[387] Procès, pp. 496-8, 502.—L’Averdy, pp. 33, 50.—Le Brun de Charmettes, IV. 62-3, 94-5.
[388] Procès, pp. 503-5.—L’Averdy, pp. 56-97.
[389] Le Brun de Charmettes, IV. 102-4, 106.—Procès, p. 506.
In considering the verdict of the University and the Inquisition it must be borne in mind that visions of the Saviour, the Virgin, and the Saints were almost every-day occurrences, and were recognized and respected by the Church. The spiritual excitability of the Middle Ages brought the supernatural world into close relations with the material. For a choice collection of such stories see the Dialogues of Cæsarius of Heisterbach. As a technical point of ecclesiastical law, moreover, Joan’s visions had already been examined and approved by the prelates and doctors at Chinon and Poitiers, including Pierre Cauchon’s metropolitan, Renaud, Archbishop of Reims.
[390] Procès, pp. 508-9.—Journal d’un Bourgeois de Paris, an 1431.—Le Brun de Charmettes, IV. 110-41.
There are two forms of abjuration recorded as subscribed by Joan; one brief and simple, the other elaborate (Procès, p. 508; Le Brun de Charmettes, IV. 135-7). Cauchon has been accused of duplicity in reading to her the shorter one and substituting the other for her signature. She subsequently complained that she had never promised to abandon her male attire—a promise which was contained in the longer but not in the shorter one. Much has been made of this, but without reason. The short abjuration is an unconditional admission of her errors, a revocation and submission to the Church, and was as binding and effective as the other.
[391] Le Brun de Charmettes, IV. 141.
[392] Procès, pp. 508-9.—Le Brun de Charmettes, IV. 147.
[393] Procès, p. 508.—Le Brun de Charmettes, IV. 166-70.—L’Averdy, p. 506.
[394] Procès, p. 509.—Le Brun de Charmettes, IV. 175-8.