Divided territories were easier to handle than anything which could produce men of great power at the helm. If they pushed for one Crown heir or another it was for the simple fact that they offered their allegiance and declared no other font of honour than the papacy. Nationalism even if understood as a coherent move could not have meant any more than childish illusions which could not be taken seriously against the vast territories which covered the whole world of the day and which served invading forces as they came and went. The Church misunderstood the power of culture and tradition. Her dominion over heart and mind was based on pure economics having inherited the Roman Empire in her own way. She also underestimated what was to become the world of Nations and which would turn against her precisely because of this ultimate unit of identity. Colour or code, would become important in the fight for common cultural sympathies but the Church would see it all as full of people ready to pay Peter´s pence and support her own religious demands. The Church knew no terrestrial boundaries and working with the potential winners was always the safe bet. In the case of Joan of Arc, they knew that they would have to work with great public transparency before they dared to kill what the new nation would have considered both a saint and ultimate warrior. She would have been incapable of determining what had in fact changed for ever. Joan, as a spiritual and terrestrial leader of such public recognition was not something she could just eliminate overnight and the period of discredit required to undermine the beliefs of a people had not been long or persuasive enough to dull the sense of the superstitious citizens of the country. Whoever conjured her in their name as a martyr would summon greater support than the weakened Church would have over the “nationalized” people in the future.
Only in the understanding the nature and design of each power whether territorial or spiritual can decisions taken by them be seen in the light of public interest. In the case of Joan of Arc, who was to become a leading patron saint of France, the decision to brand her as treacherous to Church and State and kill her before she did further damage, was a very critical move. It was also one that promised to lead nowhere. However, the hate which emanated from the Church establishment of the time against those who preached differently was choleric. The Church was already facing public doubt and disdain that promised to end its rule in the name of Christ. Church and Crowns were to become the main protagonists in feuds which were to lead to wars between them and sometimes, unlikely and delicate alliances with what would be called Holy Roman Emperors. The latter, which was an attempt to create a universal leadership above national crowns would one day face her as an enemy. Such therefore were the considerations that the Church would have had when preparing the ground for a public assassination of a legend. But was it carried out ? Did they dare or perhaps chose a middle road ? Doubts have arisen with respect to this recorded act of poisonous hypocrisy against a figure who had apparently offered her life and victory to her king and God. The former had not even intervened to save her, it would seem and it speaks volumes on the question of honourable response to the hand that feeds. But were there other relevant facts hidden from the public that could have explained such extraordinary behaviour against a national idol ??
It seems that perhaps there were. Joan who was apparently brought up by peasants had real parents and it was later surmised that she had been secretly removed from her parental scene at the assassination of her real father who was, according to many, none other than the very Duke of Normandy and heir to the military leadership of the Normans if not the Franks. On his assassination his only child Joan, it would seem, was handed over to a peasant family to safeguard her identity and prepare her future. The Dukes of Normandy as Bourbon Conti, were to give the Templars a Grand Master and it is said that from there stems a source of support molded by design. Some would even say that Joan on her legendary pedestal demonstrated their hidden hands. If she was of a Royal line and presented as that mythical figure of La Pucelle, it would imply that either she was privy to it all or else was genuinely mentally affected and utilized for the purpose when she started t o preach. Like all things historical at that level, it was a provocation to public credibility but it worked. Not for the Church however , which had its own roles to play in the installation of Royal Crowns. Like the defenseless Princes in the tower of so much romantic literature, she had to go. A new book on the subject now states that Joan was not the one in the pyre and that ten years after the event, having been released from a British prison, she appears in court to claim her ancestral heritage. It makes sense but only because none, as often happens, of the powers of the day dared to lay conclusive claim to this heinous act against the person of a figure which had already risen to such heights . They might, after a time have decided to give her a rebirth as a form of public apology and with things going against them. Having the living corpse and the living legend at the same time, was an answer to any future threat brought about by the deed. They could have even turned it into another miracle leaving the public to work it out. The fact that she was raised to the heights of Saint Joan however (and a very long time after the so called execution), shows how the hidden hands of State and Church have long memories and tread the wires with great caution. Although those who posed as family of Joan and her supposed living person, later claimed they had utilized a look alike to lay their claims, it sounds highly improbable with such a well known face. It sounds more likely to represent an attempt to bow out publicly if things went wrong and especially because of one very strange fact – the uncultivated writing attributed to Joan historically, matched that of the claim for legal rights by the so called “imposter” ? Could the family have been bought off by the French Royals in exchange for the declaration of having falsified the claim that Joan was alive and well. ? Now that would make very good sense. Everybody, including a disillusioned public, Joan and her family and the heirs to her efforts, would have by now, reaped some of the glory, but the Church was quite capable of absorbing all the guilt in her bid for fear as an instrument of power.
blogpay
Total Comments: 0