Amen

What the English did to her was part and parcel of the period, but the biggest fault must lie with Charles VII, who (even with ample opportunities to save her) left her to her fate because he doubted her divinity. It was only after her demise that he declared her a martyr and a Saint.

I totally agree with you and I feel the same way about Mary Queen of Scots. I enjoy watching documentaries about historians and this one lady, Claire Ridgeway, is a Tudor historian. I'm not English but I'm a Scottish French American and even though my one side of the family did go to England during the Norman invasion, they didn't stay there long, and then they went on to Scotland. if I have any English ancestry in me at all it's on my mother's side of the family and I know about my dad's. I made a comment about Queen Elizabeth because for years her legitimacy was challenged because her father technically married her mother when he was still married to Catherine of Aragon. because Henry was impatient, even according to the Church of England and English law his marriage to Anne Boleyn was null and void and Elizabeth was illegitimate from the start. After Mary Tudor died the throne should have gone to Mary Queen of Scots despite Henry putting Elizabeth in the line of succession. it doesn't have anything to do with religion but rather to do with the fact that Elizabeth was illegitimate. I'm glad Mary Queen of Scots never really wanted the throne in England but only to be named Elizabeth's successor. Mary Queen of Scots was very kind and said that regardless of everything she was still King Henry VIII daughter, and she challenged Henry II of France about that because Mary Queen of Scots was the Dauphine and married to the Future King Francis II. Mary Tudor died in 1558 and Henry II wanted Mary to go into England and claim the throne because he said that it was her throne because she was next in line as an heir. here's a 16 year old teen standing up to a 39 year old man telling him no. Mary was no ordinary Queen and she had been Queen of Scotland since she was six days old and Henry was no man but the king of France. every Catholic country in the Vatican supported it but Mary Queen of Scots wanted nothing to do with going into England. BUT when her second husband the king consort in Scotland was assassinated, she wasn't certain how it happened or who did it but she knew that she wasn't safe. Years and years later our research and discovered that it was actually the Protestant Council in Scotland that assassinated her husband and had James Bothwell do the worst part of the Dirty Work. Mary was not supposed to know about any of this or she could have gotten brought up on charges or lost her throne. her second husband was a wretch of a man and he didn't show his true colors until after they were wed and he was a drunk and a whoremonger, stole money from the Scottish treasury chest and then attacks Mary when she refused to give him King matrimonial in Scotland. it was better off that he was killed and I'm against murder but he was a terrible terrible person and he would have killed her & taken her throne to be king had she given him King matrimonium. Mary was not about to give it to him and he became more and more hostile, drunk, & he had some Englishmen come in and kill her secretary and they all stabbed him 57 times right in front of her when she was six months pregnant. her own husband and King consort of Scotland was the last one to stick a knife in David rizzio. Rizzio was such a nice person and protective of Mary. I was commenting on the Queen Elizabeth page about how Elizabeth didn't get married or have children and I can understand why, but had her father gotten ahold of her he would have beaten the crap out of her for destroying his dynasty by not having an heir. the amazing thing out of her not ever marrying is that Mary Queen of Scots had already been executed by Queen Elizabeth when she didn't do anything wrong. the English Court wrote up some false documentation and showed it to Queen Elizabeth and put Mary on trial for treason. William Cecil, Elizabeth's Secretary of State, had done everything he could do for 18 years to try to get Elizabeth to execute Mary Queen of Scots and she wouldn't do it. Cecil believed the Catholics the Vatican and surrounding Catholic countries we're going to invade England because Mary Queen of Scots and was living in England and various castles essentially on house arrest. Mary could go outside and horseback ride but she always had to have guards with her because Elizabeth did not want to have Mary kidnapped by a group full of Catholics and have an uprising with the backing of surrounding Catholic countries to invade and take her off the throne room and put marry there. Mary Queen of Scots was killed when she was innocent of so many things and she was not dumb like some of the British like to call her. Mary Queen of Scots was clever and very very intelligent, but she did her duty as Monarch and that is to continue the dynasty by having an heir. she fled from gotland because her Protestant Council had turned on her and held a knife to her throat and illegally made her abdicate from the throne. her son was only a year old and she has not done anything wrong except that she was scared for her life and she married Lord Bothwell about three months after her second husband died and she wasn't in love with him but married him for protection because he was very close friends with her and loyal to her. he was on the council and he had a Feeling about what was going on and how they were trying to force Mary out even if they had to do her like they did her deceased husband. Mary Queen of Scots flees to England to see if she can get help from her cousin Elizabeth. Elizabeth kept her there in a castle with guards but what Mary was trying to do was gather an army of people to go back to Scotland with her so she could retake her throne. Because Mary wanted her country back all of those years, Elizabeth's Secretary of State had convinced Elizabeth finally once Elizabeth was old, that Mary Queen of Scots was actually trying to take her out. politics is ugly business but all throughout history English Court Has always been the most lying, conniving, and deceitful bunch of people. their own council members would stab one another in the back and spread lies about them just to gain power and have them killed. Karma works in mysterious ways and even Mary Queen of Scots was unjustly killed just as Joan of Arc, but in the end Mary Queen of Scots son, King James, became Elizabeth successor since his mom was already dead and that ultimately combined England and Scotland. there was peace between the two regions as long as the Stuarts were on the throne but after the Stuarts were no longer on the throne & Hanoverians were, the cramp started busting loose again between the British and Scottish.

Montre' Louise Bohon-Harris what a lot of nonsensical babble. You don’t even get the basics right. Mary Queen of Scots was not Henry VIII’s daughter, her grandmother was Henry’s sister. Mary was considered to be a “loose women” by the Protestant Lords and suspected of sleeping with Rizzio, who was possibly the father of James I. Mary was not the Dauphine, she married him, Francis II. She refused to renounce her claim to the English throne and her approval of a plot to murder Elizabeth led to her execution. If you read Scottish , or French history you’ll find it was just as murderous and back stabbing as the English Court.

@@montrelouisebohon-harris7023 thank you for your comment ..as lover of history ..I appreciate it and agree a hundred percent

@@thatismattjohnsonjohnson3146 Please do not give them ideas.

An unfair trial. It was a sham. Satan ruled the Court.

“No fake b*tches” -Jeanne d’Arc

I wonder on what basis they decided angels couldn't manifest in visual form and when and why they decided this.

@@rosebud4387 They didn't actually believe that, as I said. This video is repeating a misconception about medieval theology that was made up in modern times as an attempt to try to explain why the tribunal opposed her, but that's not actually what the medieval Church taught, and it's not why the tribunal opposed her.

It was to keep the men from sexualizing her. you have to understand they go months even years without being with a woman. when you have a woman in camp, making her dress like them takes a lot of the pressures off of being raped By the men who are supposed to protect her 🤨

@@Aquarius7999 She was wearing a type of soldiers' clothing that had cords to lace the different parts of it together, which would make it difficult for someone to pull her clothing off.

Acta Diurna Are you really serious 🤨we’re talking about a camp full of men of few thousands 1000 😂 😆 🤣So basically you’re saying one horny soldier couldn’t get through that 🤣

What French! Salad dressing maybe!!!!!!

She was not a peasant girl ! She was a brilliant young woman, with an education, speaking various dialects. She was not caring for farm animals...she mentioned that fact, at the first trial. She was answering all the questions , better than all clerics, including the bishops or the experts in religious Canon law. Her father, Jacque was the ''prévot' of the entire region, under Robert de Bandricourt . Also, her father rented a castle de l'Isle during the Bourguinons' invasion of the Barrois region. Her father' brother, Nicolas , his wife was a ''Dame de Compagnie'' at the Court of Charles VII. This is an important family. They are dealing with the Aristocracy ! In 1428, at the Court of the Duke of Lorraine , Jehanne la Pucelle , was doing jousting ( running a lance ) and the Duke mentioned that she was as good, even better than most of his men ! NO peasant girl, here !

@@RayB1656 My opinion she could read, she probably kept her education secret. Since at that time, that could be considered heresy and unbecoming to have a literate educated woman. Some other accounts of woman even of actual peasantry means, became literate and it often was kept secret so both their educator and the women weren't ridiculed or worse. It's sort of dumb this narrator keeps calling her a peasant after explaining her upbringing wasn't of peasantry, but a land owning farmer and minor title holder of town watch. He keeps doing it too as I'm typing this... weird. The narrator needs to have a memory longer than than 30 minutes, and maybe he would stop and say wait... But she was amazing for her day in age. She should have crowned herself queen. At least than France would have had something stronger than tiny testicles. Strong ovaries instead. ;)~

@@jmitterii2 Joan of Arc... afraid to speak up??? About..... a secret education?? lol. Doesn't seem likely.

@@britay337 Yes, there was no secret education. In the 15th century, numerous women were highly educated. And, the population was travelling all over. ( Pilgrimages ). Jehanne la Pucelle was certainly well educated, spoke various dialects and her father was the prévot of the entire region ! Her mother Romée Vouthon Ysabeau de Salm was from a small noble family , from the Vosges area. Since the family house was a few meters from the Meuse River which was the border between the Holy Germanic Empire and the Barrois region and Jehanne being in Tull, in 1428, by herself, to annul the marriage promise, accepted by her father a few years earlier, she had to speak a different dialect since Tull, was being part of the Holy Germanic Empire. ( Bishop of Metz ) A young woman doing jousting at the Court of the Duke of Lorraine had certainly the training and the education to the function properly with the Aristocracy. On the 7th of May 1429, when the Tourelles' bridge collapsed and William Glasdale was killed, Jehanne insisted that his body was to be brought out of the water and given back to the English ! And, it was done ! At Jargeau, Suffolk and many English lords were suddenly prisoners , guarded by a few French Knights, however, because of the battle intensity and the frustrations, some French foot soldiers wanted to kill all the English and burning the town, including the churches. Jehanne took Suffolk and the English lords , they were all taken on board a boat and she sent them to Orléans... She was already showing diplomatic qualities and wisdom ! The late 15th and 16th century writers mentioned the English remembered that gesture ! Most on this thread are wondering how she was able to answer all the questions at the trial with such brilliance, agility and sound judgment ! Jehanne la Pucelle, a brilliant woman from the 15th century !

She was illiterate, she would often put a cross instead of signing her name and multiple times in the trial she says she is not sure what words were written on her banner and other things. Joan did not go to school, nor was she ever seen reading or writing anything other than her name. She probably signed the confession without knowing exactly what it said

I strongly agree as well

Thanks for sharing!

I'm American but my family are Scottish and French, and I've studied so much European history. The English and Saxon Empires have been nothing but backstabbing Liars and cold cruel killers. Their own council members working together would backstab one another to get the monarchs favor to be granted titles and land, and then make up stories to have someone tried and executed. Henry VIII killed over 75,000 people in 17 years!! His illegitimate daughter Elizabeth should have never been Queen Anne England and actually it should have been Mary Queen of Scots, but Mary never wanted that Throne because she was always Queen of Scotland and she was Queen consort of France for two years. So heartbreaking that King Francis II died so young because the Valois line would have lasted longer and it's possible with Mary and Francis ruling in France that they would not have had the severe Bloodshed that occurred when Francis' younger two brothers were on the throne because they were only kids and his mother was Regent. Catherine Medici was in full power for about 20 years and her strict Catholic faith against the Protestants in France resulted in a lot of Bloodshed and the assassination of her youngest son and the end of the Valois line ( dynasty). the Bourbon family took over after that. My favorite historical subject is the Ottoman Empire and how they defeated the Roman Empire!! I was watching this film on that for days on end.

Montre' Louise Bohon-Harris So the English were just the same as any country then You say you studied history especially the Ottoman Empire But some how we were the worst lol

Montre' Louise Bohon-Harris You really seem to have it in for the English

Your ancestors fought the British not the English.

She was older than 19 ; she was born around 1407 ! Jehanne la Pucelle, not d'Arc, at 20 year old was in the city of Tull , Holy Germanic Empire, to annul a marriage promise which was accepted by her father , a few years before. She left for France, a year after. She was then 21 or 22, in 1429. The youngest of the family was born in late 1408. How could she be younger than the youngest of the family !

@@RayB1656 source?

@@RayB1656 wha-? I just want the website or book you got your information from

@@thenorthwillow1536 -- Her journey to the city of Toul !

@@thenorthwillow1536 Prof Henri Guillemin, French historian !

ONE LiFE ONE VISION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOLO

@@vincentp.locollo3343 Not so witnessed by the millions of NDE's who are told by God that they we are an eternal living soul, returned back to Paradise home base, refreshed for another reincarnation, and Paradise kept under control from people seeking retribution from those who have unjustly taken opportunity of them; by God infusing souls with an overbearing passions of love mercy and forgiveness; witnessed by all NDE's Obviously, it does not work that well; for while walking around Paradise, your true nature and pass behaviour must show. Is that why souls leave Paradise and to distance themselves from that shame--go walking on earth as ghost, of which some of us see them sometimes and clairvoyance see and talk to them all the time, as witnessed by them on Dr. Oz and Oprah Winfrey shows. And regression therapy now is well understood proving our pass life experiences. Gaston

You have one life. I will live again after I die. Maybe you should start praying to Jesus, he can help you and give you eternal life.

@@christianriddler5063 no you won't

Genius are geniuses, the truth was she was one, while her predecessors where not much bright

@teslagod2003 Jehanne la Pucelle was a brilliant woman. She was not a young girl, she was a woman. If you read the first authors of the late 15th and 16th century and the Latin document , De Rebus gesti Francorum, she was about 21 or 22 when she arrived in Chinon, with Yolande d'Anjou. Please remember that Yolande d'Anjou is the mastermind behind all the scenes and she had the authority. Not the Dauphin. Jehanne spoke a few dialects, remember she as at the city of Tull, Holy Germanic Empire, by herself, when she was 20 year old. She was in Tull ( today's Toul ) to cancel a marriage' promise which was accepted by her father a few years before. The fiancé was quite upset. ( from the Bishop of Metz ) She was also at the Court of the Duke of Lorraine, running a lance. Her father was the ''prévôt'' of the region under Robert de Baudricourt, Baudricourt was the son of the Chamberlain of the Duke of Bar. What a small word, Yolande d'Anjou's father , was Robert , Duke of Bar. The Catholic Church of Normandy was under the control of the English Aristocracy. Jehanne la Pucelle was declared an heretic for political reason. Since Charles VII had used an ''heretic'' , an ''evil entity'' to obtain the Crown, the English believed they had reasons to invalidate Charles' coronation at Reims. To deflect the English action, Regnault de Chartres, archbishop of Rheims , suggested to Charles to rehabilitate Jehanne la Pucelle. It was done in 1455/56 with a new trial, the Rehabilitation Trial. This amazing story was always a political story, a story of struggle between the French Aristocracy , the English Aristocracy and naturally, the Burgundians. However, by the middle of the 19th century, it became slowly a religious story ; the Franco-German War of 1870/71 and turmoil in Paris during that period it became important to find a national hero, a saint, for the nation. That is why , now called the Maid of Orléans, the Church of Paris requested from the Vatican , in 1879, the Sainthood process and she became a Saint, after many years in 1920.

@@RayB1656 she was 19 when she died ,.. so yes she was young...

@@michaelhawkins7389 all the contemporaries noted that Jehanne la Pucelle was 21 year old when she arrived for the first time , at Chinon to meet the Dauphin with Yolande d'Anjou. This makes sense since according to the Bishop of Metz, she was about 20 year old , in Tull , that was in 1428. Also, on average , 7 years were required for young aristocrats to mount a Medieval war horse and to survive a 15th century battlefield ! You seems to have additional material, concerning her age, please provide and share the info. Concerning the wording ''young'' , everyone would have a personal interpretation, no quarrel with your opinion .

True. But present youngsters can’t even survive by themselves

"good trouble"

Why would the English appreciate her?

It's kind comments like this that make all our work worth while.

Freedom from the French ruled English.

@Ashtaroth Solemn Hypnotic no, that can't possibly be a thing

@@RayB1656 , Satan destroys humans on a different level. Satan sticks around for all mankind throughout the ages. Catherine was a Saint. Michael is an Arc Angel. The Vatican doesn't know anything. Joan of Arc has huge Status in Heaven.✨

Laura Smith. Believe you.

@@RayB1656 Well, they did exist. They existed when she saw them. ( assuming she did )

Where does the Bible talk of levels of heaven?

Bear in mind she was tried in a French court and betrayed by the French to the English. A shameful fact that the French play down.

@@andrewrobinson8447 I agree, that was indeed shameful.

In France her name is Jeanne you are correct, but in English it's Joan, this is an English language video after all.

Not sure Caman

@@PeopleProfiles Isn't that like saying that it would be okay to change someone's Italian name "Giovanni" to "John" when speaking to English people? Just as if a English person named Matthew was to present himself as Matteo when they asked him what his name was in Italy...I think it would be a bit odd as that's not their actual name.

@@farzana017 I completely agree, she should be known as her real and only name in whatever language "Jeanne d'Arc"' and not Joan (Johanne in french).

Jehanne la pucelle During the first part of the 15th century , the meaning of ''Pucelle'' meant a ''Servant'' !

Glad you enjoyed it

Her capture at near Compiègne, was a surprise. She never saw it coming, even her Scottish guards/escort ! She was taken easily including her brother. It was the perfect set-up entrapment. The Burgundians were advised to hide behind a small hill, nearby, in early evening ! They had a stronger force. Who provided the info ? As she was ready to entered the main bridge, Guillaume de Flavy close the main gate. Who was Flavy ?

You love special attention don’t you little man

We will be doing a video on him and Charles VII for sure.

@@PeopleProfiles wasn't Charles VII nuttier then fruit cake or am i mistaken

Charles V of France was successful , he had Bertrand du Guesclin, a Breton Knight, called the Eagle of Brittany ! Sadly, Charles V was succeeded by his son, Charles VI which had a mental illness. Charles VII was a depressive individual and received help all his life.

@@smiller3995 yes he was a basket case he had iron rods sewn into his clothes as he thought he was made of glass

King Charles is the cause of Joan's death! he could have saved her but he didn't want a 19 year old girl leading his army bad politics they were more loyal to her than him

I liked that one too

Heydrich was quite the character.

Lily Scarlet Good luck with your work.

Not dying from disease is remarkable in itself, much less medieval combat.

VideoCrowNest With respect, I would have thought her deeds were spectacular for any era.

Joan was also famously able to convince La Hire to pray, which no one else ever managed. He was famous for his "sinful" (for the time) and non-pious nature.

@@jf3097 OOF, true though.

I respect your faith, yet , there were no voices or visions since Saint Catherine of Alexandria and Saint Marguerite of Antioch never existed. They were part of the Medieval folklore. The Vatican removed these two saints from the Roman Catholic Calendar of Saints in 1969. During that year, nearly 100 saints were removed since they stories came from legends. Concerning Michael the Archangel, he was a popular ''saint' in the Middle Ages , mainly because of Mount Saint-Michel , in Normandy they resisted the English numerous times and St Michel was never really conquered by the English. For the general population , it was a Sign from God...

Yea keep trying to make yourself more than what you are

That's a matter of opinion.

Jehanne was a brilliant woman with a temper , a warrior and certainly an inspiration with the help of Yolande d'Anjou, however she was not a ''mystic'' !

@@RayB1656 I see you scurrying about comment sections on the topic of Joan of Arc, spreading false informations and theories that have been completely debunked. Honestly you should get a life and stop it. Yes, Joan of Arc was a mystic, and she is a saint, and though she wasn't a litteral peasant but rather the daughter of a fortunate farmer, she still wasn't part of some royal plot as you claim.

@@remilenoir1271 You should stop spreading false info especially without providing an historical explanation. Honestly, real history books could be useful in your case. What is '' a fortunate farmer'' ! Totally illogical . Being the ''prévôt'' of the region under Robert de Bandricourt...you do NOT become suddenly a fortunate farmer ! Joan of Arc, you say ! She never used that particular family name during her lifetime ! Jehanne la Pucelle was not a mystic. Because you do not understand Medieval history , you used the '' mystic world'' to try to understand this political story. Why using the unknown, the divine or other mysterious forces to explain a struggle from the early 15th century ?? WHY ? Jehanne la Pucelle became a saint only in 1920 and the sainthood request to the Vatican was sent in 1879 . Viewing you name, you should really know why it was sent only in 1879 !!! Also, take the time to read the first authors from the late 15th and the early 16th century , you will have a total different story from today's modern books and a'' teenage girl'' . It should be easy for you, being written in Medieval French. There were no political '' plots'' only a political agenda to stop the English aristocracy and their quest to obtain the Crown. Jehanne la Pucelle was not part of a ''politacl plot'' , yet Yolande d'Anjou and her son René d'Anjou were ! Vous avez tous cette déplaisante habitude de modifier l'histoire pour votre propre agenda politique.

@@RayB1656 By fortunate I meant "prosperous", not "lucky". I've read the books don't worry, but contrary to you, I don't pick and choose whatever fits my own interpretation. I already know this was not the name she went by, however this is the name everyone knows her by so I will use it as such. By the way, "la pucelle" wasn't her name either, it was a title due to her youth and virginity. Her name was just "Jehanne". It doesn't matter that she was only canonised recently. A canonisation doesn't make someone a Saint, it is only a confirmation from the Church that this person is a Saint. Joan of Arc was a saint, by all accounts. And a mystic. You say there wasn't any plot, and yet proceed to say there was a political "agenda"; which is basically the same thing. Plots are devised to fulfill agendas. Writers from the late 15th and 16th century didn't have access to the transcript of the trial and counter trial. We do. There are lots of myths around Joan of Arc, your revisionist story is one of them.

@@remilenoir1271 Fine, Jacque was prosperous... however, why he became prosperous ? To say that you have read books concerning the events of Jehanne la Pucelle is easy, named the ones you have read and why you believe in them. It is said that there are more than 20,000 books on the subject and they are mostly all different. You know why they are different ? There are more than 50 excellent books from the early 16th century and they all have something in common , a political story ! Which one you have read ? If you knew about Medieval history you should know by now, that the french word '' pucelle'' in the early 15th century meant a ''servant '' and it had nothing to do with a ''Virgin'' . This is one of the errors of the modern world. The meaning of ''pucelle'' was changed later during the latter part of the 15th century to a ''virgin'' and was used by Charles VII for his political Rehabilitation Trial. The famous transcript ! How do know that the early authors didn't have access to the first trial notes ? Simple, you do not know this. You own interpretation only. The 'transcript'' was written in Medieval Latin and rewritten 2 years after. And, there are numerous versions and slightly different. Which one you prefer ? One example, the Fierbois' sword. There are 4 different stories about how Jehanne la Pucelle obtained that sword...which one you prefer ? Jehanne la Pucelle had 5 swords, which one she liked the best ? I am not interested in myths or legends especially that particular story from about 1840, where it was changed for the benefit of the population and the unrest during the Franco-German war of 1870. You really believe that the request to the Vatican in 1879 was a coincidence ?? Not interested in the visions or the voices... how can you have a conversation with a saint who never existed ? History is similar to Science, the understanding of past events changed as we understand them better, like Science it is evolution and patience is needed. To try to understand what we do not understand totally using the ''unknown'' is futile. Why not accept Jehanne la Pucelle as a brilliant young woman from the Barrois region ( not a girl ) for her own efforts and contribution in this aristocratic struggle during the Hundred Year War who was at the end, used , abused and abandoned at the end !

Nonsense !

Jehanne didn't speak to God. Her voices were from Michael , Saint Katherine and Marguerite. However, we know today that both Katherine and Marguerite never existed...

Neferiti Sounds like it.

The dead can't hear you. Pray to Jesus instead, the living God.

@@christianriddler5063 she is a Saint. Therefore she can pray for us.

@@ultravioletspirit No she can't. Psalm 135:17: 16They have mouths, but cannot speak; they have eyes, but cannot see; 17they have ears, but cannot hear; nor is there breath in their mouths.

@@christianriddler5063 yes she can because she is a Saint not a normal human

@@ultravioletspirit Everyone who is saved is also a saint and also being a saint does not make you above humans nor does it make you different from humans. None of what you are saying is in the bible.. lol

Trojanette83 Her parents and other family relations received some entitlements, I think. Seem to remember reading, some time later after her death this happened.

Her father wanted her dead.He told her brothers to take her and drown her in the river,but they did not do it.As a matter of fact two of her brothers joined the military with her to fight.

@@danielagreen1799 Are you dumb ? Her father once had a dream about Joan leaving his house with soldiers and upon imforming his family of that dream he said to her brothers that he would drown her with his own hands if it ever happened, and that they should do it if he lacked the will to do so by himself. What he meant by that is that he would kill her if she became a prostitute. Because that was the only way he could interpret that vision of a young woman leaving her house to accompany a group of men. What he didn't know was that she was to leave his house as a soldier herself, not a prostitute.

The old testament , the Hebrew Bible and the story of Jehanne.... I do not see the connection !