fighting, Joan was wounded in the leg by a crossbow bolt. She remained in a trench beneath Paris's walls until she was rescued after nightfall. The following morning the assault on Paris was broken off. The Armagnacs had suffered 1,500 casualties. In September, Charles disbanded the army, and Joan was not allowed to work with the Duke of Alençon again.

Campaign against Perrinet Gressard

In October, Joan was sent as part of a force to attack the territory of Perrinet Gressart, a mercenary who had served the Burgundians and English. The army then besieged Saint-Pierre-le-Moûtier, which fell after Joan encouraged a direct assault on 4 November. The army then made an unsuccessful attempt to take La-Charité-sur-Loire in November and December. At the end of December Joan returned to court, where she learned that she and her family had been ennobled by Charles as a reward for her services to him and the kingdom.

Capture

Before the attack on Paris, Charles had negotiated a four-month truce with the Burgundians, which was extended until Easter 1430. During this truce, there was little for Joan to do. In March, the Duke of Burgundy began to reclaim towns that had been ceded to him by treaty but had not submitted to him. Many of these towns were in areas which the Armagnacs had recaptured over the previous few months. Compiègne was one of the towns that refused to submit, and it prepared for a siege. Joan set out with a company of volunteers to relieve the town.

In April, Joan arrived at the town of Melun, which had expelled its Burgundian garrison. As Joan advanced, her modest force became larger as other commanders joined her. Joan's troops advanced to Lagny-sur-Marne and won a battle against an Anglo-Burgundian force commanded by the mercenary Franquet d'Arras. He was captured, and Joan consented to have him executed instead of ransomed. Joan's forces finally arrived at Compiègne on 14 May. After a number of defensive forays against the Burgundian besiegers, Joan was forced to disband the majority of her force because it had become too difficult for the surrounding countryside to support. Joan and about 400 of her remaining soldiers entered the city.

On 23 May 1430, Joan accompanied an Armagnac force which sortied from Compiègne in an attempt to attack the Burgundian camp at Margny, northeast of the city. It was defeated and Joan was captured. She agreed to surrender to a pro-Burgundian nobleman named Lyonnel de Wandomme, a member of Jean de Luxembourg's contingent. Luxembourg quickly moved her to his castle at Beaulieu-les-Fontaines near Noyes. After her first attempt to escape, she was transferred to Beaurevoir Castle. She made another attempt to escape while there, jumping from a window of a 70-foot (21 m) tower and landing in a dry moat. In November, she was moved to the Burgundian town of Arras.

The English negotiated with their Burgundian allies to pay Joan's ransom and transfer her to their custody. Bishop Pierre Cauchon of Beauvais, a partisan supporter of the Duke of Burgundy and the English crown, played a prominent part in these negotiations. The final agreement called for the English to pay the sum of 10,000 livres tournois to obtain her from Luxembourg. After the English paid the ransom, they moved Joan to Rouen, which served as their main headquarters in France.

Trial

Joan was put on trial for heresy. on 9 January 1431 at Rouen. Joan's captors downplayed the secular aspects of her trial by submitting her judgment to an ecclesiastical court, but the trial was politically motivated. Both the English and Burgundians rejoiced that Joan had been removed as a military threat, fearing her because she appeared to have supernatural powers that undermined their morale. In addition, she posed a political threat. Joan testified that her voices had instructed her to defeat the English and crown Charles, and her success was argued to be evidence Joan was acting on behalf of God. If unchallenged, her testimony would invalidate the English claim to the rule of France and undermine the University of Paris, which supported the dual monarchy ruled by an English king.

The verdict was a foregone conclusion. Joan's guilt could be used to compromise Charles's claims to legitimacy by showing that he had been consecrated by the act of a heretic. Cauchon served as the ordinary judge of the trial. The English subsidized the trial's cost, including payment to Cauchon and Jean Le Maître, who represented the Inquisitor of France, for their participation. Over two thirds of the clergy involved with the trial were associated with University of Paris.; and most were pro-Burgundian and pro-English.

Cauchon attempted to follow correct inquisitorial procedure, but the trial had many irregularities. Joan should have been in the hands of the church during the trial and guarded by women. Instead, she was imprisoned by the English and guarded by ordinary soldiers under the service of the Duke of Bedford. Contrary to canon law, Cauchon had not established Joan's infamy before proceeding with the trial process. Joan was not read the charges against her until well after her interrogations began. The interrogation procedures were below inquisitorial standards, subjecting Joan to lengthy interrogations without legal counsel. There is evidence that the trial records were falsified.

During the trial, Joan showed remarkable control. She was able to induce her interrogators to ask questions sequentially rather than simultaneously, refer back to their records when appropriate, and end the sessions when she requested. Witnesses at the trial were impressed by her prudence when answering the questions posed to her. For example, in one exchange she was asked if she knew she was in God's grace. The question was meant as a scholarly trap, as church doctrine held that nobody could be certain of being in God's grace. If she answered positively, she would have been charged with heresy; if negatively, she would have confessed her own guilt. Joan avoided the trap by stating that if she was not in God's grace, she hoped God would put her there, and if she were in God's grace then she hoped she would remain so. To convince her to submit, Joan was shown the instruments of torture. When Joan refused to be intimidated, Cauchon met with about a dozen assessors (clerical jurors) to vote whether she should be tortured. The majority decided against it.

In early May, Cauchon asked the University of Paris to deliberate on twelve articles summarizing the accusation of heresy. It approved the charges. On 23 May, Joan formally admonished by the court. The next day, Joan was taken out to the churchyard of the abbey of Saint-Ouen for public condemnation. As Cauchon began to read Joan's sentence, she agreed to submit and signed an abjuration.

Execution

Public heresy was a capital crime, in which an unrepentant or relapsed heretic could be given over to the judgment of the secular courts and punished by death. Having signed the abjuration, Joan could not be put to death as an unrepentant heretic, but she could be put to death if she was convicted of relapsing into heresy again.

As part of her abjuration, Joan was required to renounce wearing men's clothes. She exchanged her clothes for a woman's dress and allowed her head to be shaved. But she was kept in English custody instead of being transferred to an ecclesiastical prison. She was returned to her cell and kept in chains. Witnesses at the rehabilitation trial stated that Joan was subjected to mistreatment and rape attempts, including one by an English noble, and that guards placed men's clothes in her cell, forcing her to wear them. Cauchon was notified that Joan had resumed wearing male clothing. He sent clerics to admonish her to remain in submission, but the English prevented them from visiting her.

On 28 May, Cauchon personally went to Joan's cell, along with a number of other clerics. According to the trial record, Joan said that she had gone back to wearing men's clothes because it was more fitting that she dress like a man while being held with male guards, and the judges had broken their promise to let her go to mass and to release her from her chains. She stated that if they fulfilled their promises and placed her in a decent prison, she would be obedient. When Cauchon asked about her visions, Joan stated that they had blamed her for adjuring out of fear, but she would not deny them again. As Joan's abjuration had required her to deny her voices, this was sufficient to convict her of relapsing into heresy and to condemn her to death. The next day, forty-two assessors were summoned to decide Joan's fate. Two recommended that she be abandoned to the secular courts immediately. The remaining recommended that the abjuration be read to her again and explained. In the end, all voted unanimously that Joan was a relapsed heretic, and she was to be abandoned to the secular power, the English, for punishment.

On 30 May 1431, Joan was executed at the age of about nineteen years old. In the morning, she was allowed to receive the sacraments despite having been excommunicated. Afterwards, she was directly taken to Rouen's Vieux-Marché (Old Marketplace), where she was publicly read her sentence of condemnation. At this point, she should have been turned over to the appropriate authority, the bailiff of Rouen, for secular sentencing but she was not. Instead, she was delivered directly to the English and tied to a tall plastered pillar for execution by burning. She requested to view a cross as she died. She was given one fashioned from a stick by an English soldier, which she kissed and placed next to her chest. A processional crucifix was fetched from the church of Saint-Saveur. She embraced it before her hands were bound, and it was held before her eyes during her execution. After her death, her remains were cast into the Seine River.

Aftermath and rehabilitation trial

Joan's execution did not change the military situation. Her triumphs had raised Armagnac morale, and the English were not able to regain their momentum. Charles retained legitimacy as the king of France, despite a rival coronation held for the ten-year-old Henry VI of England at Notre-Dame cathedral in Paris on 16 December 1431. In 1435, the Burgundians agreed to abandon their alliance with England by signing the Treaty of Arras. The war ended twenty-two years after Joan's death with a French victory at the Battle of Castillon in 1453, which led to the expulsion of the English from all of France except for Calais.

Joan's execution had created a political liability for Charles, implying that his consecration as the king of France had been achieved through the actions of a heretic. On 15 February 1450, a few months after he regained Rouen, Charles had ordered Guillaume Bouillé, a theologian and former rector of the University of Paris, to open an inquest. In a brief investigation, Bouillé interviewed seven witnesses of Joan's trial and concluded that the judgment of Joan as a heretic was arbitrary. She had been a prisoner of war treated as a political prisoner, and was put to death without basis. Bouillé's report could not officially overturn the verdict but it opened the way for the later retrial.

In 1452 a second inquest into Joan's trial was opened by Cardinal Guillaume d'Estouteville, papal legate and relative of Charles, and Jean Bréhal, who had recently been appointed Inquisitor of France. Around twenty witnesses were interviewed by Bréhal, and the inquest was guided by twenty-seven articles describing how Joan's trial had been biased. Immediately after the inquest was completed, Guillaume d'Estouteville went to Orléans on 9 June and granted an indulgence (remission of temporal punishment for sin) to those who participated in the 8 May procession and ceremonies in Joan's honor that commemorated the lifting of the siege.

The inquest still lacked the authority to change the judgement of Joan's trial, but for the next two years d'Estouteville and Bréhal continued to work on the case. Bréhal forwarded a petition from Joan's mother, Isabelle, and Joan's two brothers Jean and Pierre, to Pope Nicholas V in 1454. Bréhal submitted a summary of his findings to theologians and lawyers in France and Italy, as well as a professor at the University of Vienna, most of whom gave opinions favorable to Joan. In early 1455, Pope Nicholas V died, and Callixtus III became pope. Callixtus granted permission for a rehabilitation trial and appointed three commissioners to oversee the affair: Jean Juvénal des Ursins, archbishop of Reims; Guillaume Chartier, bishop of Paris; and Richard Olivier de Longueil, bishop of Coutances. In turn, they chose Bréhal to serve as Inquisitor.

The trial began on 7 November 1455 at Notre Dame Cathedral when Joan's mother publicly delivered a formal request for her daughter's rehabilitation. During the course of the rehabilitation trial, the depositions of about 115 witnesses were processed. The trial came to an end on 7 July 1456 at Rouen Cathedral. The court declared that the original trial was unjust and deceitful; Joan's abjuration, execution and their consequences were declared nullified. To emphasize the court's decision, one of the copies of the Articles of Accusation was formally torn up. The court decreed that a cross should be erected on the site of where Joan was burned.

Legacy

Joan of Arc has become a semi-legendary figure and is one of the most-studied people in Middle Ages, in part because her two trials have provided a wealth of primary source material.

Early legacy

Joan's legacy began to form before her death. Just after Charles's consecration at Reims in 1429, the poet Christine de Pizan wrote her last known poem, Ditié de Jehanne D'Arc, celebrating Joan as a supporter of Charles sent by Divine Providence. As early as 1429, Orléans began holding a celebration in honor of the raising of the siege. After Joan's execution, her role in the victory encouraged popular support for her rehabilition. Eventually, Joan became a central part of the celebration, and a play was written, Mistère du siège d'Orléans (Mystery of the Siege of Orléans), which features her as the vehicle of the divine will that liberated Orléans. Her celebration by the city continues to this day. Less than a decade after her rehabilitation trial, Pope Pius II wrote a brief biography describing her as the maid who saved the kingdom of France. Louis XII commissioned a full-length biography of her around 1500. In 1630, Edmond Richer wrote a biography calling her la Pucelle d'Orléans (The Maid of Orléans).

Symbol of France

Joan's early legacy was closely associated with the divine right of the monarchy to rule France. During the French Revolution, her reputation came into question because of her association with the monarchy and religion, and the festival in her honor held at Orléans was suspended in 1793. In 1803, Napoleon Bonaparte authorized the renewal of the festival and the creation of a new statue of Joan at Orléans, extolling her as representative of the genius of the French people in the face of national threat. Since that time, she's become a prominent symbol as defender of the French nation. After the French defeat in the Franco-Prussian War, Joan became a rallying point for a new crusade to reclaim Lorraine, the province of her birth. The Third Republic held a patriotic civic holiday in her honor, and a series of French warships have been named for her. In World War I, her image was used to inspire victory. During World War II, all sides of the French cause appealed to her legacy. She was a symbol for Philippe Pétain in Vichy France, a model for Charles de Gaulle's leadership of the Free French, and an example for the communist resistance. More recently, her association with the monarchy and national liberation has made her a symbol for the French far-right, including the monarchist movement Action Française and the National Front Party. Joan's image has been used by the entire spectrum of French politics. To the present day, Joan remains an important reference in political dialogue regarding French identity and unity.

Saint and martyr

Joan is a virgin saint in the Roman Catholic Church. Joan was seen as religious figure in Orléans, where an annual panegyric was pronounced on her behalf until the 1800s. In 1849, the Bishop of Orlėans Félix Dupanloup delivered a panegyric that attracted international attention and, in 1869, he petitioned Rome to begin beatification proceedings. She was beatified by Pope Pius X in 1909, and canonized on 16 May 1920 by Pope Benedict XV. Her feast day is 30 May, the anniversary of her execution. In an apostolic letter delivered on 2 March 1922, Pope Pius XI declared Joan a secondary patron saint of France.

During her trial, Joan stated that her visions told her she would undergo martyrdom. She was not canonized as a martyr of the church, but since her death, Joan has been popularly revered as a martyr who suffered for her modesty and purity, her country, and her faith.

Joan's legacy as a religious figure extends beyond the Catholic Church. She is remembered as a visionary in the Church of England with a commemoration on 30 May. She is revered in the pantheon of the Cao Dai religion.

Heroic woman

While Joan was alive, she was already being compared to biblical women heroes, such as Esther, Judith, and Deborah. She fulfilled the traditionally male role of a military leader, while maintaining her status as a brave and valiant woman. Her claim of virginity, which signified her virtue and sincerity, was upheld by women of status from both the Armagnac and Burgundian-English sides of the Hundred Years' War: Yolande of Aragon, Charles's mother-in-law, and Anne of Burgundy, Duchess of Bedford. Joan has been described as representing the best qualities of both sexes: she heeded her inner experience, fought for what she believed in, and encouraged others to do the same.

Cultural legacy

Joan remains a major cultural figure. In the nineteenth century, hundreds of work of art about her—including biographies, plays, and musical scores—were created in France, and her story became popular as an artistic subject in Europe and North America. She is the topic of thousands of books. Her legacy has become global, as her story inspires novels, plays, poems, operas, films, paintings, children's books, advertising, computer games, comics and popular culture across the world.

Visions

In Joan's time, theologians assumed that visions could have a supernatural source. The assessors at her trial focused on determining the specific source of Joan's visions, using an ecclesiastical form of discretio spirituum (discernment of spirits). Because she was accused of heresy, they sought to show that her visions were false. The rehabilitation trial did not clarify the issue. Though it nullified Joan's sentence, it did not declare her visions authentic. In 1894 Pope Leo XIII declared that Joan's mission was divinely inspired, and by the end of her canonization trial in 1903, her visions were seen as part of that mission.

Contemporary scholars have suggested neurological and psychiatric causes as the source of her visions. Her visions have been conjectured to be hallucinations arising from epilepsy or a temporal lobe tuberculoma. Others have implicated ergot poisoning, schizophrenia, and delusional disorder. One of the Promotors of the Faith at her 1903 canonization trial suggested her voices may have been manifestations of hysteria. It has been argued that Joan's visions were a product of creative psychopathy induced by her early childhood rearing or that they were partly an artifact produced by her interrogation during her trial. None of these explanations has strong support, and each has been challenged.

Though the source of Joan's visions has not been conclusively identified, her belief that her visions came from God strengthened her confidence and resolve, as well as providing hope during her capture and trial.

Cross-dressing

From the time of her journey to Chinon to her abjuration, Joan usually wore men's clothes. She cropped her hair in a male fashion. When she left Vaucouleurs to see the Dauphin in Chinon, Joan was said to have worn a black doublet, a black tunic, and a short black cap. By the time of her capture, she had acquired a more elaborate outfit. During the trial proceedings, Joan is not recorded as giving a practical reason why she cross-dressed. She stated that it was her own choice to wear men's clothes, and that she did so not at the request of men but by the command of God and his angels. She stated she would return to wearing women's clothes when she fulfilled her calling.

Joan's cross-dressing became one of the principle articles in her accusation at her trial. In the view of the assessors, it was the emblem of her heresy. Joan's final condemnation began when she was found to have resumed wearing men's clothes, which was taken as an overt sign that she had relapsed by listening to her voices again.

Though Joan's cross-dressing was used to justify her execution, the Church's position on it was not clear. In general, cross-dressing was seen as a sin, but there was not agreement about its severity. Exceptions were allowed too. Soon after the siege of Orléans had been lifted, Jean Gerson claimed that Joan's male clothes and haircut were appropriate for her calling, as she exposed herself as a warrior and men's clothes were more practical.

Other reasons for Joan's cross-dressing have been suggested. It has been argued that it may have helped her maintain her virginity by deterring rape and signalling her unavailability as a sexual object. For most of her active life, Joan did not cross-dress to hide her gender. Rather, it may have functioned to emphasize her unique identity as La Pucelle, a role that was neither male nor female but a model of virtue that inspired people.

Alleged relics

In 1867, a jar was found in a Paris pharmacy with the inscription "Remains found under the stake of Joan of Arc, virgin of Orleans." They consisted of a charred human rib, carbonized wood, a piece of linen, and a cat femur—explained as the practice of throwing black cats onto the pyre of witches. Beginning in 2006, a forensic study including carbon-14 dating and spectroscopic analyses was performed. The researchers determined that the remains came from the balm of an Egyptian mummy from the sixth to the third century BC.

In March 2016, a ring believed to have been worn by Joan was sold at auction to the Puy du Fou, a historical theme park, for £300,000. There is no conclusive proof that she owned the ring, but its unusual design matches Joan's own words about her own ring at her trial. The ring was reportedly obtained by Cardinal Henry Beaufort, who attended Joan's trial and execution in 1431. Arts Council England later determined the ring should not have left the United Kingdom. The purchasers appealed to Queen Elizabeth II, and the ring was allowed to remain in France.

Revisionist theories

The standard accounts of Joan's life have been challenged by revisionist authors. Claims include: that Joan of Arc was not actually burned at the stake; that she was secretly the half sister of King Charles VII; that she was a member of a pagan cult; and that most of her story is a fabrication.

References

Notes

1. Her name was written in a variety of ways, particularly before the mid-19th century. Her last name was often spelled "Darc" without the apostrophe, and her signature appears as "Jehanne".
2. At her trial, Joan seemed uncertain of her birthdate. Perceval de Boulainvilliers, a councillor of Charles VII, wrote a letter to the Duke of Milan stating that Joan was born on the feast of the Epiphany (6 January), but his letter is filled with literary tropes that make it questionable as a statement of fact. Neither Joan's mother nor the witnesses at the rehabilitation trial mention her being born on Epiphany.
3. The woman was Isabeau of Bavaria, who was blamed for the Treaty of Troyes.
4. Joan did not not specify which Saints Margaret and Catherine were in her visions, but most scholars assume she was referring to Margaret of Antioch and Catherine of Alexandria.
5. Some historians put the time in February (e.g., Castor 2015, p. 3;Vale 1974, p. 46). Others in March (e.g., Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 22). See Lowell 1896, p. 62, footenote 1 for a discussion of the ambiguity.
6. Witnesses at the rehabilitation trial who were not at Joan's first meeting with Charles report hearing that he had hidden himself in the crowd among members of the court, but Joan quickly identified and approached him.
7. Some writers have argued that Joan eased his mind about the legitimacy of his birth, but others question this possibility.
8. The examination of Joan's virginity was to establish if she was indeed the prophesied virgin who would save France, to show the purity of her devotion, and to ensure there was no chance she had consorted with the Devil.
9. Fauquembergue's drawing on the margin of a Parliament's register is the only known contemporary representation of Joan. This artist's impression is fanciful, depicting her with long hair and a dress rather than with short hair and armor.
10. Joan was illiterate and it is believed that she dictated her letters to scribes.
11. Joan testified she preferred her banner to a sword and never killed anyone.
12. At the rehabilitation trial, some of the commanders testified that she had an uncanny ability for performing tasks such as assembling the army and arranging the disposition of troops and artillery.
13. Biographers Frances Gies and Vita Sackville-West state that when Joan's family was ennobled, the family name became "du Lys", after the fleur-de-lis of France. The historians Régine Pernoud and Marie-Véronique Clin are more cautious in their conclusions, but state that Joan's brothers, Jean and Pierre, called themselves by that name later in life. (See Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 222, 235)
14. Joan set out without the explicit permission of Charles, who was still observing the truce. This may have been a desperate act that could be seen as treason, but it has been argued that she could not have launched the expedition without funding from the court.
15. DeVries describes three different accounts of Joan's capture.
16. Gies gives three sources for Joan's surrender to Wandomme, two of whom state that Joan offered him her parole and one that states she didn't. Joan testified that she did not promise not to attempt to escape.
17. Most biographers agree that there is little evidence that Charles tried to save Joan once she was transferred to the English, though historian Pierre Champion argues that attempts were made.
18. All but eight of the 131 clergy who participated in the trial were French.
19. One of the clerics at the trial, Jean Lohier, stepped down from the trial and challenged it because he felt the testimony was coerced and its intention was to entrap Joan. Nicholas de Houppeville challenged Cauchon's right to judge the trial and was jailed.
20. At the rehabilitation trial, court notary Boisguillaume testified that at the moment the court heard her reply, he was amazed.
21. The details of Joan's submission are unclear. Some biographers state that she did not explicitly agree to abjure but only to sign the document, which she could not read because she was illiterate. The abjuration was read aloud to her, but its contents are unknown as the original document was replaced with a longer one in the official record. Quicherat 1841a, pp. 446–448 provides the official record's text of the abjuration document, which is written in French. See Linder 2017 for an English translation.
22. Lightbody 1961, pp. 133–134 argues that the claim that Joan was executed without a secular sentence may have been due to the biases of the rehabilitation trial.
23. see Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 152–155 for a translation of the articles.
24. In his final summary of the trial, the Recollectio, Bréhal suggested that Cauchon and the assessors who supported him in prosecuting Joan could be guilty of heresy.
25. See de Pizan 1497, pp. 41–50 for an English translation.
26. The extant version of the mystery play is thought to have been written sometime in the mid 1400s. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 243 date a version to 1435, but one may have been written to celebrate the rehabilitation of Joan in July 1456.
27. See Anon. 1500 for an English translation.
28. Benedict XV's papal bull Divina disponente (Benedict XV 1920) canonizes Joan as a Virgo , not Virgo et Martyr . For arguments given for not canonizing her as a martyr, see those made by the Promotor of the Faith Augustine Caprara (summarized in Kelly 1996, p. 206) during the inquisition that lead to her beatification in 1909, as well as those made by the Catholic theologian Jean Guitton (summarized in Guillemin 1970, p. 256).
29. Although Bréhal, the inquisitor at the rehabilitation trial, did state that Joan "had very good reason always to trust her voices. For in very truth she was delivered, as they promised, from the prison of the body by martyrdom and a great victory: the victory of patience".
30. Huizinga 1959, pp. 222–223 also suggests that Joan's visions may not have been named until her trial.
31. For example, Mackowiak 2007, pp. 138–129 points out problems with assuming Joan had schizophrenia, ergot poisoning or temporal lobe issues; Hughes 2005 disputes the conjecture that she had epilepsy; Nores & Yakovleff 1995 argue against her visions being caused by tuberculosis; one of Joan's advocates at the canonization trial pointed out that her case did not fulfill the clinical descriptions of hysteria; and Ratnasuriya 1986, p. 234–235 questions diagnosing Joan as a creative psychopath.
32. According to the trial record, she was accused of having "her hair her hair cropped short and round like a young fop's, she wore shirt, breeches, doublet, with hose joined together and fastened to the said doublet by 20 points, long leggings laced on the outside, a short mantle reaching to the knees, or therabouts, a close-cut cap, tightfitting boots, and buskins, long spurs, sword, dagger, breastplate, lance, and other arms in the style of a man-at-arms".
33. For example, Thomas Aquinas argued that a woman may wear man's clothes to hide herself from enemies or when other clothes are lacking. Joan was in the former situation when she rode through enemy territory to get to Chinon, and she was in the latter situation after her abjuration when all she had available were men's clothes.
34. Scholars have pointed out that when Joan was imprisoned, wearing men's clothes would have only been a minor deterrent to rape as she was shackled most of the time.
35. Playwright George Bernard Shaw surmises that Joan was the model for the sculpture.

Citations

1. Contamine 2007, p. 199: Cette miniature du XV siècle, très soignée (l'étendard correspond exactement à la description que Jeanne d'Arc elle-même en donnera lors de son procès) ... Mais c'est précisément cette exactitude, et cette coïncidence, trop belle pour être vraie, qui éveillent—ou plutôt auraient dû éveiller—les soupçons ...
2. ^ The Calendar 2021.
3. Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 220–221.
4. , Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 81.
5. Quicherat 1841a, p. 46: interrogata cujus aetatais ipsa erat, respondit quod, prout sibit vedetur, est quasi xix annorum. replied that, her guess was that she was almost 19 years old".]
6. Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 6.
7. Gies 1981, p. 10; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 55; Warner 1981, p. 278.
8. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 265.
9. Sackville-West 1936, p. 24.
10. DLP 2021: Domrémy-La-Pucelle est situé en Lorraine, dans l'ouest du département des Vosges ... dans la vallée de la Meuse. ; Gies 1981, p. 10.
11. DeVries 1999, p. 36; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 221.
12. Lowell 1896, pp. 19–20; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 8.
13. DeVries 1999, p. 37; Vale 1974, p. 46.
14. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 221.
15. Lowell 1896, pp. 19–20; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 221.
16. Lace 1994, p. 8.
17. Lace 1994, pp. 10–11.
18. Aberth 2000, pp. 85–86.
19. Seward 1982, pp. 143–144.
20. Burgundy Today 2012; Sackville-West 1936, p. 21.
21. Seward 1982, p. 144.
22. Barker 2009, p. 5.
23. DeVries 1999, pp. 19–22; Tuchman 1982, pp. 583–585.
24. Sizer 2007.
25. Barker 2009, p. 29.
26. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 168; Vale 1974, p. 21.
27. Barker 2009, pp. 26–27; Burne 1956, p. 142.
28. Barker 2009, pp. 28–29; Russell 2014, p. 27.
29. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 189.
30. Curry et al. 2015, p. 105; Vale 1974, pp. 32–33.
31. Egan 2019, p. 29.
32. DeVries 1999, pp. 27–28.
33. Barker 2009, p. 67; Vale 1974, p. 56.
34. Fraioli 2005, p. 60.
35. Fraioli 2005, p. 59.
36. Castor 2015, p. 89; Lowell 1896, pp. 15–16; Sackville-West 1936, pp. 24–25.
37. Lowell 1896, p. 15.
38. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 171; Sackville-West 1936, p. 25.
39. Gies 1981, p. 20; Lowell 1896, pp. 21–22.
40. Gies 1981, p. 20; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 266.
41. Lowell 1896, pp. 33–34; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 16–17.
42. Barker 2009, p. 103; Richey 2003, p. 26.
43. Lowell 1896, p. 28.
44. Sackville-West 1936, pp. 53–54.
45. Barstow 1986, p. 22; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 113.
46. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 113; Sackville-West 1936, p. 58; Sullivan 1996, p. 88.
47. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 113; Sullivan 1996, pp. 88–89.
48. Gies 1981, p. 33; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 119; Lowell 1896, p. 24; Warner 1981, p. 14.
49. Gies 1981, p. 30; Goldstone 2012, p. 98; Sackville-West 1936, p. 70.
50. Barker 2009, p. 97; DeVries 1999, p. 29.
51. DeVries 1999, p. 29; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 10.
52. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 17.
53. DeVries 1999, pp. 40–41.
54. Gies 1981, p. 34; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 18.
55. Castor 2015, p. 234; Lowell 1896, pp. 42–43; Sackville-West 1936, pp. 89–90.
56. Gies 1981; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 18–19.
57. Castor 2015, p. 89; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 36; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 20.
58. Lowell 1896, p. 47; Sackville-West 1936, pp. 96–97.
59. Sackville-West 1936, p. 98.
60. Gies 1981, p. 36; Lowell 1896, p. 48.
61. Gies 1981, p. 34; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 32; Warner 1981, p. 143.
62. Lowell 1896, p. 47; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 33; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 19–20.
63. Warner 1981, p. 4.
64. Gies 1981, p. 40.
65. Gies 1981, p. 49; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 23.
66. Castor 2015, p. 91; Gies 1981, p. 50; Lowell 1896, p. 57.
67. DeVries 1999, p. 48; Gies 1981, p. 50; Sackville-West 1936, pp. 123–125.
68. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 24.
69. Gies 1981, p. 53.
70. Castor 2015, p. 96; Gies 1981, p. 53.
71. DeVries 1999, p. 50; Richey 2003, p. 34; Sackville-West 1936, p. 136.
72. Barker 2009, p. 108; Vale 1974, p. 56.
73. Gies 1981, p. 54; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 76; Sackville-West 1936, p. 138.
74. Barker 2009, p. 107; Castor 2015, p. 97; Gies 1981, p. 54.
75. Barker 2009, p. 107; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 31.
76. Michelet 1855, p. 55; Sackville-West 1936, p. 138.
77. DeVries 1999, pp. 50–51; Gies 1981, pp. 59–60; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 36–37.
78. ^ Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 220.
79. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 165.
80. DeVries 1999, p. 31; Maddox 2012, p. 442.
81. Warner 1981, p. 54.
82. Gies 1981, pp. 43–44.
83. Barker 2009, p. 108.
84. ^ Vale 1974, p. 55.
85. DeVries 1999, p. 28.
86. Richey 2003, p. 39; Warner 1981, p. 54.
87. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 31.
88. Lucie-Smith 1976, pp. 78–79; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 34–35; Richey 2003, pp. 34–35.
89. Warner 1981, p. 94.
90. Barker 2009, p. 110; DeVries 1999, p. 71.
91. Richey 2003, p. 50.
92. DeVries 1999, pp. 63–64.
93. Barker 2009, pp. 114–115; Gies 1981, p. 72; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 40–41.
94. Barker 2009, p. 118; Warner 1981, p. 64.
95. Gies 1981, p. 168; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 114; Warner 1981, p. 68.
96. Quicherat 1841a, p. 300: Interrogata quem prædiligebat, ensem vel estandart sive vexillum: respondit quod prædiligebat l'estendard quam ensem, quadraginta vicibus. ... et dixit quod nunquam interfecerat hominem.
97. Richey 2003, p. 39; DeVries 1999, p. 76.
98. Gies 1981, pp. 71, 75; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 39; Warner 1981, p. 64; ] sfnm error: no target: CITEREF (help).
99. DeVries 1996, p. 4; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 230; Richey 2003, p. 40.
100. DeVries 1999, pp. 103–104; Gies 1981, p. 86.
101. DeVries 1996, p. 9; Pernoud 1962, p. 63.
102. Barker 2009, p. 116; Gies 1981, pp. 74–75; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 43–44.
103. Richey 2003, p. 57; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 44.
104. Barker 2009, p. 117; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 45.
105. Barker 2009, p. 117; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 45; Richey 2003, p. 58.
106. Barker 2009, p. 118; DeVries 1999, pp. 82–85; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 45–46.
107. DeVries 1999, p. 85; Gies 1981, p. 78; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 46.
108. Gies 1981, pp. 79–78; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 47; Richey 2003, p. 61.
109. Barker 2009, p. 118; DeVries 1999, pp. 82–85; Gies 1981, pp. 79–78.
110. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 22; Warner 1981, p. 63.
111. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 56; Warner 1981, p. 63.
112. Fraioli 2000, pp. 87–88.
113. Michelet 1855, pp. 80–81.
114. Lang 1909, pp. 146–147; Warner 1981, p. 63.
115. Boyd 1986, p. 116; DeVries 1996, p. 10; Gies 1981, p. 87; Seward 1982, pp. 213–214.
116. Lucie-Smith 1976, pp. 126–127; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 157; Richey 2003, p. 66.
117. Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 128; Richey 2003, p. 66.
118. DeVries 1999, p. 102; Gies 1981, p. 90.
119. Castor 2015, p. 114; Lucie-Smith 1976, pp. 127–128; Lowell 1896, p. 116.
120. Lucie-Smith 1976, pp. 126–127; Lowell 1896, pp. 116–117; Richey 2003, p. 66.
121. Castor 2015, p. 114; DeVries 1999, p. 99; Gies 1981, p. 90.
122. DeVries 1999, p. 101; Barker 2009, p. 120.
123. Burne 1956, p. 250; DeVries 1999, p. 104; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 131.
124. Burne 1956, p. 250; Castor 2015, p. 115; DeVries 1999, p. 105.
125. Castor 2015, p. 115; Lowell 1896, p. 126.
126. Barker 2009, pp. 120–121; DeVries 1999, p. 104; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 132.
127. Burne 1956, p. 252.
128. Barker 2009, p. 121; Burne 1956, p. 252; Gies 1981, pp. 94–91.
129. Barker 2009, p. 122; Burne 1956, pp. 253–254.
130. Barker 2009, p. 122.
131. DeVries 1999, p. 118.
132. Gies 1981, p. 98.
133. DeVries 1999, p. 120; Gies 1981, p. 98.
134. Burne 1956, p. 256; Gies 1981, p. 100; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 140; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 60; Richey 2003, p. 75.
135. Barker 2009, p. 126; Gies 1981, pp. 101–103, 105.
136. Michelet 1855, pp. 86–87; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 62.
137. Barker 2009, p. 126; Burne 1956, p. 261.
138. DeVries 1999, p. 128; Gies 1981, p. 106.
139. Barker 2009, p. 126; DeVries 1999, p. 130.
140. DeVries 1999, p. 130; Michelet 1855, p. 87.
141. DeVries 1999, p. 130; Michelet 1855, p. 89–90; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 63.
142. DeVries 1999, p. 133; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 159.
143. Barker 2009, p. 126; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 162.
144. DeVries 1999, p. 134; Gies 1981, p. 112; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 66.
145. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 72.
146. DeVries 1999, p. 140; Lowell 1896, pp. 163–164.
147. Barker 2009, p. 128; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 72; Richey 2003, p. 78.
148. DeVries 1999, p. 147; Lowell 1896, pp. 163–164; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 69.
149. Barker 2009, p. 130; DeVries 1999, p. 142.
150. Barker 2009, p. 132; DeVries 1999, pp. 142–143.
151. DeVries 1999, p. 144.
152. Barker 2009, p. 134; DeVries 1999, p. 150.
153. Barker 2009, p. 136; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 77.
154. Barker 2009, p. 136.
155. Barker 2009, pp. 136–137; DeVries 1999, p. 153; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 76–77.
156. Barker 2009, p. 136; DeVries 1999, p. 157.
157. DeVries 1999, p. 157; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 81.
158. Gies 1981, p. 134.
159. Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 193; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 81.
160. Gies 1981, p. 134; Sackville-West 1936, p. 370.
161. Barker 2009, p. 132; DeVries 1999, p. 145; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 174.
162. Lang 1909, p. 199; Lowell 1896, p. 193.
163. Barker 2009, p. 138; DeVries 1999, p. 165.
164. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 84.
165. DeVries 1999, p. 166.
166. Barker 2009, p. 146; DeVries 1999, pp. 167–168.
167. DeVries 1999, p. 168; Gies 1981, p. 136.
168. Lang 1909, p. 226; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 84–85; Vale 1974.
169. Barker 2009, p. 146; DeVries 1999, p. 168.
170. Gies 1981, p. 136; Lightbody 1961, p. 152.
171. Gies 1981, p. 136; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 85.
172. DeVries 1999, pp. 168–169; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 86.
173. DeVries 1999, p. 169; Gies 1981, p. 137; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 85.
174. DeVries 1999, p. 169; Gies 1981, p. 138.
175. DeVries 1999, p. 171.
176. Gies 1981, p. 139.
177. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 86.
178. Barker 2009, p. 146; DeVries 1999, pp. 174–177.
179. DeVries 1999, p. 174.
180. Gies 1981; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 88.
181. Gies 1981, p. 141.
182. Quicherat 1841a, p. 47: ... si evaderet, nullus posset eam reprehendere quod fidem suam fregisset vel violasset, quia nulli unquam fidem dederat. were to escape, no one could blame her for having broken or violating her faith , because she had never given her faith to anyone.]
183. Gies 1981, p. 142; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 92.
184. Castor 2015, p. 163; Gies 1981, p. 149; Warner 1981, p. 112.
185. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 97.
186. Champion 1920, p. 405; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 208–209.
187. Castor 2015; Lucie-Smith 1976.
188. DeVries 1999, p. 183; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 97; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 212.
189. Castor 2015, p. 164; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 100–101.
190. France 1909, pp. li–liii; Gies 1981, pp. 143–144; DeVries 1999, p. 168; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 218; Michelet 1855, p. 138; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 97–98; Vale 1974, pp. 58–59; Warner 1981, p. 110.
191. Champion 1920, p. 389.
192. Hobbins 2005, pp. 14–15; Sullivan 1999, p. xviii; Russell 1972, p. 262; Taylor 2006, p. 22.
193. Hobbins 2005, p. 1.
194. Peters 1989, p. 69; Weiskopf 1996, p. 118.
195. Rankin & Quintal 1964, pp. 111–112.
196. Gies 1981, pp. 144–145; Hobbins 2005, pp. 36–37; Taylor 2006, p. 28.
197. Elliot 2002, pp. 46–47.
198. Hobbins 2005, p. 20.
199. Gies 1981, pp. 146–147; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 107.
200. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 4; Hobbins 2005, p. 3; Verger 1972, p. 53–54.
201. Hobbins 2005, p. 8; Kelly 1993, pp. 1023–1024; Sullivan 2011, p. 313.
202. Boyd 1986, p. 116; Hobbins 2005, pp. 20–21; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 106; Taylor 2006, p. 27.
203. Lightbody 1961, p. 102.
204. Sullivan 1999, p. xiii; Gies 1981, p. 156; Lightbody 1961, pp. 102–103.
205. Newhall 1934, p. 89; Warner 1981, p. 47.
206. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 214.
207. Gies 1981, p. 156; Taylor 2006, p. 23.
208. Hobbins 2005, p. 23.
209. Pernoud 1962, p. 166; Warner 1981, p. 48.
210. Hobbins 2005, p. 4; Taylor 2006, p. 23.
211. Hobbins 2005, p. 18; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 108; Sullivan 2011, p. 311; Taylor 2006, p. 29.
212. Gies 1981, p. 157; Hobbins 2005, p. 7; Peters 1989, p. 69.
213. Taylor 2006, p. 26.
214. Gies 1981, p. 154.
215. Kelly 1993, pp. 1018, 1022; Taylor 2006, pp. 24–25.
216. Kelly 1993, p. 1022.
217. Peters 1989, p. 69.
218. Sullivan 1999, pp. 88–89.
219. Hobbins 2005, p. 7; Taylor 2006, p. 25, fn 79.
220. Hobbins 2005, p. 7; Rankin & Quintal 1964, p. 101.
221. Frank 1997, p. 54; Kelly 1993, p. 1018.
222. Frank 1997, p. 54; Gies 1981, pp. 156–157; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 126.
223. Gies 1981, p. 160; Taylor 2009, p. 160.
224. Sullivan 1999, p. 102.
225. Gies 1981, p. 160; Sullivan 1999, p. 102.
226. Barstow 1986, p. 93; Gies 1981, p. 166; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 112.
227. Quicherat 1845, p. 163: Dequo responso interrogantes fuerunt multum stupefacti
228. Gies 1981, p. 206; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 127–128; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 256.
229. Gies 1981, pp. 207–209; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 130.
230. Castor 2015, p. 186; Lowell 1896, p. 318; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 129.
231. Barstow 1986, pp. 115–116; Castor 2015, p. 190; Gies 1981, p. 212; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 266; Sullivan 1999, p. 131.
232. Lowell 1896, p. 324; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 130; Michelet 1855, p. 208.
233. Gies 1981, pp. 213–214; Warner 1981, p. 140.
234. Castor 2015, p. 190; Gies 1981, p. 214; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 131.
235. Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 266; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 130; Rankin & Quintal 1964, p. 113.
236. Megivern 1997, p. 128.
237. Noonan 1998, p. 703.
238. Kelly 2014, p. 949; Noonan 1987, pp. 204–205.
239. Noonan 1987, p. 203.
240. Schibanoff 1996, p. 37; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 271.
241. Lightbody 1961, p. 138 fn3; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 269.
242. Hotchkiss 2000, pp. 64–65; Sackville-West 1936.
243. Crane 1996, pp. 302–333; Gies 1981, p. 216; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 273; Michelet 1855, p. 222.
244. Hotchkiss 2000, p. 66; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 272; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 132.
245. Lowell 1896, p. 329; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 273; Sackville-West 1936, pp. 332–333.
246. Bullough 1974, p. 1389; Crane 1996, p. 302; Hobbins 2005, p. 24; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 132–133; Sullivan 1999, pp. 132–133.
247. Gies 1981, p. 217; Hobbins 2005, pp. 24–25; Sullivan 1999, pp. 138–139.
248. Gies 1981, pp. 218–219; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 134–135.
249. Hobbins 2005, p. 198; Sackville-West 1936, pp. 337–338; Sullivan 1999, p. 139; Taylor 2006, p. 222.
250. Gies 1981, pp. 219–220; Lucie-Smith 1976, pp. 279–280; Michelet 1855, pp. 228–229; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 134.
251. Sullivan 1999, p. 148; Taylor 2006, p. 225.
252. Gies 1981, p. 223; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 135; Sackville-West 1936, p. 341.
253. Lucie-Smith 1976, pp. 281–282; Michelet 1855, pp. 228–229; Sackville-West 1936, p. 341.
254. Gies 1981, p. 223; Lowell 1896, p. 341; Michelet 1855, p. 238.
255. Gies 1981, p. 223; Lucie-Smith 1976, pp. 282–283; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 136.
256. Gies 1981, p. 223; Lowell 1896, p. 341; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 137.
257. Allmand 1988, p. 57; Curry et al. 2015, p. 106; Fuller 1954, pp. 496–497.
258. Allmand 1988, p. 57; Fuller 1954, p. 490; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 166.
259. Barker 2009, p. 229.
260. Barker 2009, p. 228; DeVries 1999, p. 186; Fuller 1954, p. 494.
261. Allmand 1988, p. 36; Burne 1956, p. 342.
262. Castor 2015, p. 230; Gies 1981, p. 231.
263. Castor 2015, p. 224; Gies 1981, p. 230; Lightbody 1961, pp. 118–119; Vale 1974, p. 62.
264. Pernoud 1955, pp. 3–4; Warner 1981, p. 189.
265. Gies 1981, p. 230; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 149–155.
266. Lightbody 1961, p. 121; Pernoud 1955, p. 318.
267. Castor 2015, pp. 228–229; Lightbody 1961, p. 122; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 151.
268. Castor 2015, pp. 228–229; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 4.
269. Pernoud 1955, p. 34; Warner 1981, p. 190.
270. Lightbody 1961, pp. 122–123; Lowell 1896, pp. 350–351; Murray 1902, p. 372; Warner 1981, p. 190.
271. Pernoud 1962, p. 264; Warner 1981, p. 190.
272. Lightbody 1961, p. 128; Lowell 1896, p. 350.
273. Pernoud 1955, p. 37.
274. Gies 1981, p. 235; Lightbody 1961, p. 122.
275. Gies 1981, p. 124; Lowell 1896, p. 351; Murray 1902, p. 373.
276. Gies 1981, p. 235; Lowell 1896, p. 351; Pernoud 1955, p. 37; Warner 1981, p. 190.
277. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 156.
278. Gies 1981, p. 236; Lowell 1896, p. 355; Pernoud 1955, pp. 287–288.
279. Castor 2015, p. 241; Gies 1981, p. 237; Pernoud 1962, p. 268.
280. Bréhal 1456, pt I, ch. VIII (p. 104-105) : Unde, quatinus ille episcopus et alii in hoc ei faventes se a malicia manifesta contra ecclesiam romanam , aut etiam ab heresi , se debite excusare possent, non video. and others who favored him in this respect can excuse themselves from malice toward the Roman Church, or even from heresy, I cannot see.]
281. DeVries 1996, p. 3.
282. Lightbody 1961, pp. 16–17; Warner 1981, pp. 4–6.
283. Kennedy & Varty 1977, p. 1; Warner 1981, p. 25.
284. Hamblin 2003, p. 209.
285. Lightbody 1961, p. 118.
286. Hamblin 2003, p. 217; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 243.
287. Hamblin 1984, pp. 9–10.
288. Hamblin 1984, p. 11.
289. Hamblin 1988, pp. 63–64.
290. Orléans 2021; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 242–245; Warner 1981, p. 192.
291. Taylor 2006, p. 350–352.
292. Rankin & Quintal 1964, p. 3.
293. Fraioli 2000, p. 56; Mackinnon 1902, p. 78; Wood 1988, p. 150.
294. Lightbody 1961, p. 15; Mock 2011, p. 39.
295. France 1909, pp. lix–lx.
296. Warner 1981, p. 256.
297. Conner 2004, p. 89; Guillemin 1970, p. 249.
298. Guillemin 1970, p. 250; Matheson 2012, p. 444.
299. Brown 2012, p. 450; Mock 2011, p. 144.
300. Jordan & Caresse 2019, p. 61.
301. Brown 2012, p. 449; Gaehtgens 2018, p. 45.
302. Cohen 2014, p. 130.
303. Brown 2012, p. 452; Cohen 2014, p. 130.
304. Cohen 2014, p. 138; Dunn 2021, p. 62.
305. Mock 2011, p. 220.
306. Dunn 2021, p. 62.
307. Gildea 1996, p. 165; Margolis 1996, p. 265.
308. Brown 2012, p. 439; Mock 2011, p. 3.
309. Mock 2011, p. 145.
310. Gildea 1996, pp. 155–156; Warner 1981, pp. 311–312, fn 24.
311. Taylor 2012, p. 238.
312. Gildea 1996; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 244–245; Taylor 2012, p. 238.
313. Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 245; Taylor 2012, p. 240.
314. Castor 2015, p. 244.
315. Pius XI 1922, p. 187:Sanctam Ioannam Virginem Arcensem, uti Patronam minus principalem Galliae, libentissime declaramus et constituimus
316. Gies 1981, pp. 183, 221; Sullivan 1999, p. 141.
317. Chenu 1990, p. 98; Ghezzi 1996; Sullivan 1996, p. 106 fn8; Warner 1981, p. 264.
318. Sullivan 1999, p. 162.
319. Lowell 1896, p. 842; Meltzer 2001, p. 192; Pernoud 1955, pp. 6, 252; Taylor 2006, p. 29 fn86.
320. Kelly 1996, p. 210; Michelet 1855, p. 249; McInerney 2003, pp. 210–211; Sullivan 1999, pp. 30–31.
321. Kelly 1996, p. 210; Guillemin 1970, p. 249; Warner 1981, p. 268.
322. Chenu 1990, pp. 98–99; Harrison, Swinny & Marvin 1920, p. 298.
323. Boal 2005, p. 208.
324. Fraioli 1981, pp. 811, 813–814.
325. Dworkin 1987, pp. 104–105; Fraioli 1981, p. 817; Sproles 1996, p. 162; Taylor 2012, p. 217; Warner 1981, p. 216.
326. Dworkin 1987, p. 104.
327. Dworkin 1987, pp. 126–127; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 30–31; Meltzer 2001, p. 94.
328. Castor 2015, pp. 97, 168; Gies 1981, pp. 54, 154; Pernoud & Clin 1986, pp. 30–31, 105.
329. Barstow 1985, p. 29; Dworkin 1987, p. 118.
330. Barstow 1986, p. 128.
331. Sexsmith 1990, p. 129.
332. Dunn 2021, p. 38.
333. Lightbody 1961, pp. 16–17.
334. Cohen 2014, p. 110.
335. Gies 1981, pp. 24; Taylor 2006, pp. 13, 27.
336. Gies 1981, p. 24; Sullivan 1996, p. 86; Weiskopf 1996, p. 127.
337. Sullivan 1999, p. 32.
338. Taylor 2006, p. 29.
339. Gies 1981, p. 236; Lightbody 1961, p. 140; Warner 1981, p. 190.
340. Pernoud 1955, p. 286.
341. Kelly 1996, pp. 220–221.
342. Henker 1984; Schildkrout 2017, §6.
343. d'Orsi & Tinuper 2006; Foote-Smith & Bayne 1991; Nicastro & Fabienne 2016.
344. Ratnasuriya 1986, p. 235.
345. Sherman & Zimmerman 2008.
346. Allen 1975.
347. Mackowiak 2007, p. 140.
348. Kelly 1996, p. 220.
349. Henderson 1939, cited in Ratnasuriya 1986
350. Sullivan 1996, pp. 104–105; Warner 1981, pp. 130–131.
351. Kelly 1996, p. 222.
352. DeVries 1999, pp. 38–39; Gies 1981, p. 28; Henderson 1939, cited in Ratnasuriya 1986, p. 234; Schildkrout 2017, §8.
353. Sullivan 1999, p. 140.
354. Crane 2002, pp. 74; Fraioli 2000, p. 28, fn18.
355. Crane 1996, p. https://archive.org/details/performanceofsel0000cran/page/78307; Schibanoff 1996, pp. 42.
356. Crane 1996, p. 307.
357. Barrett 1932, p. 152.
358. Hotchkiss 2000, p. 67; Warner 1981, p. 144.
359. Sackville-West 1936, p. 91; Gies 1981, p. 36.
360. Crane 1996, p. 298; Garber 1993, p. 216; Lucie-Smith 1976, p. 32; Warner 1981, p. 144.
361. Sullivan 2011, p. 316.
362. Garber 1993, p. 215; Sackville-West 1936, pp. 26–27; Schibanoff 1996, p. 33.
363. Hotchkiss 2000, p. 66; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 117; Schibanoff 1996, p. 31.
364. Gies 1981, p. 217–218; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 132; Schibanoff 1996, p. 31; Sullivan 1999, p. 132.
365. Hotchkiss 2000, p. 67; Schibanoff 1996, p. 38.
366. Hotchkiss 2000, p. 61.
367. Aquinas 2022, ST II-II, a. 2, ad 3.
368. Sackville-West 1936, p. 93; Schibanoff 1996, p. 41.
369. Hotchkiss 2000, p. 66; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 132.
370. Crane 1996, p. 301; Pernoud & Clin 1986, p. 184.
371. Dworkin 1987, pp. 125–126; Gies 1981, p. 216; Hotchkiss 2000, p. 67; Sackville-West 1936, pp. 301, 318.
372. Hotchkiss 2000, p. 64–65; Schibanoff 1996, p. 58.
373. Dworkin 1987, p. 126; Schibanoff 1996, p. 52.
374. Bullough 1974; Crane 1996, p. 310; Sproles 1996, p. 163; Warner 1981, p. 147.
375. Crane 2002, p. 78; Warner 1981, p. 142.
376. Crane 1996, pp. 313; Garber 1993, p. 11; Warner 1981, p. 147.
377. Crane 1996, pp. 305–306; Warner 1981, pp. 146–147.
378. Monmarché 1958, p. 70: Tête casquée découverte en 1820 dans les démolitions des restes de l'ancienne église Saint-Eloi-Saint-Maurice, considérée parfois, mais à tort, comme représentant Jeanne d'Arc; c'est en réalité une tête de St Georges. ; Warner 1981, p. 176.
379. Shaw 1932, p. 7.
380. Butler 2007, p. 593; Charlier et al. 2010, pp. e14–e15.
381. BBC 2016.
382. Alberge 2015.
383. Daley 2016; Willsher 2016.
384. Willsher 2016.
385. Brewer 1900, p. 683.
386. Caze 1819, p. 124: "Si l'on veut en effet reconnaître que les révélations faites à Jeanne d'Arc sur le Roi et sur Charles d'Orléans, ałors prisonnier en Angleterre, étaient de la même nature, ... qu'ils étaient ses frères et qu'elle était leur soeur, la cause des délais demandés par elle pour la manifestation du secret sur lequel les juges l'interrogeaient si fréquemment, devient facile à concevoir." and about Charles d'Orléans, then a prisoner in England, were of the same nature, ... that they were her brothers and that she was their sister, the cause of the delays requested by her for the manifestation of the secret about which the judges questioned her so frequently, becomes easy to imagine."]; Michaud-Fréjaville 2003, p. 13.
387. Murray 1921, p. 271.
388. Graeme 2009, p. 99.

Sources

Books

• Aberth, John (2000). From the Brink of the Apocalypse. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-92715-4. OCLC 1054385441.
• Allmand, Christopher (1988). The Hundred Years War: England and France at War c.1300-c. 1450. Routledge. ISBN 9781139167789. OCLC 1285662551.
• Barker, Juliet (2009). Conquest: The English Kingdom of France, 1417-1450. Little, Brown. ISBN 9781408702468. OCLC 903613803.
• Barstow, Anne Llewellyn (1986). Joan of Arc: Heretic, Mystic, Shaman. E. Mellen. ISBN 9780889465329. OCLC 1244846182.
• Boal, Barbara (2005). "The Cao Dai and the Hoa Hao". In Partridge, Christopher (ed.). Introduction to World Religions. Fortress. pp. 208–209. ISBN 9780824510114. OCLC 645341461.
• Brewer, E. Cobham (1900). Dictionary of Phrase and Fable (New ed.). Cassell and Company. OCLC 896665214.
• Burne, Alfred Higgins (1999) . The Agincourt War: A Milistary history of the Latter Part of the Hundred Years War from 1369 to 1453. Wordsworth Editions. ISBN 1840222115. OCLC 1285475585.
• Castor, Helen (2015). Joan of Arc: A History. Harper. ISBN 9780062384393. OCLC 1256258941.
• Caze, Pierre (1819). La Verité sur Jeanne d'Arc ou éclaircissemens sur son origine [The Truth about Joan of Arc or Clarification of Her Origins] (in French). Vol. I. Paris: Rosa. OCLC 220208170.
• Champion, Pierre (1932) . "Essay on the Trial of Jeanne d'Arc, Dramatis Personae, Biographical Sketches of the Trial Judges and Other Persons Involved in the Maid's Career, Trial and Death". The Trial of Jeanne D'Arc. Translated by Taylor, Coley; Kerr, Ruth H. Gotham house. OCLC 1314152. Archived from the original on 14 November 2014. Retrieved 25 November 2021.
• Chenu, Bruno (1990). Book of Christian Martyrs. Crossroad. ISBN 9780824510114. OCLC 645341461.
• Cohen, Paul A. (2014). History and Popular Memory. Columbia University Press. ISBN 9780231537292. OCLC 964546561.
• Conner, Susan Punzel (2004). The Age of Napoleon. Greenwood. ISBN 9780313320149. OCLC 56575944.
• Crane, Susan (2002). The Performance of Self: Ritual, Clothing, and Identity during the Hundred Years War. University of Pennsylvania. ISBN 0812236580. OCLC 843080228.
• Curry, Anne; Hoskins, Peter; Richardson, Thom; Spencer, Dan (2015). The Agincourt Companion: A Guide to the Legendary Battle and Warfare in the Medieval World. Andre Deutch. ISBN 9780233004716. OCLC 921184232.
• DeVries, Kelly (1996). "A Woman as Leader of Men: Joan of Arc's Military Career". In Wheeler, Bonnie; Wood, Charles T. (eds.). Fresh Verdicts on Joan of Arc. Garland. pp. 3–18. ISBN 0815336640. OCLC 847627589.
• DeVries, Kelly (1999). Joan of Arc: A Military Leader. Sutton Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7509-1805-3. OCLC 42957383.
• Dunn, Susan (2021). The Deaths of Louis XVI: Regicide and the French Political Imagination. Princeton University Press. ISBN 9780691224916. OCLC 1235966126.
• Dworkin, Andrea (2007) . Intercourse. Basic Books. ISBN 9780465017522. OCLC 1153284259.
• Fraioli, Deborah (2000). Joan of Arc: The Early Debate. Boydell Press. ISBN 978-0-85115-880-8. OCLC 48680250.
• Fraioli, Deborah (2005). Joan of Arc and the Hundred Years War. Greenwood Press. ISBN 0313324581. OCLC 1150093760.
• France, Anatole (1909). Jeanne d'Arc, Maid of Orleans, deliverer of France: Being the Story of her Life, her Achievements, and her Death, as Attested on Oath and Set Forth in the Original Documents. London: Heinemann. OCLC 862867781. Archived from the original on 14 June 2020. Retrieved 28 August 2020 – via Project Gutenberg.
• Fuller, John Frederick Charles (1954). A Military History of the Western World:From the Earliest Times to the Battle of Lepanto. Vol. I. Funk & Wagnalls. OCLC 1150796947.
• Gaehtgens, Thomas (2018). Reims on Fire: War and Reconciliation Between France and Germany. Getty Research Institute. ISBN 9781606065709. OCLC 1028601667.
• Garber, Marjorie B. (1993). Vested Interests: Cross-dressing and Cultural Anxiety. Harper Collins. ISBN 0060975245. OCLC 1151664883.
• Gies, Frances (1981). Joan of Arc: The Legend and the Reality. Harper & Row. ISBN 0690019424. OCLC 1204328346.
• Gildea, Robert (1996). The Past in French History. Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300067118. OCLC 638739483.
• Goldstone, Nancy Bazelon (2012). The Maid and the Queen: The Secret History of Joan of Arc. Viking. ISBN 9780670023332. OCLC 1150263570.
• Graeme, Donald (2009). Lies, Damned Lies, and History: A Catalogue of Historical Errors and Misunderstandings. History Press. ISBN 9780752452333. OCLC 851997819.
• Guillemin, Henri (1973) . Joan, Maid of Orleans. Saturday Review Press. ISBN 9781107013360. OCLC 1097164619.
• Hamblin, Vicki L. (2016) . "En L'honneur de la Pucelle:ritualizing Joan the Maid in Fifteenth-Century Orléans". In Astell, Ann W.; Wheeler, Bonnie (eds.). Joan of Arc and Spirituality. Palgrave. pp. 209–226. ISBN 9781137069542. OCLC 1083468869.
• Harrison, Frederic; Swinny, S. H.; Marvin, F. S., eds. (1920). The New Calendar of Great Men: Biographies of the 559 Worthies of All Ages & Nations in the Positivist Calendar of Auguste Comte. Macmillan and Co. OCLC 1049894322.
• Henderson, David Kennedy (1939). Psychopathic States. W. W. Norton. OCLC 912042868.
• Hobbins, Daniel (2005). "Introduction". In Hobbins, Daniel (ed.). The Trial of Joan of Arc. Harvard University Press. pp. 1–32. ISBN 9780674038684. OCLC 1036902468.
• Hotchkiss, Valerie R. (2000). Clothes Make the Man: Female Cross Dressing in Medieval Europe. Garland. ISBN 9780815337713. OCLC 980891132.
• Huizinga, Johan (1959). Men and Ideas: History, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance; Essays. Meridian. OCLC 1036539966.
• Jordan, John; Caresse, Philippe (2019). French Armoured Cruisers: 1887–1932. Seaforth. ISBN 9781526741189. OCLC 1112385464.
• Kelly, Henry Ansgar (1996). "Joan of Arc's Last Trial: The Attack of the Devil's Advocates". In Wheeler, Bonnie; Wood, Charles T. (eds.). Fresh Verdicts on Joan of Arc. Garland. pp. 205–236. ISBN 0815336640. OCLC 847627589.
• Lace, William W. (1994). The Hundreds' Year War. Lucent Books. ISBN 1560062339. OCLC 1256248285.
• Lang, Andrew (1909). The Maid of France: Being the Story of the Life and Death of Jeanne d'Arc. Longmans, Green. OCLC 697990421.
• Lightbody, Charles Wayland (1961). The Judgements of Joan: Joan of Arc, A Study in Cultural History. Harvard University Press. OCLC 1150088435.
• Lowell, Francis Cabot (1896). Joan of Arc. Houghton Mifflin Co. OCLC 457671288.
• Lucie-Smith, Edward (1976). Joan of Arc. Allen Lane. ISBN 0713908572. OCLC 1280740196.
• Mackinnon, James (1902). The Growth and Decline of the French Monarchy. Longmans. OCLC 1017332942.
• Mackowiak, Philip A. (2007). Post Mortem: Solving History's Great Medical Mysteries. American College of Physicians. ISBN 9781930513891. OCLC 1285753937.
• Maddox, Margaret Joan (2012). "Joan of Arc". In Matheson, Lister M. (ed.). Icons of the Middle Ages: Rulers, Rebels, and Saints. Vol. 2. Greenwood. pp. 417–450. ISBN 9780313340802. OCLC 728656735.
• Margolis, Nadia (1996). "The "Joan Phenomenon and the Right". In Wheeler, Bonnie; Wood, Charles T. (eds.). Fresh Verdicts on Joan of Arc. Garland. pp. 265–287. ISBN 0815336640. OCLC 847627589.
• Matheson, Lister (2012). Icons of the Middle Ages: Rulers, Writers, Rebels, and Saints. Greenwood. ISBN 9781573567800. OCLC 991308245.
• McInerney, Maud Burnett (2003). Eloquent Virgins: The Rhetoric of Virginity from Thecla to Joan of Arc. Chicago: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 9781137064516. OCLC 1083464793.
• Megivern, James (1997). The Death Penalty: An Historical and Theological Survey. New York: Paulist Press. ISBN 9780809104871. OCLC 1244600248.
• Meltzer, Francoise (2001). For Fear of the Fire: Joan of Arc and the Limits of Subjectivity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-51982-1. OCLC 46240234.
• Mock, Steven (2011). Symbols of Defeat in the Construction of National Identity. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781107013360. OCLC 1097164619.
• Monmarché, Georges (1958). Val de Loire: Maine, Orléanais, Touraine, Anjou [Loire Valley: Maine, Orléanais, Touraine, Anjou]. Les guides bleus (in French). Toulouse: Hachette. OCLC 257163813.
• Michaud-Fréjaville, François (2003). "Person vs. Personage: Joan of Arc in Seventeenth-Century France". In Goy-Blanquet, Dominique (ed.). Joan of Arc, a Saint for All Reasons: Studies in Myth and Politics. London: Routledge. pp. 39–58. ISBN 9780754633303. OCLC 974642249.
• Michelet, Jules (1900) . Joan of Arc, the Maid of Orleans. From Mitchelet's History of France. Translated by Ketcham, Henry. New York: A. L. Burt. OCLC 1047498185.
• Murray, Margaret A (1921). The Witch-cult in Western Europe. Oxford University Press. OCLC 1176037038.
• Murray, T. Douglas (1902). "Introductory Note to the Rehabilitation". In Murray, T. Douglas (ed.). Jeanne D'Arc, Maid of Orleans, Deliverer of France, Being the Story of Her Life, Her Achievements, and Her Death, As Attested on Oath and Set Forth in the Original Documents. London: William Heinemann. pp. 371–376. Archived from the original on 29 June 2018 – via Project Gutenberg.
• Pernoud, Régine (2007) . The Retrial of Joan of Arc; The Evidence at the Trial For Her Rehabilitation 1450–1456. Translated by Cohen. San Francisco: Harcourt, Brace and Company. ISBN 9781586171780. OCLC 1338471.
• Pernoud, Régine (1966) . Joan of Arc By Herself and Her Witnesses. Translated by Hyams, Edward. New York: Stein and Day. OCLC 1035912459.
• Pernoud, Régine; Clin, Marie-Véronique (1999) . Wheeler, Bonnie (ed.). Joan of Arc: Her Story. Translated by duQuesnay Adams, Jeremy. London: St. Martin's Press. ISBN 978-0-312-21442-5. OCLC 1035889959.
• Peters, Edward (1989). Inquisition. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 9780520066304. OCLC 970384852.
• Rankin, Daniel; Quintal, Claire (1964). "Authors' Comments". In Rankin, Daniel; Quintal, Claire (eds.). The First Biography of Joan of Arc with the Chronicle Record of a Contemporary Account. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press. OCLC 1153286979.
• Richey, Stephen W. (2003). Joan of Arc: The Warrior Saint. Westport: Praeger. ISBN 978-0-275-98103-7. OCLC 52030963.
• Russell, Jeffrey Burton (1972). Witchcraft in the Middle Ages. Ithaca: Cornell University. ISBN 9780801406973. OCLC 1151774229.
• Russell, Preston (2014). Lights of Madness: In Search of Joan of Arc. Savannah, GA: Frederic C. Beil, Pub. ISBN 9781499040562. OCLC 1124448651.
• Sackville-West, Victoria (1936). Saint Joan of Arc. New York: Athenium. OCLC 1151167808.
• Shaw, George Bernard (1991) . Saint Joan. Harlow: Longman. ISBN 9780582077867. OCLC 1195035218.
• Schibanoff, Susan (1996). "True Lies: Transvestism and Idolatry in the Trial of Joan of Arc". In Wheeler, Bonnie; Wood, Charles T. (eds.). Fresh Verdicts on Joan of Arc. New York: Garland. pp. 31–60. ISBN 0815336640. OCLC 847627589.
• Seward, Desmond (1982). The Hundred Years War: the English in France. New York: Athenium. ISBN 9780689706288. OCLC 1280811695.
• Sullivan, Karen (1996). ""I Do Not Name to You the Voice of St. Michael": the Identification of Joan of Arc's Voices". In Wheeler, Bonnie; Wood, Charles T. (eds.). Fresh Verdicts on Joan of Arc. New York: Garland. pp. 85–112. ISBN 0815336640. OCLC 847627589.
• Sullivan, Karen (1999). The Interrogation of Joan of Arc. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. ISBN 9780816689866. OCLC 236342924.
• Taylor, Craig, ed. (2006). Joan of Arc: La Pucelle (Selected Sources Translated and Annotated). Manchester: Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-0-7190-6847-8. OCLC 1150142464.
• Taylor, Larissa (2009). The Virgin Warrior: The Life and Death of Joan of Arc. Padstow: Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300161298. OCLC 1059166401.
• Tuchman, Barbara (1982). A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century. New York: Knopf. ISBN 9780394400266. OCLC 1033665932.
• Vale, M. G. A. (1974). Charles VII. London: Eyre Methuen. ISBN 0413280802. OCLC 1280787240.
• Verger, Jacques (1972). "The University of Paris at the End of the Hundred Years' War". In Baldwin, Richard A.; Goldthwwaite, John W. (eds.). Universities in Politics: Case Studies from the Late Middle Ages and Early Modern Period. Johns Hopkins Press. pp. 47–78. ISBN 0801813727. OCLC 1151833089.
• Warner, Marina (1981). Joan of Arc: The Image of Female Heroism. New York: Knopf. ISBN 9780394411453. OCLC 1150060458.
• Weiskopf, Steven (1996). "Readers of the Lost Arc: Secrecy, Specularity, and Speculation in the Trial of Joan of Arc". In Wheeler, Bonnie; Wood, Charles T. (eds.). Fresh Verdicts on Joan of Arc. New York: Garland. pp. 113–132. ISBN 0815336640. OCLC 847627589.
• Wood, Charles (1988). Joan of Arc and Richard III : Sex, Saints, and Government in the Middle Ages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780198021094. OCLC 519442443.

Journal articles, dissertations, and theses

• Allen, Clifford (1975). "The schizophrenia of Joan of Arc" (PDF). History of Medicine (London). 6 (3–4): 4–9. PMID 11630627. Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 December 2013.
• Barstow, Anne Llewellyn (1985). "Mystical experience as a feminist weapon: Joan of Arc". Women's Studies Quarterly. 13 (2): 26–29. JSTOR 40003571. Archived from the original on 25 January 2022. Retrieved 25 January 2022.
• Boyd, Beverly (1986). "Wyclif, Joan of Arc, and Margery Kempe". Mystics Quarterly. 12 (3): 112–118. JSTOR 20716744. Archived from the original on 9 December 2021. Retrieved 9 December 2021.
• Brown, Frederick (2012). "The battle for Joan". The Hudson Review. 65 (3): 439–452. JSTOR 43489248. Archived from the original on 17 December 2021. Retrieved 12 January 2022.
• Bullough, Vern L (1974). "Transvestites in the Middle Ages". American Journal of Sociology. 79 (6): 1381–1394. doi:10.1086/225706. JSTOR 2777140. S2CID 3466059. Archived from the original on 24 December 2021. Retrieved 28 December 2021.
• Butler, Declan (2007). "Joan of Arc's relics exposed as forgery". Nature. 446 (7136): 593. Bibcode:2007Natur.446..593B. doi:10.1038/446593a. PMID 17410145.
• Charlier, P.; Poupon, J.; Eb, A.; De Mazancourt, P.; Gilbert, T.; Huynh-Charlier, I.; Loublier, Y.; Verhille, A. M.; Moulheirat, C.; Patou-Mathis, M.; Robbiola, L.; Montagut, R.; Masson, F.; Etcheberry, A.; Brun, L.; Willerslev, E.; Lorin de la Grandmaison, G.; Durigon, M. (2010). "The 'relics of Joan of Arc'" A forensic multidisciplinary analysis". Forensic Science International. 194 (1–3): e9–e15. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.09.006. PMID 19913375. Archived from the original on 21 February 2022. Retrieved 29 December 2021.ResearchGate: 38089351 Archived 21 February 2022 at the Wayback Machine
• Contamine, Philippe (2007). "Remarques critiques sur les étendards de Jeanne d'Arc [Critical remarks on the banners of Joan of Arc]". Francia (in French). 34 (1): 187–200. doi:10.11588/fr.2007.1.45032. Archived from the original on 7 May 2021. Retrieved 7 May 2021.
• Crane, Susan (1996). "Clothing and gender definition: Joan of Arc" (PDF). Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies. 26 (2): 298–320. JSTOR 43577195. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 July 2016.
• Egan, Brendan (2019). 'Bore by discent and by title of right, justly to reigne in England and in Fraunce': Literature Directed at English Kings During the Hundred Years War (PDF) (MA). University of Guelph.
• Elliot, Dyson (2002). "Seeing double: John Gerson, the discernment of spirits and Joan of Arc". The American Historical Review. 107 (1): 26–54. doi:10.1086/532095. JSTOR 10.1086/532095. Archived from the original on 22 December 2021. Retrieved 24 December 2021.
• Foote-Smith, Elizabeth; Bayne, Lydia (1991). "Joan of Arc". Epilepsia. 32 (6): 810–815. doi:10.1111/j.1528-1157.1991.tb05537.x. PMID 1743152. S2CID 221736116.
• Fraioli, Deborah (1981). "The literary image of Joan of Arc: Prior influences". Speculum. 56 (4): 811–930. doi:10.2307/2847364. JSTOR 2847364. S2CID 161962500. Archived from the original on 24 January 2022. Retrieved 25 January 2022.
• Frank, John P. (1997). "The trial of Joan of Arc". Litigation. 69 (5): 51–54. JSTOR 29759909. Archived from the original on 23 December 2021. Retrieved 24 December 2021.
• Hamblin, Vicki L. (1984). The Fifteenth-century French Mistere du Siege D'Orléans: An Annotated Edition (Portions in French Text) (PhD). University of Arizona. Archived from the original on 8 January 2022. Retrieved 9 January 2022.
• Hamblin, Vicki L. (1988). "The Mistère du siège d'Orléans as a representational drama". The Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature. 42 (1/2): 61–68. doi:10.2307/1347436. JSTOR 1347436. S2CID 194274410. Archived from the original on 8 January 2022. Retrieved 9 January 2022.
• Henker, F. O. (1984). "Joan of Arc and DSM III". Southern Medical Journal. 77 (12): 1488–1490. doi:10.1097/00007611-198412000-00003. PMID 6390693. S2CID 44528365.
• Hughes, J. R. (2005). "Did all those famous people really have epilepsy?". Epilepsy & Behavior. 6 (2): 115–39. doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2004.11.011. PMID 15710295. S2CID 10436691.
• Kelly, Henry Ansgar (1993). "The right to remain silent: Before and after Joan of Arc". Speculum. 68 (4): 992–1026. doi:10.2307/2865494. JSTOR 2865494. S2CID 162858647. Archived from the original on 24 December 2021. Retrieved 24 December 2021.
• Kelly, Henry Ansgar (2014). "Inquisitorial deviations and cover-ups: The prosecutions of Margaret Porete and Guiard of Cressonessart, 1308–1310". Speculum. 89 (4): 936–973. doi:10.1017/S003871341400164X. JSTOR 43577195. S2CID 170115473. Archived from the original on 27 December 2021. Retrieved 28 December 2021.
• Kennedy, Angus J.; Varty, Kenneth (1977). Introduction. Ditié de Jehanne D'Arc. By de Pizan, Christine. Oxford: Society for the Study of Mediæval Languages and Literature. ISBN 9780950595504. OCLC 1083468869. Archived from the original on 16 June 2008.
• Newhall, Richard A. (1934). "Payment to Pierre Cauchon for presiding at the trial of Jeanne d'Arc". Speculum. 9 (1): 88–91. doi:10.2307/2846456. JSTOR 2846456. S2CID 162439379. Archived from the original on 22 December 2021. Retrieved 24 December 2021.
• Nicastro, Nicholas; Fabienne, Picard (2016). "Joan o fArc: Sanctity, witchcraft or epilepsy". Epilepsy & Behavior. 57 (Part B): 247–250. doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2015.12.043. PMID 26852074. S2CID 3841213.
• Noonan, John T. (1987). "Principled or pragmatic foundations for the freedom of conscious?". Journal of Law and Religion. 5 (1): 203–212. doi:10.2307/1051025. JSTOR 1051025. Archived from the original on 27 December 2021. Retrieved 28 December 2021.
• Noonan, John T. (1998). "The Death Penalty. An historical and Theological Survey by James T. Megivern". Book Review. The Catholic Historical Review. 84 (4): 703–705. doi:10.1353/cat.1998.0239. JSTOR 25025339. S2CID 159923086. Archived from the original on 26 December 2021. Retrieved 28 December 2021.
• Nores, J. M.; Yakovleff, Y. (1995). "A historical case of disseminated chronic tuberculosis". Neuropsychobiology. 32 (2): 79–80. doi:10.1159/000119218. PMID 7477805.
• d'Orsi, Giuseppe; Tinuper, Paolo (2006). ""I heard voices ...": from semiology, an historical review, and a new hypothesis on the presumed epilepsy of Joan of Arc". Epilepsy & Behavior. 9 (1): 152–157. doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2006.04.020. PMID 16750938. S2CID 24961015.
• Ratnasuriya, R. H. (1986). "Joan of Arc, creative psychopath: is ther another explanation?". Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 79 (Part B): 247–250. doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2015.12.043. PMID 26852074. S2CID 3841213.
• Schildkrout, Barbara (2017). "Joan of Arc—Hearing voices". American Journal of Psychiatry. 174 (12): 1153–1154. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2017.17080948. PMID 29191033.
• Sexsmith, Dennis (1990). "The Radicalization of Joan of Arc: Before and after the French Revoluion". RACAR: Revue d'art canadienne/Canadian Art Review. 17 (2): 125–130. doi:10.7202/1073071ar. JSTOR 42630458. Archived from the original on 24 January 2022. Retrieved 25 January 2022.
• Sherman, Larry R.; Zimmerman, Michael R. (2008). "Ergotism and its effects on society and religion". Journal of Nutritional Immunology. 2 (3): 127–136. doi:10.1300/J053v02n03_08.
• Sizer, Michael (2007). "The calamity of violence: Reading the Paris massacres of 1418". Journal of the Western Society for French History. 35: 19–39. OCLC 990058151. Archived from the original on 24 February 2014.
• Sproles, Karyn Z (1996). "Cross-dressing for (imaginary) battle: Vita Sackville-West's biography of Joan of Arc". Biography. 19 (2): 158–177. doi:10.1353/bio.2010.0242. JSTOR 23539706. S2CID 161108684. Archived from the original on 24 January 2022. Retrieved 25 January 2022.
• Sullivan, Winnifred Fallers (2011). "Joan's two bodies: A study in political anthropology". Social Research. 78 (2): 307–324. JSTOR 23347178. Archived from the original on 17 December 2021. Retrieved 24 December 2021.
• Taylor, Larissa Juliet (2012). "Joan of Arc, the church, and the papacy". The Catholic Historical Review. 98 (2): 217–240. doi:10.1353/cat.2012.0129. JSTOR 23240136. S2CID 154958228. Archived from the original on 12 January 2022. Retrieved 12 January 2022.

Online sources

• Alberge, Dalya (27 December 2015). "Hot property: ring worn by Joan of Arc up for auction". The Sunday Times. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016.
• "Joan of Arc ring returns to France after auction sale". News. BBC. 4 March 2016. Archived from the original on 5 March 2016.
• "The Calendar". The Church of England. 2021. Archived from the original on 9 March 2021.
• Daley, Jason (24 March 2016). "French theme park "battles" British government to keep Joan of Arc's ring". Smithsonian Magazine. Archived from the original on 21 November 2021.
• "Bienvenue sur la site de Domremy-la-pucelle [Welcome to the Domremy-La-Pucelle Website]". Domremy la Pucelle: village Natal de Jaenne d'Arc (in French). 2021. Archived from the original on 16 April 2021.
• Ghezzi, Burt (2021) . "Saint Joan of Arc, 1412–1431". Loyola Press. Archived from the original on 14 January 2022.
• "History of Burgundy: The Glorious Age of the Dukes of Burgundy". Burgundy Today. 2012. Archived from the original on 30 April 2012.
• "Joan of Arc Celebrations". Metropolis of Orléans. 2021. Archived from the original on 16 May 2021.
• Linder, Douglas O. (2017). "Joan of Arc's Abjuration (May 24, 1431)". Famous Trials. Archived from the original on 2 July 2017.
• Willsher, Kim (26 August 2016). "Joan of Arc ring stays in France after appeal to Queen". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 27 August 2016.

Primary sources

• Aquinas, Thomas. "Summa Theologiae". newadvent.org. Archived from the original on 27 September 2018. Retrieved 25 January 2022.
• The Trial of Jeanne d'Arc. Translated by Barrett, Wilfred Philips. New York: Gotham house. 1932. OCLC 1314152. Archived from the original on 18 August 2016.
• Benedict XV (2021) . "Divina Disponente". The Holy See. Archived from the original on 25 February 2021.
• Bréhal, Jean (1893) . "Livre Quatrième: Texte de la Recollectio" [Book Four: Text of the Recollectio]. Jean Bréhal, Grand Inquisiteur de France, et la Réhabilitation of Jeanne D'Arc [Jean Bréhal, Grand Inquisitor of France, and the Rehabilitation of Joan of Arc]. By Belon, Marie-Joseph; Balme, François (in French and Latin). P. Lethielleux. OCLC 1143025136.
• Pius XI (1922). "Galliam, Ecclesiae filiam" [France, Daughter of the Church]. Acta Apostolicae Sedia (in Latin). 14 (7): 185–187.
• de Pizan, Christine (1977) . "Christine de Pisan: Ditié de Jehanne D'Arc". Jeanne dárc la pucelle. Translated by Kennedy, Angus J.; Varty, Kenneth. Society for the Study of Mediæval Languages and Literature. Archived from the original on 1 November 2020.
• Quicherat, Jules (1841a). Procès de condamnation et de réhabilitation de Jeanne d'Arc, dite La Pucelle [The Trials of the Condemnation and Rehabilitation of Joan of Arc, known as The Maid] (in Latin and French). Vol. I. Renouard. OCLC 310772260.
• Quicherat, Jules (1841b). Procès de condamnation et de réhabilitation de Jeanne d'Arc, dite La Pucelle [The Trials of the Condemnation and Rehabilitation of Joan of Arc, known as The Maid] (in Latin and French). Vol. II. Renouard. OCLC 310772267.
• Quicherat, Jules (1845). Procès de condamnation et de réhabilitation de Jeanne d'Arc, dite La Pucelle [The Trials of the Condemnation and Rehabilitation of Joan of Arc, known as The Maid] (in Latin and French). Vol. III. Renouard. OCLC 162464167.
• Quicherat, Jules (1847). Procès de condamnation et de réhabilitation de Jeanne d'Arc, dite La Pucelle [The Trials of the Condemnation and Rehabilitation of Joan of Arc, known as The Maid] (in Latin and French). Vol. IV. Renouard. OCLC 162464167.
• Quicherat, Jules (1849). Procès de condamnation et de réhabilitation de Jeanne d'Arc, dite La Pucelle [The Trials of the Condemnation and Rehabilitation of Joan of Arc, known as The Maid] (in Latin and French). Vol. V. Renouard. OCLC 162464167.
• Rankin, Daniel; Quintal, Claire, eds. (c. 1500). The First Biography of Joan of Arc with the Chronicle Record of a Contemporary Account (PDF). OCLC 1153286979. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 July 2011.

External links

• Films about Jeanne d'Arc from International Joan of Arc Society (with film clips)
• Centre Jeanne d'Arc at the Orleans Municipal Library (in French)
• "The Siege of Orleans", BBC Radio 4 discussion with Anne Curry, Malcolm Vale & Matthew Bennett (In Our Time, 24 May 2007)

• Saints
• Biography
• Catholicism
• France

• Joan of Arc
• 1410s births
• 1431 deaths
• 15th-century Christian mystics
• 15th-century Christian saints
• 15th-century French women
• 15th-century Roman Catholic martyrs
• Angelic visionaries
• Armagnac faction
• Beatifications by Pope Pius X
• Canonizations by Pope Benedict XV
• Christian female saints of the Middle Ages
• Executed French women
• Executed people from Lorraine
• Female wartime cross-dressers
• French prisoners of war in the Hundred Years' War
• French Roman Catholic saints
• History of Catholicism in France
• History of Rouen
• Medieval French saints
• Michael (archangel)
• Overturned convictions in France
• Patron saints of France
• People executed by the Kingdom of England by burning
• People executed for heresy
• People executed under the Lancastrians
• People from Vosges (department)
• Prophets in Christianity
• Roman Catholic mystics
• Women in 15th-century warfare
• Women in medieval European warfare
• Women in war in France
• Women mystics
• Wrongful executions
• National symbols of France
• Anglican saints