rds
false or falsified, as, for example, the patent of nobility of Guy de
Cailly.[76]

[Footnote 76: _Trial_, vol. v, pp. 342 _et seq._]

Rapid as this examination of authorities has been, I think nothing
essential has been omitted. To sum up, even in her lifetime the Maid
was scarce known save by fables. Her oldest chroniclers were devoid of
any critical sense, for the early legends concerning her they relate
as facts.

The Rouen trial, certain accounts, a few letters, sundry deeds, public
and private, are the most trustworthy documents. The rehabilitation
trial is also useful to the historian, provided always that we
remember how and why that trial was conducted.

By means of such records we may attain to a pretty accurate knowledge
of Jeanne d'Arc's life and character.

The salient fact which results from a study of all these authorities
is that she was a saint. She was a saint with all the attributes of
fifteenth-century sanctity. She had visions, and these visions were
neither feigned nor counterfeited. She really believed that she heard
the voices which spoke to her and came from no human lips. These
voices generally addressed her clearly and in words she could
understand. She heard them best in the woods and when the bells were
ringing. She saw forms, she said, like myriads of tiny shapes, like
sparks on a dazzling background. There is no doubt she had visions of
another nature, since she tells us how she beheld Saint Michael in the
guise of a _prud'homme_, that is as a good knight, and Saint Catherine
and Saint Margaret, wearing crowns. She saw them saluting her; she
kissed their feet and inhaled their sweet perfume.

What does this mean if not that she was subject to hallucinations of
hearing, sight, touch, and smell? But the most strongly affected of
her senses was her hearing. She says that her voices appear to her;
she sometimes calls them her council. She hears them very plainly
unless there is a noise around her. Generally she obeys them; but
sometimes she resists. We may doubt whether her visions were really so
distinct as she makes out. Because she either could not, or would not,
she never gave her judges at Rouen any very clear or precise
description of them. The angel she described most in detail was the
one which brought the crown, and which she afterwards confessed to
have seen only in imagination.

At what age did she become subject to these trances? We cannot say
exactly. But it was proba