vol. ii, pp. 438, 457; vol. iii, pp. 100,
219.]

The heavenly source of such purity must needs have been made manifest
by Jeanne's possessing singular immunities. And on this point there is
a mass of evidence. Rough men at arms, Jean de Novelompont, Bertrand
de Poulengy, Jean d'Aulon; great nobles, the Count of Dunois and the
Duke of Alencon, come forward and affirm on oath that in them Jeanne
never provoked any carnal desires. Such a circumstance fills these old
captains with astonishment; they boast of their past vigour and wonder
that for once their youthful ardour should have been damped by a maid.
It seems to them most unnatural and humanly impossible. Their
description of the effect Jeanne produced upon them recalls Saint
Martha's binding of the Tarascon beast. Dunois in his evidence is very
much occupied with miracles. He points to this one as, to human
reason, the most incomprehensible of all. If he neither desired nor
solicited this damsel, of this unique fact he can find but one
explanation, it is that Jeanne was holy, _res divina_. When Jean de
Novelompont and Bertrand de Poulengy describe their sudden continence,
they employ identical forms of speech, affected and involved. And then
there comes a king's equerry, Gobert Thibaut, who declares that in the
army there was much talk of this divine grace, vouchsafed to the
Armagnacs[67] and denied to English and Burgundians, at least, so the
behaviour of a certain knight of Picardy, and of one Jeannotin, a
tailor of Rouen, would lead us to believe.[68]

[Footnote 67: _Trial_, vol. ii, p. 438; vol. iii, pp. 15, 76, 100,
219, and 457.]

[Footnote 68: _Trial_, vol. iii, pp. 89 and 121.]

Such evidence obviously answers to the ideas of the judges, and turns,
so to speak, on theological rather than on natural facts.

In inquisitorial inquiries there abound such depositions as those of
Jean de Novelompont and of Bertrand de Poulengy, containing passages
drawn up in identical terms. But I must admit that in the
rehabilitation trial they are rare, partly because the witnesses were
heard at long intervals of time and in different countries, and partly
because in the Maid's case no elaborate proceedings were necessary
owing to her adversaries not being represented.

It is to be regretted that all the evidence given at this trial, with
the exception of that of Jean d'Aulon, should have been translated
into Latin. This process has obscured fine shades of thought and
d