Notes

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.    This letter is found in Procès de condamnation et de réhabilitation de Jeanne d’Arc dite La Pucelle ed. Jules Quicherat, 5 vols (Paris, 1841–9) [hereafter Quicherat], I:489–93. The quoted portion comes from I:489–90. Unless otherwise indicated, all translations are author’s. N.B. in the first volume of Jules Quicherat’s work can be found an edition of the trial transcripts; the second and third volumes contain an edition of the nullification trial (or retrial) transcripts, and in the last two volumes are a collection of all contemporary sources for Joan of Arc known to this great editor. While there are in many instances better editions of the sources in question, I have used Quicherat’s edition of the trial and contemporary sources and Pierre Duparc (ed.), Procès en nullité de la condamnation de Jeanne d’Arc, 5 vols, Société de l’histoire de France (Paris, 1977–89) [hereafter Duparc] for the nullification trial testimony.

2.    A discussion of the theological questioning in Joan’s Rouen trial can be found in Régine Pernoud and Marie-Véronique Clin, Joan of Arc: Her Story, trans. and rev. J.D. Adams (New York, 1998), pp. 103–47. These trial transcripts are found in Quicherat, I. On Joan’s theological confidence and training see Régine Pernoud, La spiritualité de Jeanne d’Arc (Paris, 1992).

3.    Joan testified to this in her trial. See Quicherat, I:106–7. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 79–80; W.S. Scott, Jeanne d’Arc (New York, 1974), p. 76; and Marina Warner, Joan of Arc: The Image of Female Heroism (Harmondsworth, 1981), pp. 92–4.

4.    As she testified in her trial, Quicherat, I:46–7.

5.    This is recorded in Quicherat, V:137–9, as decreed by Charles VII at the end of July 1429. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 73, 230–1 and Warner, pp. 172–3.

6.    So decreed by Charles VII at the end of December 1429 as recorded in Quicherat, V:150–3.

7.    Archbishop Regnault of Chartres wrote this in a letter to the people of Reims after Joan was captured at Compiègne. An edition of this is in Quicherat, V:168–9. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 91.

8.    Joan is said to have written two letters to this effect to Philip the Good; one is still extant. A facsimile of this letter can be seen in C. de Maleissye, Les lettres de Jehanne d’Arc et la prétendue abjuration de Saint Ouen (Paris, 1911), p. 72; an edition of the letter is in Quicherat, V:126–7; and an edition and translation of it is in Pernoud and Clin, pp. 67–8, 253–4. Pernoud and Clin (p. 250) also record the reference to an earlier letter that she wrote to the duke of Burgundy.

9.    As seen in her letter to the citizens of Tournai. See Quicherat, V:125–6, translated in Pernoud and Clin, pp. 251–2.

10.  Jean, the duke of Alençon, testified at her nullification trial that at their first encounter Joan said to him, ‘the more the blood of France is gathered together, the better it shall be’: found in Duparc, I:381. Guillaume Gruel, Richemont’s chronicler, claimed that when she first encountered the Constable, she fell on her knees to embrace him and welcome him back to the army. See Guillaume Gruel, Chronique d’Arthur de Richemont, in Quicherat, IV:317. This is disputed by the Journal du siège d’Orléans (in Quicherat, IV:175) and the Chronique de la pucelle (in Quicherat, IV:240), both of which claim that it was Richemont who prostrated himself in front of Joan, asking her to help him to regain his military influence and position. This will be discussed further below.

11.  This happened at least twice, as found both in Dunois’s testimony (Duparc, I:318–19) and in Jean d’Aulon’s, her squire (Duparc, I:477).

12.  In a letter Guy de Laval wrote to his grandmother, Anne de Laval, the widow of Guesclin, he claims that Joan was sending a small golden ring to her as a token of her affection for the earlier war hero’s efforts against the English: found in Quicherat, V:107–8. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 58, 179.

13.  Although Joan is never recorded as having spoken against Charles, both Perceval de Cagny (Chronique des ducs d’Alençon in Quicherat, IV:29–31) and Jacques Bouvier or Gilles le Bouvier, the Herald of Berry (Chroniques du roi Charles VII in Quicherat, IV:48–9) record her frustration with him and his counselors, in particular Georges de la Trémoille, at their military inaction after the crowning of the king. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 78–81.

14.  Both can be found in part in Quicherat, IV. Complete editions are: Journal du siège d’Orléans et du voyage de Reims, 1428–29, ed. P. Charpentier and C. Cuissard (Orléans, 1896) and Chronique de la Pucelle ou chronique de Cousinot, ed. A. Vallet de Viriville (Paris, 1859).

15.  The excellent bibliography, complete to 1988, Nadia Margolis, Joan of Arc in History, Literature, and Film (New York, 1990) contains an annotated list of all contemporary and near contemporary chronicles that mention Joan of Arc. The references to her in Morosini’s Diario can be found in Antonio Morosini, Chronique: Extraits relatifs à l’histoire de France, trans. and ed. L. Dorez, 4 vols (Paris, 1898–1902).

16.  Editions and translations of all of these letters in found in Pernoud and Clin, pp. 247–64. Other editions are listed in Margolis, pp. 192–3. The letter to the Hussites can be found in Pernoud and Clin, pp. 258–9.

17.  A list of trial transcript manuscripts, editions, and translations is found in Margolis, pp. 12–28. The most complete edition of the trial transcripts is Quicherat, I, which has been updated by Pierre Tisset and Yvonne Lanhers (eds), Procès de condamnation de Jeanne d’Arc, 3 vols (Paris, 1960–71).

18.  A list of nullification trial transcript manuscripts, editions, and translations is also found in Margolis, pp. 12–28. The most complete edition of the nullification transcripts is Duparc, which updates Quicherat, II and III. (N.B. Although awkward, for greater accuracy when quoting from the nullification trial transcripts, I have retained the original third-person pronouns for the witnesses’ testimony of their activities in relation to Joan.)

19.  Complete reference is found in note 1 above.

20.  Frédéric Canonge, Jeanne d’Arc guerrièr (Paris, 1907); Lt Col Collet, Vie militaire de Jeanne d’Arc (Nancy, 1919); Eug. Bourguignon, Sainte Jeanne d’Arc (la guerrièr) (Bruges, 1928); Frantz Funck-Brentano, Jeanne d’Arc: Chef de guerre (Paris, 1943); Lt Col de Lancesseur, Jeanne d’Arc chef de guerre: Le génie militaire et politique de Jeanne d’Arc. Campagne de France, 1429–30 (Paris, 1961); and Col Ferdinand de Liocourt, La mission de Jeanne d’Arc, 2 vols (Paris, 1974–6). More specific studies of Joan’s military activities, especially at the siege of Orléans, will be cited in their appropriate chapters below.

Chapter 2: Why Joan of Arc was Needed

1.    See note 2, Chapter 6..

2.    On the Capetian Dynasty see Robert Fawtier, The Capetian Kings of France: Monarchy and Nation, 987–1328, trans. L. Butler and R.J. Adam (London, 1960) and Elizabeth M. Hallam, Capetian France, 987–1328 (London, 1980). For a comparison of the French and English kings during part of this period see Charles Petit-Dutaillis, The Feudal Monarchy in France and England from the Tenth to the Thirteenth Century (London, 1966).

3.    Malcolm Barber, The Trial of the Templars (Cambridge, 1978); Malcolm Barber, The New Knighthood: A History of the Order of the Temple (Cambridge, 1994), 280–313; and Peter Partner, The Knights Templar and Their Myth, second ed. (Rochester, VT, 1990), pp. 42–89.

4.    On Louis IX’s defeats see William Chester Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade: A Study in Rulership (Princeton, 1979). On the battles of Courtrai and Arques see Kelly DeVries, Infantry Warfare in the Early Fourteenth Century: Discipline, Tactics, and Technology (Woodbridge, 1996), pp. 9–31.

5.    On the succession crisis of 1328 see Perroy, pp. 69–76; Christopher Allmand, The Hundred Years War: England and France at War c. 1300– c. 1450 (Cambridge, 1988), pp. 10–11; and John Le Patourel, ‘The Origins of the War’, in Kenneth Fowler (ed.), The Hundred Years War (London, 1971), pp. 28–50.

6.    Henry Stephen Lucas, The Low Countries and the Hundred Years’ War, 1326–1347 (Ann Arbor, 1929), pp. 240–367 and Henri Pirenne, Histoire de Belgique, vol. II: Du commencement du XIVe siècle à la mort de Charles de Téméraire (Brussels, 1903), pp. 93–115. The best biographies of Jacob van Artevelde are Hans van Werveke, Jacques van Artevelde (Brussels, 1948) and David Nicholas, The Van Arteveldes of Ghent: The Varieties of Vendetta and the Hero in History (Ithaca, 1988), pp. 1–71.

7.    DeVries, Infantry Warfare, pp. 100–11; Pirenne, pp. 69–92; and William H. TeBrake, A Plague of Insurrection: Popular Politics and Peasant Revolt in Flanders, 1323–28 (Philadelphia, 1993).

8.    Lucas, pp. 194–223; Pirenne, pp. 112–14; and H.S. Offler, ‘England and Germany at the Beginning of the Hundred Years’ War’, English Historical Review 54 (1939), 608–31.

9.    Lucas, pp. 395–404; Alfred H. Burne, The Crécy War: A Military History of the Hundred Years War from 1337 to the Peace of Bretigny, 1360 (London, 1955), pp. 51–6; and Kelly DeVries, ‘God, Leadership, Flemings, and Archery: Contemporary Perceptions of Victory and Defeat at the Battle of Sluys, 1340’, American Neptune 55 (1995), 223–42. Jonathan Sumption, The Hundred Years War: Trial by Battle (Philadelphia, 1991) may be used here and elsewhere, although with caution as he sometimes supplies an incomplete or inaccurate record of these events.

10.  Thomas of Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, ed. H.T. Riley (London, 1863), I:227.

11.  Lucas, pp. 404–38; Burne, Crécy War, pp. 56–63; Kelly DeVries, ‘Contemporary Views of Edward III’s Failure at the Siege of Tournai, 1340’, Nottingham Medieval Studies 39 (1995), 70–105; and Clifford J. Rogers, ‘An Unknown News Bulletin from the Siege of Tournai in 1340’, War in History 5 (1998), 358–66.

12.  Lucas, pp. 438–528 and Pirenne, pp. 116–23. Artevelde was killed in 1345. Louis of Nevers returned to govern the county, but he would be killed at the battle of Crécy the following year and be replaced by his son, Louis of Male.

13.  Perroy, pp. 114–16; Burne, Crécy War, pp. 66–78; DeVries, Infantry Warfare, pp. 137–44; and Jacques Choffel, La guerre de succession de Bretagne (Paris, 1975).

14.  Burne, Crécy War, pp. 136–47; DeVries, Infantry Warfare, pp. 155–7; Henri Prentout, La prise de Caen par Édouard III, 1346 (Caen, 1904); and Clifford J. Rogers, ‘Edward III and the Dialectics of Strategy, 1327–1360’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society Sixth ser. 4 (1994), 83–102. On Edward’s numbers see Andrew Ayton, ‘The English Army and the Normandy Campaign of 1346’, in England and Normandy in the Middle Ages, ed. D. Bates and A. Curry (London, 1994), pp. 253–67.

15.  DeVries, Infantry Warfare, pp. 157–75; Burne, Crécy War, pp. 169–203; and Jules Viard, ‘La campagne de juillet-aôut 1346 et la bataille de Crécy’, Moyen Age second ser. 27 (1926), 1–84.

16.  Burne, Crécy War, 204–3; Kelly DeVries, ‘Hunger, Flemish Participation and the Flight of Philip VI: Contemporary Accounts of the Siege of Calais, 1346–47’, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History n.s 12 (1991), 129–81; and Jules Viard, ‘Le siège de Calais, 4 septembre 1346–4 aout 1347’, Moyen Age second ser. 30 (1929), 124–89.

17.  For a discussion of the chevauchée as a tactic during the Hundred Years War see Allmand, The Hundred Years War, pp. 54–6.

18.  Burne, Crécy War, pp. 275–321; Rogers, ‘Edward III and the Dialectics of Strategy’; Richard Barber, Edward, Prince of Wales and Aquitaine: A Biography of the Black Prince (1978; rpt. Woodbridge, 1996), pp. 140–6; and J.-M. Tourneur-Aumont, La bataille de Poitiers, 1356, et la construction de la France (Paris, 1940).

19.  This treaty can be found in E. Cosneau (ed.), Les grands traités de la guerre de cent ans (Paris, 1889). Good secondary discussions include: Perroy, pp. 138–42; Allmand, pp. 18–20; Burne, Crécy War, pp. 346–51; John Le Patourel, ‘The Treaty of Brétigny’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society fifth ser. 10 (1960), 19–39; and J.J.N. Palmer, ‘The War Aims of the Protagonists and the Negotiations for Peace’, in Kenneth Fowler (ed.), The Hundred Years War (London, 1971), pp. 51–74.

20.  Alfred H. Burne, The Agincourt War: A Military History of the Latter Part of the Hundred Years War from 1369 to 1453 (London, 1956), pp. 17–32; Simeon Luce, Histoire de Bertrand du Guesclin et son époque (Paris, 1876); Micheline Dupuy, Bertrand du Guesclin, captaine d’aventure, connétable de France (Paris, 1977); and Kenneth Fowler, ‘Bertrand du Guesclin –Careerist in Arms?’ History Today 39 (June 1989), 37–43.

21.  On Charles V’s military advances see Perroy, pp. 144–76 and Desmond Seward, The Hundred Years War: The English in France, 1337–1453 (New York, 1978), pp. 103–26.

22.  Barber, pp. 233–7; Perroy, pp. 167–8, 178–80; and Allmand, Hundred Years War, p. 23.

23.  Perroy, pp. 187–95; J.J.N. Palmer, England, France and Christendom, 1377–99 (Chapel Hill, 1972); Anthony Tuck, ‘Richard II and the Hundred Years War’, in Politics and Crisis in Fourteenth-Century England, ed. J. Taylor and W. Childs (London, 1990), pp. 117–31; and Maurice Keen, ‘Richard II’s Ordinances of War in 1385’, in Rulers and Ruled in Late Medieval England: Essays Presented to Gerald Harriss, ed. R.E. Archer and S. Walker (London, 1995), pp. 33–48.

24.  Perroy (pp. 178–86) describes this period as ‘The Exhaustion of England’.

25.  Pirenne, pp. 157–207. On the Flemish rebellion of 1379–85 see Nicholas, pp. 99–159 and Maurice Vandermaesen and Marc Ryckaert, ‘De Gentse opstand (1379–1385)’, in ed. M. Vandermaesen, M. Ryckaerts, and M. Coornaert, De Witte Kaproenen: De Gentse opstand (1379–1385) en de geschiedenis van de Brugse Leie (Ghent, 1979), pp. 12–35. On the Burgundian inheritance of the county of Flanders see Richard Vaughan, Philip the Bold: The Formation of the Burgundian State (London, 1962).

26.  Allmand, Hundred Years War, pp. 73–6.

27.  Palmer, England, France and Christendom, pp. 142–51, 166–79; J.J.N. Palmer, ‘The Anglo-French Peace Negotiations, 1390–1396’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 16 (1966), 81–94; and Christopher Phillpotts, ‘The Fate of the Truce of Paris, 1396–1415’, Journal of Medieval History 24 (1998), 61–80.

28.  Richard C. Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue: Crisis at the Court of Charles VI, 1392–1420 (New York, 1986).

29.  Palmer, England, France and Christendom, pp. 180–210; Aziz Suryal Atiya, The Crusade of Nicopolis (London, 1934); and Kelly DeVries, ‘The Lack of a Western European Military Response to the Ottoman Invasions of Eastern Europe from Nicopolis (1396) to Mohács (1526)’, Journal of Military History 63 (1999), 539–59.

30.  Palmer, England, France and Christendom, pp. 211–26 and Caroline Barron, ‘The Deposition of Richard II’, in ed. J. Taylor and W. Childs, Politics and Crisis in Fourteenth-Century England (London, 1990), pp. 132–49.

31.  Christopher Allmand, Henry V (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1992), pp. 19–33 and R.R. Davies, The Revolt of Owain Glyn Dw^r (Oxford, 1995).

32.  Allmand, Henry V, pp. 18–19 and A.L. Brown, ‘The English Campaign in Scotland, 1400’, in ed. H. Hearder and H.R. Loyn, British Government and Administration: Studies Presented to S. Chrimes (Cardiff, 1974), pp. 40–54.

33.  Allmand, Henry V, pp. 25–7; E.J. Priestly, The Battle of Shrewsbury, 1403 (Shrewsbury, 1979); and Philip A. Haigh, The Military Campaigns of the Wars of the Roses (Stroud, 1995), pp. 182–8.

34.  On the different popes during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries see Guillaume Mollat, The Popes at Avignon, 1305–1378, trans. J. Love (London, 1963) and Yves Renouard, The Avignon Papacy: The Popes in Exile, 1305–1403, trans. D. Bethell (New York, 1970). On the Burgundian policy towards the Low Countries see Walter Prevenier and Wim Blockmans, The Burgundian Netherlands (Cambridge, 1986) and Wim Blockmans and Walter Prevenier, In de ban van Bourgondië (The Hague, 1988).

35.  Perroy, pp. 219–26; Richard Vaughan, John the Fearless: The Growth of Burgundian Power (London, 1966), pp. 29–43; and Bertrand Schnerb, Les Armagnacs et les Bourguignons: La maudite guerre (Paris, 1988), pp. 15–77.

36.  Perroy, pp. 226–7; Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 43–8; Schnerb, pp. 67–76; and Bernard Guenée, Un meutre, une société: L’assassinat du Duc d’Orléans, 23 novembre 1407 (Paris, 1992).

37.  Perroy, p. 227; Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 46–8; and Schnerb, pp. 78–83.

38.  Perroy, pp. 228–9 and Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 68–74. Part of the Justification is translated in Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 70–2. The full document is quoted in Engerrand de Monstrelet, Chronique, ed. L. Douet-d’Arcq (Paris, 1857–62), I:177–242.

39.  Perroy, pp. 229–30 and Schnerb, pp. 93–7.

40.  Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 49–66 and Erich Wille, Die Schlacht von Othée, 23 septembre 1408 (Berlin, 1908).

41.  Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 175–6 and Pierre Bertin, ‘Le siège du chateau de Vellexon dans l’hiver 1409–1410’, Revue historique des armées 27 (1971), 7–18.

42.  Monstrelet (Douet-d’Arcq), II:172–5; Chronique des Pays-Bas, de France, d’Angleterre et de Tournai, in Corpus chronicorum Flandriae, 3, ed. J.J. de Smet (Brussels, 1856), p. 342; Le livre des trahisons de France envers la maison de Bourgogne, in Chroniques relatives à l’histoire de la Belgique sous la domination des ducs de Bourgogne (textes Français), ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove (Brussels, 1873), p. 96; and L. de Laborde, Les ducs de Bourgogne (Paris, 1849), I:24.

43.  Religieux de Saint-Denis, Chronique, ed. L. Bellaguet (Paris, 1839–52), IV:652.

44.  Religieux de Saint-Denis, V:370–5; Monstrelet (Douet-d’Arcq), III:22–31; and Jean le Fevre, Chronique, ed. F. Morand (Paris, 1876), I:184.

45.  Perroy, pp. 230–1; Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 97–100; and Schnerb, pp. 123–43.

46.  Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 91–2.

47.  For references to these letters see note 8, Chapter 1.

48.  The two versions of this poem can be found in W. Carew Hazlitt, Remains of Early Popular Poetry of England (London, 1866), II:88–108, under the title ‘The Battle of Egyngecourte’, and as an appendix to Monstrelet (Douet-d’Arcq), VI:549–62, under the title ‘The Siege of Harflet et batayl of Agencourt’. The quote which I have used is found in Monstrelet (Douet-d’Arcq) VI:551. On the siege of Harfleur and the invasion in general see Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 38–75; Allmand, Henry V, pp. 68–82; E.F. Jacob, Henry V and the Invasion of France (London, 1947), pp. 60–96; P. Jubault, D’Azincourt à Jeanne d’Arc, 1415–1430 (Amiens, 1969); and Matthew Bennett, Agincourt 1415: Triumph Against the Odds (London, 1991), pp. 38–44.

49.  Bennett; Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 76–96; Allmand, Henry V, pp. 83–102; Jacob, Henry V, pp. 96–108; and Jubault, pp. 27–39.

50.  For these numbers I rely on Bennett, pp. 66–73.

51.  Bennett, pp. 86–8 and Jacob, Henry V, pp. 106–7.

52.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 89–90; Allmand, Henry V, pp. 102–13; Jacob, Henry V, pp. 125–6; and Sarah Tolmie, ‘Quia Hic Homo Multa Signa Facit: Henry V’s Royal Entry into London, November 23, 1415’, in eds M. Gosman, A. Vanderjagt, and J. Veenstra, The Propagation of Power in the Medieval West: Selected Proceedings of the International Conference, Groningen, 20–23 November 1996 (Groningen, 1997), pp. 363–79. Henry’s muster roll of troops raised in 1416–17 is found as an appendix in Gesta Henrici quinti, Angliae regis, ed. B. Williams (London, 1850), pp. 265–73.

53.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 104–9; Allmand, Henry V, pp. 107–8; Jacob, Henry V, pp. 118–19; and E. Carleton Williams, My Lord of Bedford, 1389–1435: Being a Life of John of Lancaster, First Duke of Bedford, Brother of Henry V and Regent of France (London, 1963), pp. 35–40.

54.  No plan as such exists in the sources, but this is certainly what Henry had in mind, judging from his maneuvers over the next few years.

55.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 115–26; Jubault, pp. 45–52; Allmand, Henry V, pp. 116–20; Jacob, Henry V, pp. 125–9; and Richard Ager Newhall, The English Conquest of Normandy, 1416–24: A Study in Fifteenth Century Warfare (New Haven, 1924), pp. 37–91. For the siege of Caen see Léon Puiseaux, Siège et prise de Caen par les anglais en 1417: Épisode de la guerre de cent ans (Caen, 1868).

56.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 126–7; Newhall, pp. 71–2, 92–7; and Jacob, Henry V, pp. 129–30.

57.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 129–33; Jubault, pp. 57–64; Allmand, Henry V, pp. 121–8; Newhall, pp. 97–105, 110–23; Jacob, Henry V, pp. 130–41; and Léon Puiseaux, Siège et prise de Rouen par les anglais (1418–1419) (Caen 1867).

58.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 133–4; Newhall, pp. 123–32; and E.F. Jacob, ‘The Collapse of France, 1419–20’, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 26 (1941–2), 307–26.

59.  Jim Bradbury, The Medieval Siege (Woodbridge, 1992), pp. 163–71, 282–95; Philippe Contamine, ‘La guerre de siège au temps de Jeanne d’Arc’, Dossiers de archéologie 34 (May 1979), 11–20; and Kelly DeVries, ‘The Impact of Gunpowder Weaponry on Siege Warfare in the Hundred Years War’, in ed. I.A. Corfis and M. Wolfe, Medieval City Under Siege (Woodbridge, 1995), pp. 227–44.

60.  Perroy, pp. 242–3; Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 210–21; Jubault, pp. 39–46; Newhall, pp. 105–10; and Schnerb, pp. 177–80.

61.  Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 221–7; Jubault, pp. 53–7; Newhall, pp. 132–9; and Schnerb, pp. 180–93.

62.  Perroy, pp. 242–3; Vaughan, John the Fearless, 263–86; Schnerb, pp. 194–207; Jubault, pp. 53–7; and Paul Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau au traité de Troyes (Brussels, 1958), pp. 1–16.

63.  Bonenfant; Perroy, pp. 243–4; Allmand, Hundred Years War, pp. 29–32; Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 139–44; Allmand, Henry V, pp. 136–50; Jacob, Henry V, pp. 147–59; and Palmer, ‘War Aims of the Protagonist’, pp. 69–73.

64.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 144–80; Allmand, Henry V, pp. 151–82; Newhall, pp. 269–92; and Jacob, Henry V, pp. 160–83.

65.  On the battle of Baugé see Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 148–63; Newhall, pp. 275–6; Allmand, Henry V, pp. 158–67; Jacob, Henry V, pp. 169–70; and Jubault, pp. 123–8. On Scots in the French army see Jubault, pp. 113–86 and Bernard Chevalier, ‘Les écossais dans les armées de Charles VII jusqu’a la bataille de Verneuil’, in Jeanne d’Arc: Une époque, un rayonnement (Paris, 1982), pp. 85–94.

66.  Perroy, pp. 268–71; Allmand, Hundred Years War, p. 32; Allmand, Henry V, pp. 173–8; Jacob, Henry V, pp. 174–8; and Williams, pp. 74–5.

67.  Allmand, Hundred Years War, pp. 32–3 and M.G.A. Vale, Charles VII (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1974), pp. 32–3.

68.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 181–95; Jubault, pp. 165–7; and Jean-Michel Dousseau, La bataille de Cravant (1423) (Auxerre, 1987).

69.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 196–215; Jubault, pp. 172–84; and Williams, pp. 106–17.

70.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 216–24; Jubault, pp. 187–202, 210–12; Williams, pp. 127–36, 148–59; and Amicie de Villaret, Campagnes des Anglais dans l’Orléanais, la Beauce Chartrain et le Gatinais (1421–1428): L’armée sous Warwick et Suffolk au siège de Montargis. Campagnes de Jeanne d’Arc sur la Loire postérierures au siège d’Orléans (Orléans, 1893).

71.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 220–1; Jubault, pp. 202–4; Vale, pp. 35–41; and Jean-Paul Etcheverry, Arthur de Richemont le justicier, précurseur, compagnon et successeur de Jeanne d’Arc ou l’honneur d’être Français (Paris, 1983).

72.  Burne, pp. 225–49 and Jubault, pp. 216–19. This will be discussed further below.

73.  On the destruction of France during the Hundred Years War see Nicholas Wright, Knights and Peasants: The Hundred Years War in the French Countryside (Woodbridge, 1998) and Alain Girardot, ‘La guerre au XIVe siècle: La dévastation, ses modes et ses degrés’, Bulletin de la sociétés d’histoire et d’archéologie de la Meuse 30–1 (1994–5), 1–32.

74.  On why her men followed Joan, see Kelly DeVries, ‘A Woman as Leader of Men: A Reassessment of Joan of Arc’s Military Career’, in ed. C. Wood andB. Wheeler, Fresh Verdicts on Joan of Arc (New York, 1996), pp. 3–18.

Chapter 3: A Military Mission?

1.    On the history of Joan’s iconography, with a reference to this early artistic endeavor, see Pernoud and Clin, pp. 240–3.

2.    In the Guardian, 13 May 1998, an article, ‘“Only Portrait” of Joan of Arc Found’, announced the discovery in the Notre Dame de Beamont chapel at Joan’s birthplace, Domrémy, of a fresco possibly dating from her time or slightly after. It purports to be a ‘mainly ochre-coloured portrait [which] shows a pretty teenager with round cheeks, a mass of blonde hair piled under a peasant headdress and piercing blue eyes kneeling calmly between the arms of another local saint, Thiáut of Provins’. Nothing further is known about this fresco, nor, so far as I know, has it ever been shown or photographed. Considering the date and the lack of publicity surrounding this ‘only portrait’, one can only assume that it has now been discredited.

3.    Pernoud and Clin, p. 256.

4.    Aulon, in Duparc, I:486.

5.    Alençon, in Duparc, I:387. See also the retrial testimony of Bertrand de Poulengy in Duparc, I:306.

6.    Thibaut, in Duparc, I:370. See also Régine Pernoud, Joan of Arc by Herself and Her Witnesses, trans. E. Hyams (New York, 1964), pp. 64–5.

7.    Dunois, in Duparc, I:325.

8.    Joan, in Quicherat, I:46. (N.B. Because the record of Joan’s trial is in the third person, I have continued to use a third person grammatical format in my translations.) This was also testified to at the nullification trial by Jean Moreau (in Duparc, I:252), Béatrice (in Duparc, I:257), Dominique Jacob (in Duparc, I:256), and Hauviette (in Duparc, I:275), and repeated verbatim in the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:204–5. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 15–16. It seems curious that they never asked Joan when she was born, or how old she was. Perhaps everyone knew, or perhaps she did not know. Unfortunately, without a definite response to such a question, Joan’s age during the events of 1429–30 cannot be known for sure. Some believe, on no good evidence, that Joan was born in 1412, making her seventeen years old when she began her military career. Other guesses are 1414 or 1410, making her fifteen or nineteen. But, as none of these are based on the least amount of original source evidence, scholars, such as Régine Pernoud and Jules Quicherat, have simply not discussed her age. In agreeing with their wisdom, I, too, will not ponder on such an unanswerable question.

9.    There are a few French fanatics, though, who persist in this claim, lost perhaps in the false notion of a fifteenth-century world where no peasant girl could rise to the station that she did without having some noble blood flowing inside her. See Pernoud and Clin, p. 222, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 24–9. (While Régine Pernoud was alive – she died in 1998 – she tirelessly fought against this notion and the one that claimed that Joan had escaped the pyre and her persecutors. In almost every one of her books, she waged a crusade against the largely French scholars who wished to alter history. Pernoud was a French patriot, and she saw Joan as the quintessential example of loyalty to her country, but she would not go so far as to change history to make the story of Joan’s life ‘better’.)

10.  For an investigation of Joan’s house and life in Domrémy, the best work is Siméon Luce, Jeanne d’Arc à Domrémy: recherches critiques sur les origines de la mission de la Pucelle, 2 vols (Paris, 1886).

11.  Pernoud and Clin, p. 221, and Pierre Champion, Jeanne d’Arc (Paris, 1933), p. 4.

12.  On this see the nullification testimonies of Jean Moreau (in Duparc, I:253), Hauviette (in Duparc, I:275), and Bertrand de Poulengy (in Duparc, I:304–5).

13.  Laxart, in Duparc, I:295–6. See also the testimonies of Jean Moreau (in Duparc, I:253), Béatrice (in Duparc, I:258), Colin (in Duparc, I:288), Hauviette (in Duparc, I:275), Mengette (in Duparc, I:284–5), and Isabellette (in Duparc, I:282).

14.  Béatrice (in Duparc, I:258), Jean Moreau (in Duparc, I:253), and Colin (in Duparc, I:287). See also the testimonies of Etienne de Sionne, Dominqiue Jacob, Henri Arnoul, Perrin Drappier, Simonin Musnier, Hauviette, Mengette, Michel Lebuin, Isabellette, Durand Laxart, Jean Waterin, Jean Colin, Jean le Fumeux, and Nicolas Bailly (in Duparc, I:255–310).

15.  Waterin, in Duparc, I:277.

16.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:51–2. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 30.

17.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:52–3. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 30–1, and Champion, Jeanne d’Arc pp. 10–11. Domrémy was in the castellany of Vaucouleurs. Vaucouleurs was also, in Champion’s words, ‘the last shred of France on the eastern extreme of the realm’. On the persistence of Vaucouleurs to remain this ‘last shred of France’ in the wake of constant English and Burgundian military engagement see Henri Bataille, ‘Vaucouleurs ou l’énigma d’un siège’, Dossiers de archéologie 34 (May 1979), 56–63.

18.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:171. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 30–1. On the significance of Saint Michael in late medieval France see Colette Beaune, The Birth of an Ideology: Myths and Symbols of Nation in Late-Medieval France, trans. Susan Ross Huston, ed. Fredric L. Cheyette (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1991), pp. 152–71.

19.  Épinal, in Duparc, I:279. On the idea that Joan was to be married while still in Domrémy see Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 23–4.

20.  Lebuin, in Duparc, I:293.

21.  Laxart, in Duparc, I:296. Joan repeated the same prophecy to Catherine Royer (in Duparc, I:298). See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 19–20, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 31–3.

22.  On Isabeau’s reputation as a villain during Joan’s time see Rachel Gibbons, ‘Isabeau of Bavaria, Queen of France (1385–1422): The Creation of an Historical Villainess’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, sixth ser., 6 (1996), 51–73. Gibbons’ attempt to rehabilitate Isabeau’s reputation is, however, unconvincing.

23.  So Joan had told Seguin Seguin, as testified to in the nullification trial, in Duparc, I:472. A description of Vaucouleurs and its fortifications in Joan’s day is found in Bataille, ‘Vaucouleurs ou l’énigma d’un siège’ and Henri Bataille, Vaucouleurs: Les remparts qui ont sauvé Jeanne-d’Arc (Vosges, n.d.). On her visits with Robert de Baudricourt see Paul Gache, Sainte Jeanne d’Arc à Vaucouleurs (Vailly-sur-Sauldre, 1982).

24.  Laxart, in Duparc, I:296. The Latin ‘alapas’ means ‘to beat or slap’. Baudricourt’s ‘mockery and derision’ is emphasized in Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:205. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 33.

25.  Jean de Metz, in Duparc, I:289–90. There are several different spellings of Jean’s surname. Novelompont is found in Quicherat’s edition.

26.  Laxart, in Duparc, I:296. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 36.

27.  There is also a possibility that Joan’s mission had nothing to do with Philip’s decision to send troops into Domrémy. The duke had for the last few years been occupied with the acquisition of the counties of Hainault, Holland, and Zeeland, all controlled by his cousin, the countess Jacqueline of Bavaria, and her husband, Humphrey of Gloucester. With this acquisition completed a short time before the attack on Domrémy, it could be that Philip was simply returning his attention to matters closer to home and sought to punish a village that held out for the dauphin against the duke’s wishes. For a detailed discussion of this history, see Vaughan, Philip the Bold, pp. 29–50. Witnesses recalling this attack at the nullification trial include: Jean Moreau, Dominique Jacob, Hauviette, and Isabellette (all in Duparc, I:252–84). On the attack of Joan’s village see Funck-Brentano, pp. 32–3.

28.  There might have been no second meeting with Robert de Baudricourt. It is only in the nullification trial testimony of Marguerite la Touroulde (in Duparc, I:378) that such can be said, and then only because she claims it was the duke of Lorraine who sent to Robert de Baudricourt to ask for a visit from Joan because ‘he was ill’. Of course, this might present yet another reason, a less military one, for the second meeting between Robert and Joan.

29.  Laxart, in Duparc, I:296. Also mentioning the visit with the duke of Lorraine is Jean Moreau (in Duparc, I:255), Jean de Metz (in Duparc, I:290), and Bertrand de Poulengy (in Duparc, I:306).

30.  Touroulde, in Duparc, I:378. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 18–19, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 38.

31.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:53–4. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 18–19, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 38.

32.  On this visit see Bertrand de Poulengy, in Duparc, I:306; Pernoud and Clin, p. 19; and Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, p. 20.

33.  Royer, in Duparc, I:298. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 20, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 38.

34.  On the presentation of men’s clothing to Joan, see Durand Laxart (in Duparc, I:296), Jean de Metz (in Duparc, I:290), and Bertrand de Poulengy (in Duparc, I:306). Metz later recalled that he had asked her if she wished to travel in these clothes and that she agreed, apparently thinking that nothing was wrong with doing so.

35.  Laxart, in Duparc, I:296.

36.  Poulengy, in Duparc, I:306. See also René Olivier, ‘La lance, l’épée et la hache (les armes de la Pucelle)’, Les amis de Jeanne d’Arc 42.3 (1995), 18–19.

37.  The names of Joan’s companions on this journey are included in the nullification trial testimonies of Bertrand de Poulengy and Jean de Metz (in Duparc, I:306, 290). See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 19–21, and Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, p. 21.

38.  Jean de Metz (in Duparc, I:290–1) and Bertrand de Poulengy (in Duparc, I:306). A possible route is described in Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, pp. 20–4.

39.  Royer, in Duparc, I:299.

40.  Poulengy, in Duparc, I:306–7.

41.  Metz, in Duparc, I:291.

42.  Seguin Seguin and Husson Lemaitre, in Duparc, I:471, 467–8.

43.  Bertrand de Poulengy (in Duparc, I:306–7) and Jean de Metz (in Duparc, I:291).

44.  On the importance of this shrine see Beaune, pp. 127–32.

45.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:75–6. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 15–16; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 46; and Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, pp. 23–4.

46.  Barbin, in Duparc, I:375.

47.  Simon Charles, in Duparc, I:400. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 21–2, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 49.

48.  On Chinon Castle see Vicomte du Motey, Jeanne d’Arc à Chinon et Robert de Rouvres (Paris, 1927), pp. 15–18 and Armand Durlewanger, The Royal Chateau of Chinon, trans. Stan and Rita Morton (Colmar, 1982).

49.  Simon Charles, in Duparc, I:400. Simon Charles may not have been present, as he reported that he had been attending to the dauphin’s business in Italy when Joan arrived at Chinon. Whether he had returned or not before her meeting with the dauphin cannot be determined from his testimony.

50.  Gaucourt, in Duparc, I:326.

51.  Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:389–90. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 23–5; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 53–4, 66; Warner, pp. 75–6; Vale, pp. 51–3; Motey, pp. 30–1; Claude Desana, ‘La première entrevue de Jeanne d’Arc et de Charles VII à Chinon (Mars 1429)’, Analecta Bollandiana 84 (1966), 113–26. Jules Quicherat, New Aspects of the Case History of Jeanne d’Arc, trans. H.G. Francq (Brandon, 1971), pp. 28–30; Antoine Thomas, ‘Le “signe royal” et le secret de Jeanne d’Arc’, Revue historique 103 (1910), 278–82; and Dom Charles Poulet, ‘Jeanne d’Arc à Chinon. Les causes naturelles et surnaturelles de l’acceptation royale,’ Historisch tijdschrift 1 (1923), 13–21. Some have argued that this certainly could not have been the ‘secret’ message ‘known only to God’ which Charles received from Joan; that it must have been something more than a simple confirmation of his royalty. I am inclined to agree. Later traditions have Charles VII uttering a prayer before Joan’s arrival and having Joan repeat that prayer to him. See Quicherat, New Aspects, p. 30 and Vale, pp. 52–3.

52.  Alain Chartier, in Quicherat, V:133. See also Quicherat, New Aspects, p. 28.

53.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:381; Pernoud and Clin, pp. 26–7; and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 50–1. On her freedom within Chinon Castle see the retrial testimony of her page, Louis de Coutes, in Duparc, I:362.

54.  Simon Charles, in Duparc, I:399–400.

55.  Seguin, in Duparc, I:472–3. This interview took place in Poitiers. See also Alençon’s testimony, in Duparc, I:382.

56.  The names of these are included in Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, p. 31.

57.  Charles T. Wood, for one, believes that the loss of this interrogation transcript is suspicious. It is known to have existed during Joan’s lifetime, for she refers to it frequently at her trial in Rouen, calling it the ‘book (or register) of Poitiers’. Wood believes, on very little evidence it must be admitted, that its destruction was probably by Charles VII or someone of his circle, perhaps Regnault de Chartres, the archbishop of Reims, who never liked Joan or the way she conducted her warfare. See Charles T. Wood, ‘Joan of Arc’s Mission and the Lost Record of Her Interrogation at Poitiers’, in ed. B. Wheeler and C.T. Wood, Fresh Verdicts on Joan of Arc (New York, 1996), pp. 19–20. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 58, 67–8, and Quicherat, New Aspects, p. 2.

58.  All of this is according to Seguin Seguin (in Duparc, I:472), the only Poitiers interrogator who testified about this examination at the nullification trial. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 25–30; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 54–8, 66–7; Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, p. 32; and Motey, pp. 37–42.

59.  Seguin, in Duparc, I:472–3. See also Simon Charles, Raoul de Gaucourt, and Jean d’Aulon, in Duparc, I:399–400, 326–7, 475–6. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 56–7.

60.  Aulon, in Duparc, I:476. See also Jean Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:389; Pernoud and Clin, pp. 30–1; and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 58–9.

61.  See Aulon, in Duparc, I:476–7.

62.  Dunois, in Duparc, I:317; Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, pp. 35–6; and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 60–1. See also the accounts of Hémon Raguier, in Quicherat, V:258.

63.  Aulon, in Duparc, I:477. See also the accounts of Charles’s treasurer, Hémon Raguier, 10 March 1429, in Quicherat, V:258; the retrial testimonies of Louis de Coutes and the Duke d’Alençon, in Duparc, I:363 and I:382; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 59; Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, p. 35; and Charles ffoulkes, ‘The Armour of Jeanne d’Arc’, The Burlington Magazine 16 (Dec 1909), 141–6.

64.  On the sword of Saint-Catherine-de-Fierbois see Pernoud and Clin, p. 16; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 61–2; Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, p. 23; Quicherat, New Aspects, pp. 30–1; Olivier, p. 19; and Bonnie Wheeler, ‘Joan of Arc’s Sword in the Stone’, in ed. C. Wood and B. Wheeler, Fresh Verdicts on Joan of Arc (New York, 1996), pp. xi–xvi. On the importance of Saint-Catherine-de-Fierbois as a shrine in late medieval France see Beaune, pp. 127–32.

65.  On these see Olivier, pp. 17–20.

66.  She testified of this at her trial, in Quicherat, I:236. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 62.

67.  Quicherat, New Aspects, p. 31; Olivier, p. 18; and Wheeler, p. xv.

68.  As found in the anonymous Le mystère du siège d’Orléans, eds F. Guessard and E. de Certain (Paris, 1862), ll. 412–15. See also Beaune, p. 131.

69.  Pernoud and Clin, p. 16.

70.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:235–6.

71.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat IV:129.

72.  Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, p. 34.

73.  See Dunois’s nullification trial testimony, in Duparc, I:317.

74.  Poulengy, in Duparc, I:306.

75.  This is Champion’s estimate (Jeanne d’Arc, pp. 25–6).

76.  Seguin, in Duparc, I:473.

Chapter 4: Relieving the Siege of Orléans

1    See Luce, Histoire de Bertrand du Guesclin; Fowler, ‘Bertand du Guesclin;’ and Dupuy.

2.    See Kelly DeVries, ‘Robert Knolles’, in ed. W.W. Kibler and G.A. Zinn, Medieval France: An Encyclopedia (New York, 1995), p. 341.

3.    Alençon, in Duparc, I:381.

4.    Touroulde, in Duparc, I:378.

5.    Alençon, in Duparc, I:387–8.

6.    Pius II, Commentarii rerum memorabilium quae temporibus suis contingerunt in Quicherat, IV:510.

7.    Some of these studies include: Canonge, pp. 9–31; Collet, pp. 60–101; Bourguignon, pp. 7–103; Funck-Brentano, pp. 61–79; Lancesseur, pp. 45–71; Jules Quicherat, Histoire du siège d’Orléans et des honneurs rendus à la Pucelle (Paris, 1854); Régine Pernoud, La libération d’Orléans, 8 mai 1429 (Paris, 1969); Armand Bouvier, Orléans, cœur de la France et Jeanne la libératrice (Orléans, 1929); Edouard Bruley, Jeanne d’Arc à Orléans (Orléans, 1929); and Henri Baraude, ‘Le siège d’Orléans et Jeanne d’Arc, 1428–1429,’ Revue des questions historiques 80–1 (1906–7), 31–65, 74–112, 395–424. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 33–51; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 70–107; and Champion, Jeanne d’Arc, pp. 39–51. Original sources on this conflict are: Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:151–65; Chronique de la Pucelle in Quicherat, IV:221–32; Perceval de Cagny, Chroniques, in Quicherat, IV:5–11; Jean Chartier, Chronique de Charles VII, in Quicherat, IV:56–64; Jacques Bouvier or Gilles le [Herald of Berry], Chroniques du roi Charles VII, in Quicherat, IV:42–4; Guillaume Giraut Note sur la levée du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:282–3; Chronique de Lorraine, in Quicherat, IV:332–4; the Continuator of Guillaume de Nangis, Chronique Parisienne, in Quicherat, IV:313; Engerrand de Monstrelet, Chroniques, in Quicherat, IV:363–8; Jean de Wavrin, Recueil de chroniques et anchiennes istoires de la Grant Bretaigne a present nommee Engleterre, in Quicherat, IV:408–11; Jean Lefèvre de Saint-Rémy, Chronique, in Quicherat, IV:430–1; and Eberhard von Windecken, Denkwürdigkeiten zur Geschichte des Zeitalters Kaiser Sigismund, in Quicherat, IV:486–96.

8.    Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:70.

9.    M. Boucher de Molandon and Adalbert de Beaucorps, L’armée anglaise vaincue par Jeanne d’Arc sous les murs d’Orléans (Orléans, 1892), especially pp. 134–9, and Louis Jarry, Le compte de L’armée anglaise au siège d’Orléans, 1428–1429 (Orléans, 1892), especially pp. 58–65. See also Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 228–9.

10  Burne, Agincourt War, p. 229.

11.  The Journal du siège de Orléans (in Quicherat, IV:105–6) comments on how few English fortifications and men there were. Jacques Bouvier (in Quicherat, IV:42) notes that Joan knew this too, as she reconnoitered these positions while staying in Orléans. On the distances of the boulevards from the walls of Orléans see Philippe Contamine, ‘Les armées française et anglaise à l’époque de Jeanne d’Arc’, Revue des sociétés savantes de haute-normandie. Lettres et sciences humaines 57 (1970), 5–6.

12.  Descriptions of the bridge and the Tourelles can be found in Burne, Agincourt War, p. 229; M. Vergnaud-Romangnesi, Notice historique sur le fort des Tourelles de l’ancien pont de la ville d’Orléans, où Jeanne d’Arc combattit et fut blessée, sur la découverte de ses restes en juillet 1831 (Paris, 1832); M. Collin, La casemate du bont du pont des Tourelles à Orléans du coté de la Sologne (Paris, 1867); and M. Collin, Les derniers jours du pont des Tourelles à Orléans (Orléans, 1875).

13.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:97. On the use of gunpowder weapons during this period, and in particular during the engagements participated in by Joan of Arc, see Kelly DeVries, ‘The Use of Gunpowder Weaponry By and Against Joan of Arc During the Hundred Years War’, War and Society 14 (1996), 1–16.

14.  The best source for this is the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:98–9. See also Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 229–30.

15.  See, for example, Burne, Agincourt War, p. 230.

16.  Monstrelet, ed. L. Douet-d’Arcq, IV:299–300; Journal d’un siège de Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:100–2; The Brut, or the Chronicles of England, ed. F.W.D. Brie (London, 1906), I:434–5; and a poem, ‘De par Orliens’, found in L. Jarry, ed., ‘Deux chansons normandes sur le siège d’Orléans et la mort de Salisbury’, Bulletin de la société archéologique et historique de l’Orléannais 10 (1893), 366–7 and Siméon Luce, ed., ‘Une pièce de vers sur le siège d’Orléans’, in La France pendant la guerre de cent ans: Épisodes historiques et vie privée aux XIVe et XVe siècles, second edn (Paris, 1893), pp. 207–14. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 74–5; Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 7–10; Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 230–1; Liocourt, II:81; and Kelly DeVries, ‘Military Surgical Practice and the Advent of Gunpowder Weaponry’, Canadian Bulletin of Medical History 7 (1990), 136.

17.  Journal d’un siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:103–4 and Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:8. See also Liocourt, II:81.

18.  The extraordinary exchange of gunfire by both sides at the siege of Orléans is one of its most interesting aspects and well deserving of more study. For a brief discussion see DeVries, ‘The Use of Gunpowder Weaponry’; Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 124–5; and Liocourt, I:76. 79–80.

19.  The only exception to this is an episode recorded in the Journal d’un siège d’Orléans (in Quicherat, IV:104) which occurred on 7 December 1428, when troops from the Tourelles attempted to capture the Orléanais stronghold at the end of their side of the broken bridge known as Belle-Croix.

20.  Jacques Debal, ‘Les fortifications et le pont d’Orléans au temps de Jeanne d’Arc’, Dossiers d’archéologie 34 (May 1979), 88–90 and Jacques Debal, ‘La topographie de l’enceinte fortifiée d’Orléans au temps de Jeanne d’Arc’, in Jeanne d’Arc: une époque, un rayonment (Paris, 1982), pp. 25–6.

21.  On boulevards see DeVries, ‘Impact of Gunpowder Weaponry on Siege Warfare’, pp. 237–9, and Kelly DeVries, ‘Facing the New Military Technology: Non-Trace Italienne Anti-Gunpowder Weaponry Defenses, 1350–1550’, forthcoming in eds B.S. Hall and B. Steele, Colonels and Quartermasters: War and Technology in the Old Regime (Cambridge, 2000). On the English construction of boulevards at Orléans see Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:109, and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 92–3.

22.  Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 83. On whose calculations she bases these figures is unknown.

23.  On the Tourelles boulevard see DeVries, ‘Impact of Gunpowder Weaponry on Siege Warfare’, p. 238; Debal, ‘Les fortifications et le pont d’Orléans,’ pp. 88–90; and Debal, ‘La topographie de l’enceinte fortifiée d’Orléans’, pp. 25–6. This boulevard remained in place until at least 1676, as a drawing from that time (reproduced in Debal, ‘Les fortifications et le pont d’Orléans’, p. 89, and Debal, ‘La topographie de l’enciente fortifiée d’Orléans,’ p. 37) shows it still in place. But this illustration shows the boulevard to be of stone construction, thus different from the boulevard that was constructed by the English in 1428. (This has led some to believe that the original boulevard was also in stone – including those who constructed the model in the Musée de Jeanne d’Arc in Orléans – but this was clearly not the case when evidence is considered, either from the original sources or from traditional fifteenth-century boulevard construction techniques.)

24.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:98. A general statement of the valiance of the Orléanais is found in the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:102–3, and in the nullification trial testimony of Jean Lullier, in Duparc, I:331.

25.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:105. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 75–6, and Pernoud Libération d’Orléans, pp. 95–6.

26.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:150, and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 114.

27.  See Gibbons.

28.  Most of this and what follows comes from Pernoud and Clin, pp. 180–1, and Jean Thibault, ‘Un prince territorial au XVe siècle: Dunois, Bâtard d’Orléans’, Bulletin de la sociétés archéologique et historique de l’Orléanais n.s. 14 (1997), 3–46.

29.  See, for example, Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 148–63, and James Hamilton Wylie and W.T. Waugh, The Reign of Henry the Fifth (Cambridge, 1929), III:305–15.

30.  On the Bastard of Orléans’ role in the siege of Montargis see Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 221–2.

31.  For an alternative view see Régine Pernoud (ed.) The Retrial of Joan of Arc: The Evidence at the Trial for Her Rehabilitation, trans. J.M. Cohen (London, 1955), p. 101 n.1, who defends the Bastard’s military leadership at Orléans.

32.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:106.

33.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:110, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 76.

34.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:107, 114, 116, 117.

35.  The best source on the battle of the Herrings is: Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:120–6, or Journal du siège d’Orléans, ed. Charpentier and Cuissard, pp. 38–52. Secondary accounts include Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 234–6; Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 99–103; Charles Oman, A History of the Art of War in the Middle Ages (London, 1924), II:392; and Ferdinand Lot, L’art militaire et les armées au moyen âge en Europe et dans le Proche Orient (Paris, 1946), II:47–53.

36.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:121. Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 99–100, only uses the 4,000 number.

37.  Monstrelet (Douet–d’Arcq) IV:313. See also the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:126.

38.  On this, for example, see DeVries, Infantry Warfare in the Early Fourteenth Century.

39.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:124.

40.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:122–3.

41.  Dunois, in Quicherat, IV:317. See also Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 107. Joan’s trial results at Poitiers had even reached Bruges by 10 May 1429, according to a letter recorded in Morosini, III:53. See also Liocourt, II:71.

42.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:130–1, and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 104–5.

43.  On this and what follows see Pierre Duparc, ‘La déliverance d’Orléans et la mission de Jeanne d’Arc’, in Jeanne d’Arc: Une époque, un rayonnement (Paris, 1982), pp. 153–8.

44.  There is an indication that Joan may have gone on a pilgrimage to Puy with Pasquerel on 25 March, the day of the Annunciation. Régine Pernoud wonders if it is on or at least because of this journey that Joan decides to write this letter. See Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 113.

45.  Although the original letter has long disappeared, there were several copies of it made, many of which survive. The French text can be found edited in Pernoud and Clin, pp. 249–50, and Quicherat, V:95–8. I have used the English translation in Pernoud and Clin, pp. 33–4.

46.  On the requirements for a ‘just war’, including the declaration of war see Frederick H. Russell, The Just War in the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1975) and Kelly DeVries, ‘Medieval Declarations of War: An Example from 1212’, Scintilla 4 (1987), 20–37.

47.  Mention of the letter appears in several nullification trial testimonies and contemporary chronicles; for these references see Pernoud and Clin, pp. 249.

48.  Pernoud and Clin, pp. 247–9.

49.  Lullier, in Duparc, I:331. See also Dunois, in Duparc, I:319–20.

50.  Aulon, in Duparc, I:477. Aulon also claims that the Bastard traveled to Blois by boat and that he actually met Joan along the Loire river but outside of Blois. Whether this is to indicate that she had ventured towards Orléans on her own and had become lost – hence the reason for the Bastard’s attempts to find her – is not in any contemporary source. However, because Dunois does not refer to this in his retrial testimony, and because Aulon seems to confuse this arrival in Blois with Joan’s arrival in Orléans, some might question this incident.

51.  Dunois, in Duparc, I:317–18.

52.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:381. See also Jean de Metz, in Duparc, II:289–90.

53.  Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:364, and Joan, in Quicherat, I:78.

54.  Dunois, in Duparc, I:317; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:54; Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:217; Eberhard de Windecken, in Quicherat, IV:491; and Liocourt, II:90.

55.  See Alençon’s testimony at the nullification trial, in Duparc, I:382.

56.  Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:391. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 37.

57.  See Dunois and Aulon’s nullification trial testimonies, in Duparc, I:318, 477.

58.  This date is disputed. Only Pasquerel gives a time when Joan and the army left Blois, and then only to say that it took them three days to reach Orléans. See Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:391–2.

59.  Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:391–2.

60.  Dunois, in Duparc, I:319.

61.  Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:391–2.

62.  Dunois testifies (in Duparc, I:319) that the army was split and that only Joan and a very few of the leaders crossed over the Loire and entered Orléans. Other sources indicate the same by their leaving the main French force always on the southern side of the Loire river. Liocourt (II:92) gives a count of 2,000 men-at-arms for this expedition, but he cites no reference for this tally.

63.  Dunois, in Duparc, I:319. See also Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:392.

64.  See Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:391–2, and Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:364.

65.  Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:218.

66.  See Duparc, I:391 n.1.

67.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:151–2.

68.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:153. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 40–1.

69.  Jacques l’Esbahy, in Duparc, I:333.

70.  Louis de Coutes, in Duparc, I:363. See also Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:219–20.

71.  Dunois, in Duparc, I:318. The Chronique de la Pucelle (in Quicherat, IV:218–19) contains the same speech. See also Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 117–18, and Liocourt, II:91. On the constant discord between Joan and the Bastard see Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:59.

72.  Coutes, in Duparc, I:363. It is possible that Coutes and Dunois were testifying of the same event, but confusing the day. Yet, Coutes does seem quite confident on his dating, and it certainly fits with what Joan does during the rest of 30 April.

73.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:154.

74.  Louis de Coutes, in Duparc, I:363–4. (The translation of ‘maquereaulx mescréans’ as ‘unbelieving pimps’ is Pernoud, Retrial, p. 136.)

75.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:155. See also Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 123 and Liocourt, II:97.

76.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:154. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:220–1.

77.  See the testimony of Jean d’Aulon, in Duparc, I:477, and the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:155.

78.  See Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:155; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 85; and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 128.

79.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:156 and Jacques Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:42; Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 128.

80.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:383. Alençon was not present in Orléans at this time, but took this position after examining the English defenses once the siege had been lifted. He preceded this nullification trial comment by saying that he believed that the English fortifications were captured by ‘miracle’. See also the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat IV: 158.

81.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:156.

82.  This is recorded as an entry in the Orléans treasurer’s rolls for 3 May (edited in an appendix found in Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 212). See Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 85 and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 128.

83.  Aulon, in Duparc, I:478. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:222, and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 128–9.

84.  According to an inventory of Hémon Ragiuer, the Bastard had brought with him 532 more soldiers (see Liocourt, II:98); perhaps he believed that even with this number the French army was too small to face the English.

85.  Aulon, in Duparc, I:478–9. See also Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:218–19 and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 129.

86.  Aulon, Coutes, and Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:479–80; 364; and 392. Coutes’ testimony is confused here and seems to combine all of the next few days’ activities after this specific remembrance. See also Liocourt, II:99–100.

87.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:157. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:222–4, and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:57.

88.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:157–8. See also Aulon, in Duparc, I:480; Coutes, in Duparc, I:364; and Pasquerel, in Duparc, IV:392. Perceval de Cagny (in Quicherat, IV:7) claims that all prisoners were put to death, but there is no corroborating evidence for this.

89.  Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:224, and Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:365.

90.  Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:392–3.

91.  Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:393–4. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:225; Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 131–2; and Liocourt, II:103. There is a problem here, however, as the Journal du siège d’Orléans (in Quicherat, IV:154), as mentioned above, indicated that all heralds had been returned previously.

92.  The quote is from Aulon, in Duparc, I:480. See also Coutes, in Duparc, I:364; the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:158–9; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:224; and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:57, 59. Both Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 86–7, and Pernoud and Clin, p. 44, accept without comment Pasquerel’s assertion that Joan did not fight on the day of Ascension. (Liocourt, II:101–3, simply notes the confusion among the sources.) Equally without comment or justification, Pernoud (Joan of Arc, pp. 88–9), redates the attack on the boulevard of Saint Jean le Blanc to the following day, before the French assault on the boulevard of the Augustins, despite all contemporary dating to the contrary. It is possible that Jean Pasquerel did not know of her expedition against the boulevard of Saint Jean le Blanc, but it definitely seems to have taken place. On the other hand, there was no actual combat between the two armies, so perhaps Pasquerel is taking this into consideration in his claims that Joan did not fight on Ascension Day. On the need for boats each time the French crossed the Loire to attack an English boulevard there see Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:60.

93.  While others testify that no fighting was done with troops in the boulevard itself, Jean d’Aulon testified (in Duparc, I:430–1) that an attack was made by the English from the boulevard of the Augustins against the retiring French. This attack was only halted when Joan of Arc and La Hire charged on their horses ‘with lances couched’ against the English and ‘drove them back into the boulevard of the Augustins’.

94.  Simon Charles, in Duparc, I:401.

95.  See Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:158.

96.  Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:394.

97.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:158–9. See also Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 133.

98.  Aulon, in Duparc, I:481–2. See also Liocourt, II:104–5.

99.  Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:394–5. See also Coutes, in Duparc, I:365, and Liocourt, II:106. Joan also testified (in Quicherat, I:79) that she knew that she would be wounded in the attack on the Tourelles.

100. See Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:8.

101. Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:159. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 89, and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 134.

102. See Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:395.

103. John Bliese has made a number of studies of earlier battlefield orations and has some interesting theses on what was recorded and what might actually have been said. The studies that apply here are: ‘Rhetoric and Morale: A Study of Battle Orations from the Central Middle Ages’, Journal of Medieval History 15 (1989), 201–26 and ‘When Knightly Courage May Fail: Battle Orations in Medieval Europe’, Historian 53 (1991), 489–504. That Joan is not reported to have given any battlefield oration puts her in the minority, although it may have been that she did not think that such a speech was hers to give, that either the Bastard of Orléans, one of the other generals, or the priests attending to the army should be encouraging them to fight. She may also have had the confidence that her troops would fight for her whether she made a speech to them or not.

104. Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:8.

105. Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:159–60. See also the nullification testimonies of Louis de Coutes and Jean Lullier, in Duparc, I:165 and I:331–2. Cagny (in Quicherat, IV:8) reports that three or four assaults were made against the Tourelles.

106. Dunois, in Duparc, I:320. See also Lullier and Coutes, in Duparc, I:332 and I:365; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:228; and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 138.

107. Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:395. See also Liocourt, II:109. In her own testimony (in Quicherat, I:79), Joan recalled her wounding at the Tourelles, and said that St Catherine helped her not to give in to her pain, but to keep fighting until the Tourelles had fallen.

108. Dunois, in Duparc, I:320–1. Cagny (in Quicherat, IV:8) reports that the small gunpowder weapons known as couleuvrines supported the final assault made against the Tourelles. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:228–30.

109. Joan, in Quicherat, I:79. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 93.

110. Reimbursement of this barge and a description of its use on that day is recorded in the Orléans’ account books (Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 219). See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 47. It must be doubted that such a fire would have seriously damaged the Tourelles fortifications or even the bridge spans on which it was built. But, once again, this shows the determination of the citizens of Orléans to assist in whatever way possible with the defense of their city.

111. Aulon, in Duparc, I:483–4. See also Liocourt, II:110. A target was a small French shield generally held by one hand to ward off missile fire. It should also be noted that, as frequent reference is made to a boulevard at the Tourelles, there is a possibility that the English had also built an earthen rampart around this fortification to increase its defensability.

112. Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:395. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:230; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:9; Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 141–2; and Liocourt, II:111.

113. Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:395. Bouvier puts the number of English dead at 400–500 (in Quicherat, IV:44).

114. Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:163. See also Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:231; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:9; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 92; Pernoud and Clin, p. 48; and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, p. 142.

115. Aulon, in Duparc, I:484.

116. Lullier, in Duparc, I:332. See also Dunois, Aulon, Coutes, and Pasquerel, in Duparc, I:321, 484, 365–6, and 395. Almost all of these say the same thing.

117. Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:163–4. See also Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:231–2; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:10; Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:44; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:62–3; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 92–3; Pernoud and Clin, pp. 50–1; and Pernoud, Libération d’Orléans, pp. 142–3.

118. Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:9. But Liocourt (II:114) tallies the number of English soldiers only at 2,000, a much smaller number of troops than could be put against them by the French.

119. These two reasons are given by Monstrelet (in Quicherat, IV:360) to explain the English retreat on 8 May.

120. Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:164–5.

121. In Quicherat, V:100–4. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 96–97, and Pernoud and Clin, pp. 50–1.

122. See, for example, Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 97.

123. The order for these clothes is found in Quicherat, V:113. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 99.

124. This letter is found in Quicherat, V:131–6. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 97–8.

125. See also the letter from the dauphin’s counselor and Seneschal of Berry, Perceval de Bouainvilliers, to the Duke of Milan, Philippe Maria Visconti, in Quicherat, V:114–21, and Christine de Pisan, Ditié de Jehanne d’Arc, ed. A.J. Kennedy and K. Varty (Oxford, 1977).

126. For the Holy Roman Empire see Eberhard von Windecken, in Quicherat, V:498, and for the southern Low Countries and Italy see Antonio Morosini, III:53–4.

127. Clément de Fauquembergue, in Quicherat, IV:451. See also Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:363–8, and Pernoud and Clin, p. 51.

128. In Quicherat, V:136–7. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 100–1. Quicherat dates this letter to the end of July 1429, but Pernoud dates it, in my opinion more accurately, to 1434. If this is correct, it is a particularly interesting document in that it reveals that Bedford, the leader of the English forces in France during this time, believed that the relief of the siege of Orléans was the turning point of this phase of the Hundred Years War. On the effect of the liberation of Orléans on the English leadership over other parts of occupied France see Anne E. Curry, ‘L’effet de la libération sur l’armée anglaise: Les problèmes de l’organisation militaire en Normandie, de 1429 à 1435’, in Jeanne d’Arc: Une époque, un rayonnement (Paris, 1982), pp. 95–106.

129. See Pernoud and Clin, pp. 221–2.

130. This has come down to us as Le Mystère du siège d’Orléans. See Pernoud and Clin, pp. 243–5.

131. See Pernoud and Clin, p. 245.

132. Lullier, in Duparc, I:332.

Chapter 5: Cleaning up the Loire

1.    See note 90 in the last chapter.

2.    Liocourt, II:133. However, Villaret (pp. 74–5) claims a total of 8,000 in the French army. While Liocourt’s number may be too small, Villaret’s is certainly too large.

3.    Dunois, in Duparc, I:321. See also Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:64, and Villaret, pp. 72–3.

4.    Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:234.

5.    Alençon, in Duparc, I:383. Perceval de Cagny’s figure of 2,000–3,000 (Perceval de Cagny, Chronique des ducs d’Alençon, in Quicherat, IV:12) includes all of the troops in the French army at Jargeau and might be a more accurate depiction of the total force available to Joan there.

6.    For Fastolf’s itinerary see Liocourt, II:140.

7.    See Bourgeois of Paris, Journal, in Quicherat, IV:462–3.

8.    Both of these points are recorded in the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:233, and by Enguerrand de Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:368–9.

9.    On Fastolf’s military career and the profits he made from it see K.B. McFarlane, ‘The Investment of Sir John Fastolf’s Profits of War’, in England in the Fifteenth Century: Collected Essays (London, 1981), pp. 175–98.

10.  Liocourt, II:140. On Fastolf’s numbers see Liocourt, II:133, 140.

11.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:168–9. Virtually the same scene is reported by Dunois in his nullification trial testimony (in Duparc, I:322–3).

12.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:167. See also Perceval de Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:12, and Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:368.

13.  Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:64.

14.  See Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:234, and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:64. Despite the duke of Alençon claiming that the Bastard of Orléans and Florent d’Illiers were in charge of the ‘king’s men’ at Jargeau (in Duparc, I:383), which might give the impression that they commanded the forces there, other sources seem to indicate that these men were in charge only of some of the soldiers and not of the whole French army.

15.  On the duke of Alençon’s relationship with the dauphin, Charles, see his short biography in Pernoud and Clin, pp. 172–3.

16.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:381.

17.  See Alençon, in Duparc, I:381–2.

18.  See Alençon, in Duparc, I:385, for her promise to his wife and mother. See Pernoud and Clin, p. 172, for dates on which she stayed at Saint-Laurent.

19.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:384–5. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 59–60, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 114.

20.  The description of the town’s fortifications and numbers of soldiers are Liocourt’s (II:133). See also Villaret, pp. 80–1.

21.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:383. See also Liocourt, II:134.

22.  The quote comes from Alençon’s nullification testimony (in Duparc, I:384). See also the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:167; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:12; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:65; Pernoud and Clin, p. 59; and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 113.

23.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:12. See also Liocourt, II:134.

24.  Several contemporary sources mention this bombardment including: Alençon, in Duparc, I:384; Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:170–2; Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:234; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:12; and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:65. See also Liocourt, II:135; Villaret, pp. 77–8; Canonge, pp. 36–9; Collet, pp. 106–15; Bourguignon, pp. 123–31; Funck-Brentano, pp. 85–6; Lancesseur, pp. 72–4; and Contamine, ‘La guerre de siège’, pp. 11–12. There are indications in the Orléans comptes that all of the gunpowder weapons which had been used in defending that city, as well as the guns captured from the English there, were sent with the French army to Jargeau. These included ‘cannon, couleuvrines, and a great bombard which needed 22 horses to transport and whose balls were not able to be lifted by two people’. Also in the artillery train were gunpowder, projectiles, masons, carpenters, and cannoniers. See Villaret, p. 77.

25.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:171. See also Villaret, p. 83.

26.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:384. See also Liocourt, II:135.

27.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:79–80.

28.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:384. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 59, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 113–14.

29.  Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:369.

30.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:171–2. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:237, and Liocourt, II:136.

31.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:12–13. See also Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:172.

32.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:385. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 60, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 114.

33.  This was testified to by Alençon, in Duparc, I:385. See also Villaret, p. 84.

34.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:385. On Joan’s wounding and her encouragement of her soldiers see also the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:172, and Villaret, pp. 83–4. On the French breaking through the French walls see Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:172; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:13; and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:65. Villaret (p. 84) claims that the French broke through the walls at the breach made by the Bergière’s felling of a tower, but there is nothing in the contemporary sources to indicate the accuracy of this claim.

35.  See Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:45; Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:173; and Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:237–8.

36.  Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:65 and Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:238. See also Liocourt, II:137 and Villaret, pp. 84–5. The Journal du siège d’Orléans (in Quicherat, IV:173) indicates also that the church of Jargeau and several of the houses were pillaged.

37.  This is the total given by Alençon (in Duparc, I:385). Other tallies include: 300 (Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:369) and 300–400 (Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:65). Most others simply express the total killed in general terms: Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:173; Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:238; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:13; and Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:45. Liocourt (II:137) has a figure of 700 English dead but does not indicate how he arrived at that number, while Villaret (p. 85) agrees with Chartier’s 300–400 number.

38.  Except for Perceval de Cagny’s total of eighteen or twenty killed (in Quicherat, IV:13) which probably should not be taken seriously.

39.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:173; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:234–5; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:13; and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:65. The Orléans comptes record a town present to Joan and the other French military leaders of six barrels of wine in gratitude for the victory. See Villaret, p. 86.

40.  See Villaret, p. 86. This is also recorded in the Orléans comptes. The same preacher said Mass on 10 May 1429, during one of the celebrations for the relief of the siege of Orléans.

41.  See Jean de Waurin (in Quicherat, IV:414).

42.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:13.

43.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:173–4; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:238–9; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:13; and Liocourt, II:138.

44.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:174. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:239–40; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:13; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:65; and Villaret, p. 87.

45.  Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:65.

46.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:173–4. See also Villaret, p. 87.

47.  For this and the rest of my brief biography of Richemont see Pernoud and Clin, pp. 198–200 and Etcheverry.

48.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 220–1, for one, is not too impressed by Richemont’s military capabilities.

49.  Perceval de Cagny (in Quicherat, IV:14) claims that Richemont, while on his march to meet with Joan, had been filled in on the details of the capture of Jargeau.

50.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:385–6. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:238; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 115–16; and Villaret, pp. 89–90.

51.  See Alençon’s nullification trial testimony, in Duparc, I:386; Dunois, in Duparc, I:322; Waurin, in Quicherat, IV:416–17; and the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:239.

52.  Waurin, in Quicherat, IV:413.

53.  Colonel Liocourt (II:139) does this, although the reason is not revealed.

54.  Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:240–1.

55.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:386. See also Villaret, pp. 90–1; Etcheverry, pp. 144–5; and E. Fonssagrives, ‘Jeanne d’Arc et Richemont’, Bulletin de la société polymathique du Morbihan (1920), 8–11. On the numbers in Richemont’s force see Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:66.

56.  Guillaume Gruel, Chronique d’Arthur de Richemont in Quicherat, IV:317. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 116, and Villaret, pp. 91–2.

57.  According to Gruel (in Quicherat, IV:316), Charles had discovered the Constable’s march to Beaugency and had sent messengers telling him that he was forbidden to go there.

58.  Waurin, in Quicherat, IV:416–17. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 60–1, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 116–17.

59.  Gruel, in Quicherat, IV:318.

60.  See Alençon’s testimony, in Duparc, I:385; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:240; and Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:14.

61.  Liocourt, II:138–9. For a description of the castle and medieval town see Daniel Vannier, Beaugency (Beaugency, 1991). A schematic drawing of the keep can be found in Jean Mesqui, Châteaux et enceintes de la France médiévale: De la défense à la résidence (Paris, 1991), II:213.

62.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:173–4.

63.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:175; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:240; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:14; and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:66.

64.  See the Comptes de forteresse, in Quicherat, V:263, and Liocourt, II:142.

65.  The quote is from the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:175, which also contains the fullest account of the terms of surrender. See also the testimony of Alençon, in Duparc, I:385; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:241–2; Gruel, in Quicherat, IV:318; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:14–15; and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:66–7.

66.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:176. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:242.

67.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:176. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:242; Gruel, in Quicherat, IV:318; Waurin, in Quicherat, IV:417; and Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:45.

68.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:386. See also the testimony of Dunois, in Duparc, I:322; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:242–3; the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:177; Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:371–2; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 117; and Liocourt, II:144.

69.  On the recognition by the French leadership that speed was an important tactic at the battle of Patay see Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:67–8; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:242; the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:176; and Liocourt, II:144. On the English attempting to reach Janville see the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:176; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:15; and Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:45. Jean Waurin (in Quicherat, IV:418) claims that the English were trying to march to Paris.

70.  Waurin, in Quicherat, IV:421. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 118, and Liocourt, II:145.

71.  The Journal du siège d’Orléans (in Quicherat, IV:177) has only 4,000 in the English army, but as that is the number which had arrived with Fastolf, who had not lost anyone in combat, I have added another thousand English troops to indicate those who had been already on the Loire before Fastolf’s army arrived.

72.  Gruel, in Quicherat, IV:318–19. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:243, and Liocourt, II:144.

73.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:177.

74.  Waurin, in Quicherat, IV:421. See also Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:372, and Liocourt, II:145.

75.  Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:374. See also Liocourt, II:148.

76.  See the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:242.

77.  See, for example, Burne, Agincourt War, p. 268 note 1.

78.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 268–9.

79.  Michel de Lombarès, ‘Patay, 18 juin 1429’, Revue historique de l’armée 22 (1966), 5–16.

80.  Liocourt, II:148–9. Unfortunately, Liocourt’s plan of the battle is found on p. 111 and is thus extremely difficult to follow in connection with his discussion more than thirty-five pages later. Nevertheless, I believe that Liocourt is probably correct in his findings.

81.  The quotes all come from Waurin (in Quicherat, IV:421–2). See also Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:14; Liocourt, II:145; and Lombarès, pp. 12–13. That they were located near Saint-Sigismond comes from a letter written by a battle participant, Jacques de Bourbon (‘Lettre de Jacques de Bourbon’, Revue bleue (13 Feb 1892), 203).

82.  Waurin, in Quicherat, IV:422. See also Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:372; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:68; Pernoud and Clin, p. 61; and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 118. Burne, Agincourt War, Villaret, and Lombarès all diminish the role of the stag in this battle, believing that it was the French surprise that carried the day. In ignoring the eye-witness and best source on the battle, however, they weaken their credibility.

83.  Gruel (in Quicherat, IV:319) claims that this ultimately is what causes Fastolf’s defeat. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 61–2; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 119; Liocourt, II:146; and Lombarès, pp. 13–14.

84.  Waurin, in Quicherat, IV:423.

85.  See Waurin, in Quicherat, IV:423; Bourbon, p. 203; and Liocourt, II:145.

86.  See Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:373, and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:68. Waurin does not record this part of the battle, having already fled, it seems, by the time that this occurred.

87.  So timed by the author of the Chronique de la Pucelle (in Quicherat, IV:243).

88.  This number of English casualties is given by Gruel (in Quicherat, IV:319) and Bouvier (in Quicherat, IV:45). Waurin (in Quicherat, IV:423) claims a death toll of 2,000, with 200 more captured, and Monstrelet’s figures (in Quicherat, IV:373–4) are 1,800 dead and 100–120 captured. Finally, Cagny (in Quicherat, IV:15–16) and Jean Chartier (in Quicherat, IV:68) claim that there were 2,000–3,000 dead English soldiers with, according to Cagny alone, another 400–500 made prisoners. On the French dead, Thibault d’Armagnac testified (in Duparc, I:404) that the French had lost only one.

89.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:177; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:244; and Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:374.

90.  See Waurin, in Quicherat, IV:424; Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:371; the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:178; and Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:15.

91.  Coutes, in Duparc, I:366.

92.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:178, and Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:16.

Chapter 6: The Road to Reims

1.    Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:45–6, and the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:244.

2.    Edouard Perroy’s tallies of 10–12 million French inhabitants and 3¹2 English inhabitants (pp. 36, 50–1) are pre-Black Death numbers (1328). However, there is no indication in his work, or in anyone else’s, that the population disparity one hundred years later was any different.

3.    Anne Curry, ‘English Armies in the Fifteenth Century’, ed. A. Curry and M. Hughes, in Arms, Armies and Fortifications in the Hundred Years War (Woodbridge, 1994), p. 45. This citation refers to a chart that lists the numbers of troops sent each year to France between 1415 and 1450. Curry’s entire article (pp. 39–68) is devoted to the calculation of English soldiers serving in France during the fifteenth century.

4.    See, for example, Guy Llewelyn Thompson, Paris and its People under English Rule: The Anglo-Burgundian Regime, 1420–1436 (Oxford, 1991).

5.    There may have been such a pro-French group operating in Troyes, as their sheltering of Friar Richard, who had been driven from Paris for treasonous preaching earlier in the year, might be evidence that a group of French sympathizers existed there. (For a short biography of Friar Richard see Pernoud and Clin, p. 198.) It is also possible that these sympathizers were instrumental in surrendering the town to Joan on 9 July.

6.    See note 7 in chapter 1.

7.    For editions of this letter see Quicherat, V:125–6, and Pernoud and Clin, p. 251. I have used the Pernoud and Clin translation (p. 252). The letter itself no longer exists, but it was recorded in the city registers. Why Joan claimed to have captured Fastolf, when she had not, is a mystery. It is known that she wrote also to Duke Philip the Good of Burgundy at this time, but this letter no longer survives in any form. See Pernoud and Clin, p. 62, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 120.

8.    For a short biography of La Trémoïlle see Pernoud and Clin, p. 190.

9.    Both the Journal du siège d’Orléans (in Quicherat, IV:178–81) and the Chronique de la Pucelle (in Quicherat, IV:246–50), the two narrative sources that speak most positively about Joan, decry at length La Trémoïlle’s opposition to her. See also Liocourt, II:157–65.

10.  Dunois, in Duparc, I:323. See also the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:246–8, and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:69.

11.  Cosne and La Charité were held not by the English themselves but by a mercenary leader, Perrinet Gressart, and his forces. Both would become targets for Joan in 1430.

12.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:178–80; the Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:246–7; and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:69. Although La Trémoïlle is not specifically identified as the proponent of these alternate proposals, and Regnault of Chartres, the archbishop of Reims and a later opponent of Joan’s, was also present, La Trémoïlle’s blame can be inferred from these sources.

13.  These numbers are given by Pernoud and Clin (p. 62) without substantiation.

14.  On this phenomenon see DeVries, ‘A Woman As Leader of Men’.

15.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:16–17. On the army’s travel to Gien see the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:179, Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:16–17; and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:71.

16.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:17–18. ‘By my Martin’ appears to have been Joan’s partic ular oath. According to many wit nesses, she expressed it on numerous occasions, mostly in private conversations.

17.  See Burne, Agincourt War, p. 169.

18.  See Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:72; Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:377–8; and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 120–1.

19.  See Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:72; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:18; Chronique de la Pucelle, in Quicherat, IV:251; and C.-R. Pernin, Jeanne d’Arc à Troyes (Paris, 1894), p. 9.

20.  See note 63 in chapter two for references to this treaty.

21.  This letter also no longer exists, but a transcription of it has survived in the seventeenth-century register of Jean Rogier. Editions of the letter are in Quicherat, IV:284–8, and Pernoud and Clin, pp. 252–3. I have used the Pernoud and Clin translation (p. 253).

22.  Pernin, p. 12. See also the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:181.

23.  The Journal du siège d’Orléans (in Quicherat, IV:181) and Jean Chartier (in Quicherat, IV:72) are the only sources that mention this garrison and its ill-advised sortie.

24.  See Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:72–3, and Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:378.

25.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:100. See also Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:3; Pernoud and Clin, p. 63; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 121–2; and Pernin, pp. 18–20.

26.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:182; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:73; and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 122. However, Pernoud wonders whether this could have been the case at a time of harvest.

27.  Dunois, in Duparc, I:324. See also the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:182–3; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:73–5; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 122–3; and Pernin, pp. 20–1, 25–7.

28.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:183, and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:76.

29.  See Simon Charles’s nullification trial testimony, in Duparc, I:401–2; Pernoud and Clin, p. 63; and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 123.

30.  Simon Charles, in Duparc, I:401–2. See also Dunois’s nullification trial testimony, in Duparc, I:324; the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:183–4; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:76; Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:378; Pernoud and Clin, p. 63, Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 123; and Pernin, pp. 27–31.

31.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:18–19.

32.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:184–5; Jean de Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:76–7; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:18; and Pernoud and Clin, p. 64.

33.  Épinal, in Duparc, I:279. On the visit with some of her former friends and acquaintances see Pernoud and Clin, p. 64, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 123–4.

34.  Simon Charles, in Duparc, I:402. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 124.

35.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:187. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 125.

36.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:186. For an account of the crowning see the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:185–6; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:19–20; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:77–8; Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:46; Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:378–81; Fauquembergue, in Quicherat, IV:453; Pernoud and Clin, pp. 64–8; and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 124–6.

Chapter 7: The Decline of a Military Leader

1.    Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:380.

2.    See Thompson.

3.    This is found in the Archives Nationales, X.12.4796, fols. 239–41.

4.    Bourgeois of Paris, in Quicherat, IV:463–4. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 73, and Liocourt, II:219.

5.    Gruel, in Quicherat, IV:320. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 76.

6.    This letter is found in Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:382–6. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 131–2, and Liocourt, II:211–12.

7.    For a short biography of Bedford see Pernoud and Clin, pp. 176–7. A longer one can be found in Williams.

8.    See Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:78.

9.    See Pernoud and Clin, p. 72.

10.  This letter is preserved in the Archives du Nord in Lille. It is edited in Quicherat V:126–7 and Pernoud and Clin, pp. 253–4. I have used the translation found in Pernoud and Clin, pp. 67–8. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 128, and Liocourt, II:198.

11.  See Liocourt, II:199.

12.  This letter is also still extant and located in the Archive Municipales in Reims. It is edited in Quicherat, IV:139–40, and Pernoud and Clin, p. 254. I have used the Pernoud and Clin translation (p. 255). See also Liocourt, II:210.

13.  Greffier de la Rochelle, as quoted in Liocourt, II:199.

14.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:472–3, and Seguin, in Duparc I:382.

15.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:146–7. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 134, and Liocourt, II:218. Both of these modern commentators, and others, accept this statement without question. But it is a confusing thing for Joan to say, as there is no record either in her trial testimony or anywhere else that mentions who these ‘noblemen’ might be.

16.  See Pernoud and Clin, pp. 69–70, and Liocourt, II:205.

17.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:178; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:20; Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:46; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:78; and Liocourt, II:205.

18.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:20. See also Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:46, Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:78; and Liocourt, II:206–7.

19.  See Pernoud and Clin, pp. 73, 230–1, and Liocourt, II:207.

20.  See Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:20.

21.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:21. See also Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:46, and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:78. The fortifications of Provins have received excellent modern study. See Jean Mesqui, Provins: La fortification d’une ville au moyen âge (Paris, 1979).

22.  Luce, Jean d’Arc à Domrémy, II:250, and Liocourt, II:208. On Joan’s visit to the duke of Lorraine see note 29 in Chapter 3 above.

23.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:189. See also Liocourt, II:213.

24.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:188–9; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:21; Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:46, and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:78. At Crépy-en-Valois, the king received the surrender of Compiègne.

25.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:21–3. The engagement at Montépilloy is one of the best described military encounters of the Hundred Years War. Other sources include: Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:80–4; Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:386–9; Saint-Rémy, in Quicherat, IV:433–5; the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:189–90; and Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:47. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 73–4; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 132–3; and Liocourt, II:214–17.

26.  Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:388.

27.  Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:387. Monstrelet also includes the English formation and command structure. Most sources identify these soldiers as coming from the Burgundian-controlled region of Picardy. See also Liocourt, II:215.

28.  Liocourt’s battle plan (II:215) is confusing and does not attend to the sources. It should be disregarded.

29.  Jean Chartier (in Quicherat, IV:82–3) includes the French command structure and formations; Joan of Arc, the Bastard of Orléans, and La Hire all took up positions in the vanguard. See also Liocourt, II:214–15.

30.  Jean Chartier (in Quicherat, IV:83) writes that the English had spent all night setting up this fortification.

31.  Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:47. Jean Chartier (in Quicherat, IV:83–4) sees a similar distance, claiming that the two lines were only the space of two crossbow shots apart.

32.  Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:84.

33.  Jean Chartier (in Quicherat, IV:84) maintains that some combat did take place when Joan moved forward, resulting in deaths on both sides, before she returned to her earlier position. Even if that did occur, the fuller warfare which she sought by this tactic failed to take place. See Liocourt, II:215.

34.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:23. See also Liocourt, II:215.

35.  See Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:85; Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:391; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 134; and Liocourt, II:217.

36.  See Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:391, and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:85. Paul Marin, La génie militaire de Jeanne Darc (siège de Paris, 1429) (Paris, 1889), p. 146, claims that Bedford had moved to Rouen because he felt that Paris was on the verge of falling. But, as Bedford returned to Paris before that happened, Marin is simply wrong here. More than likely, Bedford’s move to Rouen had to do with Richemont’s attacks on western Normandy and their effect on Normans who wished to join the French rather than remain with the English.

37.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:24. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 76, and Liocourt, II:218.

38.  Dean of the Collegiate Church of St Thibaud of Metz, Chroniques de la noble ville et cité de Metz in Quicherat, IV:321.

39.  See Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:86; the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:197; and Liocourt, II:218.

40.  See Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:24. Paul Marin (p. 140) has a French army size of 6,000 men, but he does not reveal how he calculates this number. I believe that such a figure is far too large.

41.  See Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:24–5; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:86; and Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:47.

42.  See Monstrelet (ed. Douet-d’Arcq), II:348–9, and Liocourt, II:207–9, 218.

43.  See Pernoud and Clin, pp. 75–6.

44.  Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:388.

45.  See Henri Couget, Jeanne d’Arc devant Paris (Paris, 1925), pp. 21–3, 76–7, and Liocourt, II:221, 223–4. Liocourt’s idea that there were two moats, one dry and the other filled with water, is not supported by archaeological or written evidence. Sixteenth-century maps of the Saint-Honoré gate (found detailed in Couget, pp. 139, 149, 159) clearly show only one moat, but that it was only filled with water in the middle. Hence, it is entirely possible that Joan could have stepped off the edge of the higher ground on to the dry moat, and then later have needed bundles of sticks, etc., a common moat filler during sieges, to be placed in the wet part of the moat.

46.  Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:87.

47.  For references see note 61 in chapter 2.

48.  See Bourgeois of Paris, Journal d’un bourgeois de Paris, 1405–49, ed. A. Teutey (Paris, 1881), pp. 243, 245. See also Liocourt, II:220. Couget (pp. 15–16), on the other hand, contends that there were many who would have joined Joan if she had been able to get through the walls.

49.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:25. See also Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:86; the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:197; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 136–7; Liocourt, II:220–1; and Couget, pp. 13–14.

50.  Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:86–7.

51.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:24–5.

52.  Cagny, being Alençon’s chronicler, is naturally the most detailed contemporary reporter of this part of the story (in Quicherat, IV:25–6). See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 137, and Couget, pp. 16–17. Joan may have planned to carry out an attack on 7 September as well, but that one, for whatever reason, does not seem to have taken place. See Liocourt, II:222, and Couget, pp. 18–20.

53.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:26–7. See also Liocourt, II:223–4, and Couget, pp. 25–30. During this initial attack, the boulevard in front of Saint-Honoré gate, if there was in fact one there, must have been overrun. That no contemporary source says so, indicates that perhaps a boulevard had not been constructed there.

54.  Fauquembergue, in Quicherat, IV:457. Several contemporary chroniclers agree with Cagny that no French were killed or wounded; others agree with Fauquembergue that many were killed or wounded. See Couget, pp. 39–43.

55.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:26–7. See also the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:198–9; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:87–8; Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:392–3; the Bourgeois de Paris, in Quicherat, IV:464–6; Fauquembergue, in Quicherat, IV:457; Liocourt, II:224–5; and Couget, pp. 35–7.

56.  Bourgeois de Paris, in Quicherat, IV:464–6. See also Couget, pp. 33–4.

57.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:27. See also Couget, p. 43.

58.  See Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:27–8; Liocourt, II:225; and Couget, pp. 43–4.

59.  Germain Lefèvre-Pontalis confirmed this part of Cagny’s chronicle when he discovered a letter written by Henry VI in 1431 reminding a citizen of Denisot Doe, one of the villages surrounding Paris, of the bridge’s existence during the time of Joan’s attacks. See Germain Lefèvre-Pontalis, ‘Un détail du siège de Paris par Jeanne d’Arc’, Bibliothèque de l’écoles des chartes 46 (1885), 5–15. He (pp. 5–6), Paul Marin (pp. 142–5), and Ferdinand de Liocourt (II:225), all maintain that the bridge was to be used by Joan that day, 9 September, when the king called off the attacks, but there is no contemporary evidence to support that theory.

60.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:27–8. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 138, and Couget, pp. 44–5.

61.  Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:48.

62.  Saint-Rémy, in Quicherat, IV:436.

63.  See the Journal de siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:201; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:88–9; and Liocourt, II:226.

64.  Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:394.

65.  See the Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quich erat, IV:201–2; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:29; Pernoud and Clin, pp. 79–80; and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 29.

66.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:30. See also Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:48–9, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 141–2.

67.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:29.

68.  Joan, in Duparc, I:179. See also Liocourt, II:226.

69.  Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:89. For stories that the armor remained in Saint-Denis after the Hundred Years War see, for example, Liocourt (II:226), who, using a basilica treasury report from 1626, believes that the armor was still there in the seventeenth century, and Pernoud (Joan of Arc, p. 139), who holds that the armor currently resides in the Musée de la armée in Paris. What is claimed to have been her armor appears to have been something later placed in the basilica if Jean Chartier is correct.

70.  Journal du siège d’Orléans, in Quicherat, IV:199–200.

71.  Alençon, in Duparc, I:387.

72.  Most military historians see Joan’s attack on Paris as an impressive military feat. See Liocourt, II:218–25; Canogne, pp. 56–67; Collet, pp. 199–250; Bourguignon, pp. 212–33; Funck-Brentano, pp. 120–5; Lancesseur, pp. 96–111; Marin, pp. 140–60; and Contamine, ‘Guerre de siège’, pp. 12–13. Yet, Couget (pp. 20–1) maintains that the attack of 8 September ‘was not sufficiently prepared, nor sustained’.

Chapter 8: The End of a Military Leader

1.    See Liocourt, II:227.

2.    See Liocourt, II:252; Villaret, p. 109; and André Bossuat, Perrinet Gressart et François de Surienne: Agents de l’Angleterre. Contribution à l’étude des relations de l’Angleterre et de la Bourgogne avec la France, sous le règne de Charles VII (Paris, 1936).

3.    For a biography of Perrinet Gressart see Pernoud and Clin, pp. 185–7, and Bossuat. Much of the following about Gressart’s life comes from these sources.

4.    On Bertrand du Guesclin’s free company experience see the references in note 20 in Chapter 2.

5.    On mercenaries and mercenary captains during the Hundred Years War see Allmand, Hundred Years War, pp. 73–6; Philippe Contamine, War in the Middle Ages, trans. M. Jones (Oxford, 1984), pp. 99–101, 150–65; and M.G.A.Vale, War and Chivalry: Warfare and Aristocratic Culture in England, France and Burgundy at the End of the Middle Ages (London, 1981), pp 151–7.

6.    See Pernoud and Clin, p. 186; Bossuat, p. 112; and Calemard, ‘La chevauchée de Jeanne d’Arc et son appel aux habitants de Riom’, Revue politique et parlementaire 140 (1929), 435.

7.    Aulon, in Duparc, I:484. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 143, and Bossuat, pp. 111–12.

8.    Aulon, in Duparc, I:484, and J.-L. Jaladon de la Barre, Jeanne d’Arc à Saint-Pierre-le-Moutier et deux juges nivernais à Rouen (Nevers, 1868), pp. 25–6.

9.    See Pernoud and Clin, p. 80; Villaret, p. 108; and Bossuat, pp. 113–14.

10.  See Liocourt, II:249.

11.  Liocourt, II:249, and Jaladon de la Barre, pp. 18–19.

12.  Aulon, in Duparc, I:484. In comparison to the French army, which does not seem to have been very large at all, the number of soldiers in Saint-Pierre-le-Moutier may have appeared to be ‘a large number’ to Jean d’Aulon, and he can be excused for exaggerating the opposing numbers. But the small size of the place, even today, means that the number there can have been nothing in comparison to some of the towns which Joan had previously encountered.

13.  Aulon, in Duparc, I:484–5. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 80–1; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 143–4; Villaret, p. 109; Bossuat, p. 115; Jaladon de la Barre, pp. 28–30; and Calemard, pp. 436–7.

14.  Thierry, in Duparc, I:330. See also Villaret, p. 109; Jaladon de la Barre, pp. 32–3; and Calemard, p. 437.

15.  This can be found in the Archives Communales de Riom, AA.33. It is edited in Quicherat, V:147–8, and Pernoud and Clin, p. 257. I have used my own translation. See also Calemard; Bossuat, pp. 115–16; and Jaladon de la Barre, pp. 35–6.

16.  A transcription of Albret’s letter to the citizens of Riom is found in Calemard, pp. 438–40.

17.  On the gunpowder weapons sent to the French besieging La Charité see Liocourt, II:250–1; Bossuat, pp. 116–17; and Villaret, pp. 159–65. In Villaret is a transcription of the gunpowder weapons inventory. On the money sent by the inhabitants of Orléans and Bourges see Villaret, p. 111.

18.  Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:49. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 81; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 145; Liocourt, II:251; and Villaret, p. 111.

19.  See Liocourt, II:251–2.

20.  See Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:91; Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:31; and Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:49. (The quotes are from Chartier and Cagny respectively.) See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 81; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 145; Liocourt, II:252; and Bossuat, p. 118. The exact date of departure from La Charité is not known, but it was probably sometime between 22 and 24 December.

21.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:31. See also Villaret, p. 111, and Jaladon de la Barre, p. 40.

22.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:109. See also Villaret, p. 111, and Bossuat, p. 118.

23.  See Pernoud and Clin, p. 81, and Bossuat, p. 118.

24.  The document ennobling them is edited in Quicherat V:150–3. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 81, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 145–6.

25.  Pernoud and Clin (p. 82) have Joan spending much of her time at La Trémoïlle’s castle in Sully-sur-Loire. But there is very little evidence beyond the letters written there in March to indicate that this was her winter residence for all of January, February, and March.

26.  The original of this letter still exists and is held privately. Editions can be found in Quicherat, V:160, and Pernoud and Clin, p. 258. The partial translation which I have quoted is from Pernoud and Clin, p. 83.

27.  This letter, too, is still extant; it too is privately held. Editions are in Quicherat, V:161, and Pernoud and Clin, pp. 259–60. I have used a translation of Pernoud and Clin, p. 260.

28.  This letter, originally written in Latin, is most found in a German translation in the Vienna Reichsregister D. f. 236 r. I have used the translation in Pernoud and Clin, p. 259.

29.  Pernoud and Clin (pp. 158–9) are direct in their opinion that Joan did not write this letter: ‘This letter was not dictated by Joan; it is the work of Pasquerel, her confessor.’ Liocourt (II:267) accepts the letter as hers.

30.  See Pernoud and Clin, p. 82, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 146–7.

31.  See Pernoud and Clin, p. 84, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 146.

32.  On the Burgundian attempts to take Compiègne see Pernoud and Clin, p. 83; Richard Vaughan, Philip the Good: The Apogee of Burgundy (London, 1970), pp. 17–25; Pierre Champion, Guillaume de Flavy: Captaine de Compiègne: Contribution à l’histoire de Jeanne d’Arc et à l’étude de la vie militaire et privée au XVe siècle (Paris, 1906); and Louis Carolus-Barre, ‘Compiègne et la guerre, 1414–1430’, in 111e Congres national des Sociétés savantes, Poitiers, 1986, Histoire médiévale, T. I: ‘La France Anglaise’, pp. 383–92.

33.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:32. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 147, and Pernoud and Clin, pp. 84–5. Pernoud and Clin do not accept that the king would have kept her from travelling to help the Compiègnoise.

34.  Joan testified of this in her own trial (in Quicherat, I:105). See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 85, and Liocourt, II:272.

35.  She also testified of this (in Quicherat, I:115). See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 85, and Liocourt, II:272–3.

36.  See Pernoud and Clin, p. 85, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 149.

37.  On the battle of Lagny see Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:32; Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:91–2; Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:399–400; Georges Chastellain, Chronique de ducs de Bourgogne, in Quicherat, IV:441–3; Pernoud and Clin, p. 85; Liocourt, II:273; and Alexandre Sorel, La prise de Jeanne d’Arc devant Compiègne et l’histoire des sièges de la même ville sous Charles VI et Charles VII (Paris, 1889), pp. 143–4.

38.  Chastellain, in Quicherat, IV:442.

39.  Chastellain, in Quicherat, IV:442; Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:399; and Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:91.

40.  Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:399.

41.  On this sword see Olivier, pp. 19–20.

42.  See Pernoud and Clin, p. 85, and Liocourt, p. 273.

43.  Article XXXIX, in Quicherat, I:264.

44.  See Pernoud and Clin, pp. 85–6. This Louis of Bourbon, the count of Vendôme, was not the same as the Louis of Bourbon, count of Montpensier, who was with Joan on the upper Loire late in 1429. The Bourbon family was large, with at least two Louis, it appears, and all of them titled. Regnault of Chartres would write one of the most heinous and disloyal letters after Joan’s capture condemning her activities as independent and ‘full of pride’ (see Pernoud and Clin, p. 91).

45.  See Chastellain, in Quicherat, IV:444–5. On the siège of Compiègne see Burne, The Agincourt War, pp. 264–7; Canogne, pp. 74–85; Collet, pp. 272–97; Bourguignon, pp. 264–73; Funck-Brentano, pp. 141–6; Lancesseur, pp. 123–37; Sorel; Champion, Guillaume de Flavy; Vaughan, Philip the Good, pp. 17–25; and Paul Marin, Jeanne d’Arc tacticien et stratégiste: L’art militaire dans la première moitié du XVe siècle, 4 vols (Paris, 1889–90) [all four volumes discuss this siege exclusively].

46.  See Vaughan, Philip the Good, p. 17.

47.  See Kelly DeVries and Robert D. Smith, The Artillery of the Dukes of Burgundy (forthcoming), and Joseph Garnier, L’artillerie des ducs de Bourgogne d’après les documents conservés aux archives de la Côte-d’Or (Paris, 1895).

48.  Jean de Waurin, Récueil des croniques et anchiennes istories de la Grant Bretaigne, ed. W. and E.L.C.P. Hardy (London, 1864–91), III:362; Monstrelet (ed. Douet-d’Arcq), IV:418–19; Morosini, III:319–23; and Georges Chastellain, Oeuvres, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove (Brussels, 1863–6), II:53. See also Liocourt, II:279–80 and DeVries, ‘The Use of Gunpowder Weaponry’, pp. 15–16.

49.  Contamine, ‘Guerre de siège’, p. 16.

50.  As transcribed in Champion, Guillaume de Flavy, pp. 174–83. See also Alain Salamagne, ‘L’attaque des places-fortes au XVe siècle à travers l’exemple des guerres anglo et franco-bourguignonnes’, Revue historique 289 (1993), 78–9.

51.  See Pernoud and Clin, p. 232, and Sorel, pp. 161–7.

52.  Champion, Guillaume de Flavy, p. 48.

53.  Quoted in Champion, Guillaume de Flavy, p. 49 n.10.

54.  Jean Chartier, in Quicherat, IV:92.

55.  See Saint-Rémy, in Quicherat, IV:436; Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:49; Pernoud and Clin, p. 86; Liocourt, II:281–2; and Sorel, pp. 150–9.

56.  Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:49–50. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 86, and Liocourt, II:282–3.

57.  The selling of the town comes from Bouvier, in Quicherat, IV:50. The price comes from the third compte of Jean Abonnel, Archives du Nord, B 1492 f. 64, transcribed in Champion, Guillaume de Flavy, p. 168. See also Liocourt, II:283, and Pernoud and Clin, p. 86.

58.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:32–3. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 86; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 150; Liocourt, II:283; and Sorel, pp. 171–3.

59.  See Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:33.

60.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:33. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 86; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 150; and Liocourt, II:283.

61.  Chastellain, in Quicherat, IV:444–5. See also Pernoud and Clin, p. 86.

62.  Cagny, in Quicherat, IV:34. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 150.

63.  Chastellain, in Quicherat, IV:446–7. See also Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:401–2; Pernoud, Joan of Arc, p. 151; and Sorel, pp. 183–4.

64.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:207–8. See also Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 149–50.

65.  Joan, in Quicherat, I:207.

66.  Jules Michelet, Joan of Arc, trans. A. Guérard (Ann Arbor, 1957), pp. 50–3; Sorel, pp. 287–300; Bourguignon, pp. 264–73; and Marin, Jeanne d’Arc tacticien et stratégiste. See also Pernoud and Clin, pp. 231–3, who suggest that the treason of Flavy was ‘at least plausible’.

67.  Quicherat, New Aspects, pp. 35–8; Champion, Guillaume de Flavy; and J.-B. Mestre, Guillaume de Flavy n’a pas trahi Jeanne d’Arc (Paris, 1934).

68.  Épinal, in Duparc, I:279. On Joan’s visit with some of her former friends and acquaintances see Pernoud and Clin, p. 64, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 123–4.

69.  See note 63 above.

70.  Sorel, pp. 225–70; Vaughan, Philip the Good, pp. 24–5; Carolus-Barre, pp. 386–7; and DeVries, ‘The Use of Gunpowder Weapons’, pp. 15–16.

71.  Monstrelet, in Quicherat, IV:402.

72.  As quoted in Pernoud and Clin, p. 233.

73.  Pernoud and Clin, p. 233.

74.  Guillaume de Flavy’s military biography is found in Champion, Guillaume de Flavy, pp. 5–61.

75.  Christine de Pisan, p. 48.

76.  In setting this itinerary, I have followed the route set by Pierre Rocolle, Un prisonnier de guerre nommé Jeanne d’Arc (Paris, 1982).

77.  See Pernoud and Clin, pp. 92–4.

78.  As translated in Pernoud and Clin, p. 90.

79.  See Pernoud and Clin, pp. 95–8.

80.  So many books have been written about Joan’s trial and execution that it would be folly to try to list them all. Concise descriptions of what occurred can be found in Pernoud and Clin, pp. 103–38, and Pernoud, Joan of Arc, pp. 165–254.

Chapter 9: Afterword

1.    On the Congress of Arras see Joyceline Gledhill Dickinson, The Congress of Arras, 1435: A Study in Medieval Diplomacy (Oxford, 1955).

2.    See Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 279–81.

3.    Burne, Agincourt War, p. 272, and Allmand, Hundred Years War, p. 76. The French held the important castle for less than a month before it was recaptured by the English. As was Joan’s experience, after defeating the English, La Hire found himself unsupported by men, arms, and supplies.

4.    Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 287–9.

5.    Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 293–302.

6.    Burne, Agincourt War, p. 302.

7.    Burne, Agincourt War, p. 313.

8.    Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 313–15.

9.    Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 315–24.

10.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 331–5.

11.  Burne, Agincourt War, pp. 335–45.