Middletown transcript., 1871-06-03
sOAH D'ARc.

his father BY reading q historical work TO
him, the aged statesman, /" hsckncycd in
the ways Of men," cxclaimcd--" Any
thing but history; that must be false. !"
DR.. johnson according to Boswell. held
somewhat similar opinion; aud Gibbon,
alluding. to the fallacics of history. said,
the spectators Of events knew too little,
tho actors were to deeply interested. to
speak the real truth The French hero
inc affords remarkable in.tance Of his
toric uncertainty. Historians, one copy
ing the words Of another. assert she was
burned at Roucn. in 1881 while docu-
mentary evidence Of tho most authentic
character, completely ncgativing tho story
Of her being burned, show she was alive,
and happily married. several year, after
the period alleged to be that Of her execu-
tion.
Many Of these documents are in the
registry Of the city Of Mentx, and prove
she came thithcr in 1896. The mngis-
tratcs, to make sure that she was not an
imposi.or. sent for her brothers. Pierre
and jean, who at once recognized her.
Several entries in the city records cnum-
crate the presents, with tho name Of do
ncrs, that were given 10 her on the occa-
sion Of her marriage with the Chcvalier
dArmoisc. and even the marriage contract
between Robert d'Armoise. knight, and
Jeanne d'Arc, Ia Pucellc dOrlcans, has
deem discovered.
The archives Of the city Of Orleans,
contain important evidence on this sub
;;eei In the treasurcr's accounts for 1888,
there is an entry Of eleven francs and
eight sous paid to messengers who had
brought letters from 'Jeannc, la Pucelle.
Under date Of 1876, there is another en-
try of twelve livrcs paid to Jean de Lys,
brother Of Jeanne, Ia Pucelle,' that he
might 90 aud see her. The King of
France enuobled Joau's family, giving
them the appclla'ion of de Lys, derived
from the fcar de iys, on account of her
services TO the state and the entry in the
Orleans records corresponding with and
carroboratcs the one in the registry OF
! Mcn,z which states that the magistrates
of the latter city sent for her brothers to
identify her These totally Independent
sources Of evidence confirm each other in
u still more remarkable manner. In thy
trcasurers accounts of Orleans for the
vcar i3y. there are entries Of various
sums expended for wine. banque,s. and
puhlie rcoioings, on the occasion Of Reb.
crt d Armoisc aud Jeanne, his wife. visit.
ing that city. Also memorandum that
the council, after mature deliberation had
presented to Jeanne d Armsisc the sum
Of ald liyrcs, for the services rendered by
her In the 4cicr of the said city Of Orleans
There are several other documents, o
equally unqucs'ionable authority, confirm
Ing those alrcady quoted here; and th'
only answer made to them by persons VIII
in.is, that Joan was burned is, that the,
are utterly uncxplainnblc.
Il has been urged, however, that Dam
dArmoi.c was mn mpostor; but If sh'
were. why did the brothers Of the rca
Joan recognise and identify her? Ad
hitting that they did. for the purpose d
probing by the fraud, how could the citi
zcns of Orleans, who knew her so well
and fought side hy side with her durin
the memorable scigc. allow themselves t
bc so grossly deceived ? The idea tina
Joan was not burned, but another crimi
nal substituted for her, was so provalen
a, the period, that there are accounts {
several inpostcrs who assumed to be her
aud Of their detection aud punishment
but We never hear of the bame l'Armois
having been punished.
In fine. there are many more argument
in favor Of the opinion that Joan was n,
burned. which need not be cn,crod int
here The French anti4naries, best qua
iacd II form a correct opinion on the sui
icct believe that sic was not burned, b,
kept in prison until after the Duke I
Belford's death, in li35. and then libei
a,cl and so We may leave the qucstio
a very pretty puzzle as it stands,