The Life of Joan of Arc
By Anatole France
VOLUME 2 CHAPTER 6
THE MAID IN THE TRENCHES OF MELUN—LE SEIGNEUR DE L'OURS— THE CHILD OF
LAGNY
IN Easter week, Jeanne, at the head of a band of mercenaries, is
before the walls of Melun.[345] She arrives just in time to fight. The
truces have expired.[346] Is it possible that the town which was
subject to King Charles[347] can have refused to admit the Maid with
her company when she came to it so generously? Apparently it was so.
Was Jeanne able to communicate with the Carmelites of Melun? Probably.
What misfortune befell her at the gates of the town? Did she suffer
ill treatment at the hands of a Burgundian band? We know not. But when
she was in the trenches she heard Saint Catherine and Saint Margaret
saying unto her: "Thou wilt be taken before Saint John's Day."
And she entreated them: "When I am taken, let me die immediately
without suffering long." And the Voices repeated that she would be
taken and thus it must be.[Pg ii.123]
And they added gently: "Be not troubled, be resigned. God will help
thee."[348]
Saint John's Day was the 24th of June, in less than ten weeks. Many a
time after that, Jeanne asked her saints at what hour she would be
taken; but they did not tell her; and thus doubting she ceased to
follow her own ideas and consulted the captains.[349]
On her way from Melun to Lagny-sur-Marne, in the month of May, she had
to pass Corbeil. It was probably then, and in her company, that the
two devout women from Lower Brittany, Pierronne and her younger sister
in the spirit, were taken at Corbeil by the English.[350]
For eight months the town of Lagny had been subject to King Charles
and governed by Messire Ambroise de Loré, who was energetically waging
war against the English of Paris and elsewhere.[351] For the nonce
Messire Ambroise de Loré was absent; but his lieutenant, Messire Jean
Foucault, commanded the garrison. Shortly after Jeanne's coming to
this town, tidings were brought that a company of between three and
four hundred men of Picardy and of Champagne, fighting for the Duke of
Burgundy, after having ranged through l'Île de France, were now on
their way back to Picardy with much booty. Their captain was a valiant
man-at-arms, one Fran[Pg ii.124]quet d'Arras.[352] The French determined to cut
off their retreat. Under the command of Messire Jean Foucault, Messire
Geoffroy de Saint-Bellin, Lord Hugh Kennedy, a Scotchman, and Captain
Baretta, they sallied forth from the town.[353]
The Maid went with them. They encountered the Burgundians near Lagny,
but failed to surprise them. Messire Franquet's archers had had time
to take up their position with their backs to a hedge, in the English
manner. King Charles's men barely outnumbered the enemy. A certain
clerk of that time, a Frenchman, writes of the engagement. His innate
ingeniousness was invincible. With candid common sense he states that
this very slight numerical superiority rendered the enterprise very
arduous and difficult for his party.[354] And the battle was strong
indeed. The Burgundians were mightily afraid of the Maid because they
believed her to be a witch and in command of armies of devils;
notwithstanding, they fought right valiantly. Twice the French were
repulsed; but they returned to the attack, and finally the Burgundians
were all slain or taken.[355]
The conquerers returned to Lagny, loaded with booty and taking with
them their prisoners, among whom was Messire Franquet d'Arras. Of
noble birth and the lord of a manor, he was entitled to expect that he
would be held to ransom, according to custom. Both Jean de Troissy,
Bailie of Senlis,[356][Pg ii.125] and the Maid demanded him from the soldier who
was his captor. It was to the Maid that he was finally delivered.[357]
Did she obtain him in return for money? Probably, for soldiers were
not accustomed to give up noble and profitable prisoners for nothing.
Nevertheless, the Maid, when questioned on this subject, replied, that
being neither mistress nor steward of France, it was not for her to
give out money. We must suppose, therefore, that some one paid for
her. However that may be, Captain Franquet d'Arras was given up to
her, and she endeavoured to exchange him for a prisoner in the hands
of the English. The man whom she thus desired to deliver was a
Parisian who was called Le Seigneur de l'Ours.[358]
He was not of gentle birth and his arms were the sign of his hostelry.
It was the custom in those days to give the title of Seigneur to the
masters of the great Paris inns. Thus Colin, who kept the inn at the
Temple Gate, was known as Seigneur du Boisseau. The hôtel de l'Ours
stood in the Rue Saint-Antoine, near the Gate properly called La Porte
Baudoyer, but commonly known as Porte Baudet, Baudet possessing the
double advantage over Baudoyer of being shorter and more
comprehensible.[359] It was an ancient and famous inn, equal in renown
to the most famous, to the inn of L'Arbre Sec, in the street of that
name, to the Fleur de Lis near the Pont Neuf, to the Epée in the Rue
Saint-Denis, and to the Chapeau[Pg ii.126] Fétu of the Rue Croix-du-Tirouer. As
early as King Charles V's reign the inn was much frequented. Before
huge fires the spits were turning all day long, and there were hot
bread, fresh herrings, and wine of Auxerre in plenty. But since then
the plunderings of men-at-arms had laid waste the countryside, and
travellers no longer ventured forth for fear of being robbed and
slain. Knights and pilgrims had ceased coming into the town. Only
wolves came by night and devoured little children in the streets.
There were no fagots in the grate, no dough in the kneading-trough.
Armagnacs and Burgundians had drunk all the wine, laid waste all the
vineyards, and nought was left in the cellar save a poor piquette of
apples and of plums.[360]
The Seigneur de l'Ours, whom the Maid demanded, was called Jaquet
Guillaume.[361] Although Jeanne, like other folk, called him Seigneur,
it is not certain that he personally directed his inn, nor even that
the inn was open through these years of disaster and desolation. The
only ascertainable fact is that he was the proprietor of the house
with the sign of the Bear (l'Ours). He held it by right of his wife
Jeannette, and had come into possession of it in the following manner.
Fourteen years before, when King Henry with his knighthood had not yet
landed in France, the host of the Bear Inn had been the King's
sergeant-at-arms, one Jean Roche, a man of wealth and fair fame. He[Pg ii.127]
was a devoted follower of the Duke of Burgundy, and that was what
ruined him. Paris was then occupied by the Armagnacs. In the year
1416, in order to turn them out of the city, Jean Roche concerted with
divers burgesses. The plot was to be carried out on Easter Day, which
that year fell on the 29th of April. But the Armagnacs discovered it.
They threw the conspirators into prison and brought them to trial. On
the first Saturday in May the Seigneur de l'Ours was carried to the
market place in a tumbrel with Durand de Brie, a dyer, master of the
sixty cross-bowmen of Paris, and Jean Perquin, pin-maker and brasier.
All three were beheaded, and the body of the Seigneur de l'Ours was
hanged at Montfaucon where it remained until the entrance of the
Burgundians. Six weeks after their coming, in July, 1418, his body was
taken down from gibbet and buried in consecrated ground.[362]
Now the widow of Jean Roche had a daughter by a first marriage. Her
name was Jeannette; she took for her first husband a certain Bernard
le Breton; for her second, Jaquet Guillaume, who was not rich. He owed
money to Maître Jean Fleury, a clerk at law and the King's secretary.
His wife's affairs were not more prosperous; her father's goods had
been confiscated and she had been obliged to redeem a part of her
maternal inheritance. In 1424, the couple were short of money, and
they sold a house, concealing the fact that it was mortgaged. Being
charged by the purchaser, they were thrown into prison, where they
aggravated their offence by suborning two witnesses, one a priest, the
other a chambermaid. Fortunately for them, they procured a
pardon.[363]
[Pg ii.128]
The Jaquet Guillaume couple, therefore, were in a sorry plight. There
remained to them, however, the inheritance of Jean Roche, the inn near
the Place Baudet, at the sign of the Bear, the title of which Jaquet
Guillaume bore. This second Seigneur de l'Ours was to be as strongly
Armagnac as the other had been Burgundian, and was to pay the same
price for his opinions.
Six years had passed since his release from prison, when, in the March
of 1430, there was plotted by the Carmelites of Melun and certain
burgesses of Paris that conspiracy which we mentioned on the occasion
of Jeanne's departure for l'Île de France. It was not the first plot
into which the Carmelites had entered; they had plotted that rising
which had been on the point of breaking out on the Day of the
Nativity, when the Maid was leading the attack near La Porte
Saint-Honoré; but never before had so many burgesses and so many
notables entered into a conspiracy. A clerk of the Treasury, Maître
Jean de la Chapelle, two magistrates of the Châtelet, Maître Renaud
Savin and Maître Pierre Morant, a very wealthy man, named Jean de
Calais, burgesses, merchants, artisans, more than one hundred and
fifty persons, held the threads of this vast web, and among them,
Jaquet Guillaume, Seigneur de l'Ours.
The Carmelites of Melun directed the whole. Clad as artisans, they
went from King to burgesses, from burgesses to King; they kept up the
communications between those within and those without, and regulated
all the details of the enterprise. One of them asked the conspirators
for a written undertaking to bring the King's men into the city. Such
a demand looks as if the majority of the conspirators were in the pay
of the Royal Council.[Pg ii.129]
In exchange for this undertaking these monks brought acts of oblivion
signed by the King. For the people of Paris to be induced to receive
the Prince, whom they still called Dauphin, they must needs be assured
of a full and complete amnesty. For more than ten years, while the
English and Burgundians had been holding the town, no one had felt
altogether free from the reproach of their lawful sovereign and the
men of his party. And all the more desirous were they for Charles of
Valois to forget the past when they recalled the cruel vengeance taken
by the Armagnacs after the suppression of the Butchers.
One of the conspirators, Jaquet Perdriel, advocated the sounding of a
trumpet and the reading of the acts of oblivion on Sunday at the Porte
Baudet.
"I have no doubt," he said, "but that we shall be joined by the
craftsmen, who, in great numbers will flock to hear the reading."
He intended leading them to the Saint Antoine Gate and opening it to
the King's men who were lying in ambush close by.
Some eighty or a hundred Scotchmen, dressed as Englishmen, wearing the
Saint Andrew's cross, were then to enter the town, bringing in fish
and cattle.
"They will enter boldly by the Saint-Denys Gate," said Perdriel, "and
take possession of it. Whereupon the King's men will enter in force by
the Porte Saint Antoine."
The plan was deemed good, except that it was considered better for the
King's men to come in by the Saint-Denys Gate.
On Sunday, the 12th of March, the second Sunday in Lent, Maître Jean
de la Chapelle invited the magistrate Renaud Savin to come to the
tavern of La Pomme de Pin and meet divers other conspirators in[Pg ii.130]
order to arrive at an understanding touching what was best to be done.
They decided that on a certain day, under pretext of going to see his
vines at Chapelle-Saint-Denys, Jean de Calais should join the King's
men outside the walls, make himself known to them by unfurling a white
standard and bring them into the town. It was further determined that
Maître Morant and a goodly company of citizens with him, should hold
themselves in readiness in the taverns of the Rue Saint-Denys to
support the French when they came in. In one of the taverns of this
street must have been the Seigneur de l'Ours, who, dwelling near by,
had undertaken to bring together divers folk of the neighbourhood.
The conspirators were acting in perfect agreement. All they now
awaited was to be informed of the day chosen by the Royal Council; and
they believed the attempt was to be made on the following Sunday. But
on the 21st of March Brother Pierre d'Allée, Prior of the Carmelites
of Melun, was taken by the English. Put to the torture, he confessed
the plot and named his accomplices. On the information he gave, more
than one hundred and fifty persons were arrested and tried. On the 8th
of April, the Eve of Palm Sunday, seven of the most important were
taken to the market-place on a tumbrel. They were: Jean de la
Chapelle, clerk of the Treasury; Renaud Savin and Pierre Morant,
magistrates at the Châtelet; Guillaume Perdriau; Jean le François,
called Baudrin; Jean le Rigueur, baker, and Jaquet Guillaume, Seigneur
de l'Ours. All seven were beheaded by the executioner, who afterwards
quartered the bodies of Jean de la Chapelle and of Baudrin.
Jaquet Perdriel was merely deprived of his possessions. Jean de Calais
soon procured a pardon.[Pg ii.131] Jeannette, the wife of Jaquet Guillaume, was
banished from the kingdom and her goods confiscated.[364]
How can the Maid have known the Seigneur de l'Ours? Possibly the
Carmelites of Melun had recommended him to her, and perhaps it was on
their advice that she demanded his surrender. She may have seen him in
the September of 1429, at Saint-Denys or before the walls of Paris,
and he may have then undertaken to work for the Dauphin and his party.
Why were attempts made at Lagny to save this man alone of the one
hundred and fifty Parisians arrested on the information of Brother
Pierre d'Allée? Rather than Renaud Savin and Pierre Morant,
magistrates at the Châtelet, rather than Jean de la Chapelle, clerk of
the Treasury, why choose the meanest of the band? And how could they
look to exchange a man accused of treachery for a prisoner of war? All
this seems to us mysterious and inexplicable.
In the early days of May, Jeanne did not know what had become of
Jaquet Guillaume. When she heard that he had been tried and put to
death she was sore grieved and vexed. None the less, she looked upon
Franquet as a captive held to ransom. But the Bailie of Senlis, who
for some unknown reason was determined on the captain's ruin, took
advantage of the Maid's vexation at Jaquet Guillaume's execution, and
persuaded her to give up her prisoner.
He represented to her that this man had committed many a murder, many
a theft, that he was a[Pg ii.132] traitor, and that consequently he ought to be
brought to trial.
"You will be neglecting to execute justice," he said, "if you set this
Franquet free."
These reasons decided her, or rather she yielded to the Bailie's
entreaty.
"Since the man I wished to have is dead," she said, "do with Franquet
as justice shall require you."[365]
Thus she surrendered her prisoner. Was she right or wrong? Before
deciding we must ask whether it were possible for her to do otherwise
than she did. She was the Maid of God, the angel of the Lord of Hosts,
that is clear. But the leaders of war, the captains, paid no great
heed to what she said. As for the Bailie, he was the King's man, of
noble birth and passing powerful.
Assisted by the judges of Lagny, he himself conducted the trial. The
accused confessed that he was a murderer, a thief, and a traitor. We
must believe him; and yet we cannot forbear a doubt as to whether he
really was, any more than the majority of Armagnac or Burgundian
men-at-arms, any more than a Damoiseau de Commercy or a Guillaume de
Flavy, for example. He was condemned to death.
Jeanne consented that he should die, if he had deserved death, and
seeing that he had confessed his crimes[366] he was beheaded.
When they heard of the scandalous treatment of Messire Franquet, the
Burgundians were loud in their sorrow and indignation.[367] It would
seem that in this[Pg ii.133] matter the Bailie of Senlis and the judges of Lagny
did not act according to custom. We, however, are not sufficiently
acquainted with the circumstances to form an opinion. There may have
been some reason, of which we are ignorant, why the King of France
should have demanded this prisoner. He had a right to do so on
condition that he paid the Maid the amount of the ransom. A soldier of
those days, well informed in all things touching honour in war, was
the author of Le Jouvencel. In his chivalrous romances he writes
approvingly of the wise Amydas, King of Amydoine, who, learning that
one of his enemies, the Sire de Morcellet, has been taken in battle
and held to ransom, cries out that he is the vilest of traitors,
ransoms him with good coins of the realm, and hands him over to the
provost of the town and the officers of his council that they may
execute justice upon him.[368] Such was the royal prerogative.
Whether it was that camp life was hardening her, or whether, like all
mystics, she was subject to violent changes of mood, Jeanne showed at
Lagny none of that gentleness she had displayed on the evening of
Patay. The virgin who once had no other arm in battle than her
standard, now wielded a sword found there, at Lagny, a Burgundian
sword and a trusty. Those who regarded her as an angel of the Lord,
good Brother Pasquerel, for example, might justify her by saying that
the Archangel Saint Michael, the standard-bearer of celestial hosts,
bore a flaming sword. And indeed Jeanne remained a saint.
While she was at Lagny, folk came and told her that a child had died
at birth, unbaptized.[369] Having[Pg ii.134] entered into the mother at the time
of her conception, the devil held the soul of this child, who, for
lack of water, had died the enemy of its Creator. The greatest anxiety
was felt concerning the fate of this soul. Some thought it was in
limbo, banished forever from God's sight, but the more general and
better founded opinion was that it was seething in hell; for has not
Saint Augustine demonstrated that souls, little as well as great, are
damned because of original sin. And how could it be otherwise, seeing
that Eve's fall had effaced the divine likeness in this child? He was
destined to eternal death. And to think that with a few drops of water
this death might have been avoided! So terrible a disaster afflicted
not only the poor creature's kinsfolk, but likewise the neighbours and
all good Christians in the town of Lagny. The body was carried to the
Church of Saint-Pierre and placed before the image of Our Lady, which
had been highly venerated ever since the plague of 1128. It was called
Notre-Dame-des-Ardents because it cured burns, and when there were no
burns to be cured it was called Notre-Dame-des-Aidants, or rather Des
Aidances, that is, Our Lady the Helper, because she granted succour to
those in dire necessity.[370]
The maidens of the town knelt before her, the little body in their
midst, beseeching her to intercede with her divine Son so that this
little child might have his share in the Redemption brought by our
Saviour.[371] In such cases the Holy Virgin did not always deny her
powerful intervention. Here it may not be inap[Pg ii.135]propriate to relate a
miracle she had worked thirty-seven years before.
At Paris, in 1393, a sinful creature, finding herself with child,
concealed her pregnancy, and, when her time was come, was without aid
delivered. Then, having stuffed linen into the throat of the girl she
had brought forth, she went and threw her on to the dust-heap outside
La Porte Saint-Martin-des-Champs. But a dog scented the body, and
scratching away the other refuse, discovered it. A devout woman, who
happened to be passing by, took this poor little lifeless creature,
and, followed by more than four hundred people, bore it to the Church
of Saint-Martin-des-Champs, there placed it on the altar of Our Lady,
and kneeling down with the multitude of folk and the monks of the
Abbey, with all her heart prayed the Holy Virgin not to suffer this
innocent babe to be condemned eternally. The child stirred a little,
opened her eyes, loosened the linen, which gagged her, and cried
aloud. A priest baptized her on the altar of Our Lady, and gave her
the name of Marie. A nurse was found, and she was fed from the breast.
She lived three hours, then died and was carried to consecrated
ground.[372]
In those days resurrections of unbaptized children were frequent. That
saintly Abbess, Colette of Corbie, who, when Jeanne was at Lagny,
dwelt at Moulins with the reformed Sisters of Saint Clare, had brought
back to life two of these poor creatures: a girl, who received the
name of Colette at the font and afterwards became nun, then abbess at
Pont-à-Mousson; a boy, who was said to have been two days buried and
whom the servant of the poor de[Pg ii.136]clared to be one of the elect. He died
at six months, thus fulfilling the prophecy made by the saint.[373]
With this kind of miracle Jeanne was doubtless acquainted. About
twenty-five miles from Domremy, in the duchy of Lorraine, near
Lunéville, was the sanctuary of Notre-Dame-des-Aviots, of which she
had probably heard. Notre-Dame-des-Aviots, or Our Lady of those
brought back to life, was famed for restoring life to unbaptized
children. By means of her intervention they lived again long enough to
be made Christians.[374]
In the duchy of Luxembourg, near Montmédy, on the hill of Avioth,[375]
multitudes of pilgrims worshipped an image of Our Lady brought there
by angels. On this hill a church had been built for her, with slim
pillars and elaborate stonework in trefoils, roses and light foliage.
This statue worked all manner of miracles. At its feet were placed
children born dead; they were restored to life and straightway
baptized.[376]
The folk, gathered in the Church of Saint-Pierre de Lagny, around the
statue of Notre-Dame-des-Aidances, hoped for a like grace. The damsels
of the town prayed round the child's lifeless body. The Maid was asked
to come and join them in praying to Our Lord and Our Lady. She went to
the church, and[Pg ii.137] knelt down with the maidens and prayed. The child was
black, "as black as my coat," said Jeanne. When the Maid and the
damsels had prayed, it yawned three times and its colour came back. It
was baptized and straightway it died; it was buried in consecrated
ground. Throughout the town this resurrection was said to be the work
of the Maid. According to the tales in circulation, during the three
days since its birth the child had given no sign of life;[377] but the
gossips of Lagny had doubtless extended the period of its comatose
condition, like those good wives who of a single egg laid by the
husband of one of them, made a hundred before the day was out.
RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS                          CONTINUE TO VOLUME 2 CHAPTER 7
Please Consider Shopping With One of Our Supporters!
|
|
| |