e by the Archbishop of Embrun to King Charles;
he, on the contrary, recommended him not to abandon the means inspired
by human reason.[101]

[Footnote 101: The Reverend Father M. Fornier, _Histoire des
Alpes-Maritimes_, Paris, 1890, in 8vo, vol. ii, p. 324; Lanery d'Arc,
_Memoires et consultations_, pp. 565 _et seq._]

It has frequently been repeated that the lords and captains were
jealous of her, especially old Gaucourt.[102] But such a statement
shows an absolute ignorance of human nature. They were envious one of
another; this and no other sentiment was the jealousy that made them
tolerate the Maid's assuming the title of commander in war.[103]

[Footnote 102: _Trial_, vol. iii, p. 117; _Perceval de Cagny_, p. 168;
Marquis de Gaucourt, _Le sire de Gaucourt_, Orleans, 1855, in 8vo.]

[Footnote 103: _Perceval de Cagny_, pp. 168, 170, 171; _Cronicques de
Normendie_, ed. Hellot, pp. 77, 78.]

Those secret intrigues on the part of the King and his captains, who
are said to have plotted together the destruction of the saint, I
admit having found it impossible to discover. To certain historians
they appear very obvious: for my part, do what I may, I cannot discern
them. The Chamberlain, the Sire de la Tremouille, had no pretensions
to nobility of character; and the Chancellor Regnault de Chartres was
hard-hearted, but what strikes me is that the Sire de la Tremouille
refused to give up this valuable damsel to the Duke of Alencon when he
asked for her, and that the Chancellor retained her in order to make
use of her.[104] I am not of the opinion that Jeanne was a prisoner at
Sully. I believe that when she went to join the Chancellor, who
employed her until her capture by the Burgundians, she quitted the
castle in estate, with trumpeters, and banners flying. After the girl
saint he employed a boy saint, a shepherd who had stigmata; which
proves that he did not regret having made use of a devout person to
fight against the King's enemies and to recover his own archbishopric.

[Footnote 104: _Perceval de Cagny_, pp. 170, 171; _Chronique de la
Pucelle_, p. 313; Heraut Berry, in _Trial_, vol. iv, p. 48.]

The excellent Quicherat and the magnanimous Henri Martin are very hard
on the Government of 1428. According to them it was a treacherous
Government. Yet the only reproach they bring against Charles VII and
his councillors is that they did not understand the Maid as they
themselves understood her. But such an understandin