Page:A history of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, volume 3.djvu/368

 352 POLITICAL HERESY.— THE STATE. All Europe was aroused with so portentous an apparition. It was not only statesmen and warriors that watched with astonish- ment the strange vicissitudes of the contest, but learned men and theologians were divided in opinion as to whether she was under the influence of heavenly or of infernal spirits, and were every- where disputing and writing tracts to uphold the one opinion or the other. In England, of course, there was no dissent from the popular belief which Shakespeare puts in the mouth of Talbot — " A witch by fear, not force, like Hannibal, Drives back our troops and conquers as she lists." So general, indeed, was the terror that she excited that when, in May, 1430, it was proposed to send Henry VI. to Paris for corona- tion, both captains and soldiers in the levies appointed for his escort deserted and lay in hiding ; and when, in December, after Joan lay a prisoner in Rouen Castle and the voyage was performed, the same trouble was experienced, requiring another proclama- tion to the sheriffs for the arrest of those who were daily desert- ing, to the great peril of the royal person and of the kingdom of France. Elsewhere the matter was not thus taken for granted, and was elaborately argued with all the resources of scholastic logic. Some tracts of this character attributed to Gerson have been preserved, and exhibit to us the nature of the doubts which suggested themselves to the learned of the time — whether Joan is a woman or a phantasm ; whether her acts are to be considered as divine or phitonic and illusory ; whether, if they are the result of supernatural causes, they come from good or evil spirits. To Joan's defenders the main difficulty was her wearing male attire and cutting her hair short — an offence which in the end proved to be the most tangible one to justify her condemnation. Even her advocates in the schools felt that in this the case was weak. It had to be admitted that the Old Law prohibits a woman from wearing man's garments, but this, it was argued, was purely juridical, and was not binding under the Xew Law ; it had merely a moral object, to prevent indecency, and the circumstances and objects were to be considered, so that the law could not be held to pro- hibit manly and military vesture to Joan, who was both manly and financial results caused its limitation to the male lines for the future (Vallet de Yiriville, Charles du Lis, pp. 24, 88).