Re: Joan of Arc: dozens of eyewitnesses said she was executed by a pro-English tribunal because she had opposed the English government, not for the reason this article claims ("daring to step forward and challenge medieval societal norms") since she didn't do that: she denied fighting or calling herself a commander, confirmed by numerous eyewitness accounts, and she had already been previously approved by high-ranking clergy at Poitiers in April 1429 (after Charles VII had her examined for orthodoxy) which included the Inquisitor for Southern France. She was a religious visionary in an era when many women and girls had been accepted in that role, so her role did not violate societal norms. The English also executed a boy named Guillaume le Berger for opposing them, so it had nothing to do with gender. Additionally, her signature is "Jehanne" rather than "Jehann" as this article says: if you look closely you can see an 'e' at the end, which is clearler in her other two signatures on other letters. If anyone wants to see the full translation of the letter in the exhibit, here's an online translation : https://archive.joan-of-arc.org/joanofarc_letter_Nov1429.html
Thank you for the additional information and links. Nathen isn't an expert on Joan of Arc, which isn't her name either, but I appreciate his enthusiasm for this exhibition. Joan's life and actions has been interpreted by many different historians, sadly today by many wild causes as well. I leave all of that to those who are experts on her life. It can be misunderstood, I think, how she was viewed by her captors, given that she was forced to return to wearing female dress, tricked into wearing her old male travel clothing and then her death sentence reinstated partly as a result of that. Of course it wasn't against any law to wear male clothing, it was worn for safety when travelling and for hunting. It was her adoption of a male role which was most likely what they found offensive or which frightened them, her ability to command men. Joan was seen as someone to fear. That was part of it. It wasn't just the English though, surely? Wasn't it an English Burgundy alliance?
Yes, the Burgundian faction were the ones who captured her and then transferred her to the English. But the thing they feared about her was the fact that the pattern in the war had shifted so dramatically as soon as she showed up at Orleans for reasons they couldn't explain, and so the English troops came to believe she was using black magic against them and they began deserting the army in large numbers (as internal English government records state). She didn't have direct command nor a male role: the eyewitness accounts make it clear that there was always a nobleman in command although the nobles increasingly accepted her advice much as Pope Urban VI accepted advice from St. Catherine of Siena since the role of religious visionary or mystic was an accepted role for women and girls if they were approved by theologians (as Joan had been at Poitiers in April 1429).
Given the turn in fortune at Orleans I think I might have suspected magic if I were English as well. I don't agree that none of her role was male in nature and although she did have nobles in command, her ,commands were also followed. This is a woman giving commands for ammunition. I am sure many saw her as a visionary. The English didn't. Even though she wasn't always successful and did fail for many reasons, the English feared her and armies under her encouragement. You are correct though, there's nothing that would have been in her actions which was inappropriate or which points to her being condemned because of her gender. I haven't as yet seen the exhibition but ideas around Joan and her gender being held against her is modern misconception.
Amazing. Thank you, Nathen. Now I definitely need to go. Is anyone interested in babysitting my hubby for 5 days in February or March next year? Easy to care for, just make sure he takes his meds and you feed him 3 times a day. Oh must drink plenty of water.
I am going to really enjoy this exhibition. Sounds fabulous.
This is really interesting! I loved looking at documents like this when doing my dissertation on the impact Elizabeth of York had on the Tudor dynasty and beyond! I hope I get to go and see this!
Re: Joan of Arc: dozens of eyewitnesses said she was executed by a pro-English tribunal because she had opposed the English government, not for the reason this article claims ("daring to step forward and challenge medieval societal norms") since she didn't do that: she denied fighting or calling herself a commander, confirmed by numerous eyewitness accounts, and she had already been previously approved by high-ranking clergy at Poitiers in April 1429 (after Charles VII had her examined for orthodoxy) which included the Inquisitor for Southern France. She was a religious visionary in an era when many women and girls had been accepted in that role, so her role did not violate societal norms. The English also executed a boy named Guillaume le Berger for opposing them, so it had nothing to do with gender. Additionally, her signature is "Jehanne" rather than "Jehann" as this article says: if you look closely you can see an 'e' at the end, which is clearler in her other two signatures on other letters. If anyone wants to see the full translation of the letter in the exhibit, here's an online translation : https://archive.joan-of-arc.org/joanofarc_letter_Nov1429.html
That site also has translations of all of her other surviving letters: https://archive.joan-of-arc.org/joanofarc_letters.html
Thank you for the additional information and links. Nathen isn't an expert on Joan of Arc, which isn't her name either, but I appreciate his enthusiasm for this exhibition. Joan's life and actions has been interpreted by many different historians, sadly today by many wild causes as well. I leave all of that to those who are experts on her life. It can be misunderstood, I think, how she was viewed by her captors, given that she was forced to return to wearing female dress, tricked into wearing her old male travel clothing and then her death sentence reinstated partly as a result of that. Of course it wasn't against any law to wear male clothing, it was worn for safety when travelling and for hunting. It was her adoption of a male role which was most likely what they found offensive or which frightened them, her ability to command men. Joan was seen as someone to fear. That was part of it. It wasn't just the English though, surely? Wasn't it an English Burgundy alliance?
Yes, the Burgundian faction were the ones who captured her and then transferred her to the English. But the thing they feared about her was the fact that the pattern in the war had shifted so dramatically as soon as she showed up at Orleans for reasons they couldn't explain, and so the English troops came to believe she was using black magic against them and they began deserting the army in large numbers (as internal English government records state). She didn't have direct command nor a male role: the eyewitness accounts make it clear that there was always a nobleman in command although the nobles increasingly accepted her advice much as Pope Urban VI accepted advice from St. Catherine of Siena since the role of religious visionary or mystic was an accepted role for women and girls if they were approved by theologians (as Joan had been at Poitiers in April 1429).
Given the turn in fortune at Orleans I think I might have suspected magic if I were English as well. I don't agree that none of her role was male in nature and although she did have nobles in command, her ,commands were also followed. This is a woman giving commands for ammunition. I am sure many saw her as a visionary. The English didn't. Even though she wasn't always successful and did fail for many reasons, the English feared her and armies under her encouragement. You are correct though, there's nothing that would have been in her actions which was inappropriate or which points to her being condemned because of her gender. I haven't as yet seen the exhibition but ideas around Joan and her gender being held against her is modern misconception.
Amazing. Thank you, Nathen. Now I definitely need to go. Is anyone interested in babysitting my hubby for 5 days in February or March next year? Easy to care for, just make sure he takes his meds and you feed him 3 times a day. Oh must drink plenty of water.
I am going to really enjoy this exhibition. Sounds fabulous.
This is really interesting! I loved looking at documents like this when doing my dissertation on the impact Elizabeth of York had on the Tudor dynasty and beyond! I hope I get to go and see this!
Fantastic post! It looks amazing. Thank you for sharing.
Looks amazing! I really hope I’m able to go to this exhibition…