Saint Joan of Arc (Sackville West)

Critical reception

"Deeply and rightly as one mistrusts the historian who draws too freely on his imagination to fill in the details of the cold outline provided by official documents, there are occasions when it becomes only reasonable for him to do so."

Historians began to criticize this book shortly after its publication. One issue, as indicated in the quotation above, was that Ms. Sackville-West often created many details by engaging in personal speculation. This sometimes included subjects for which documented evidence does exist, but which the author either deliberately ignored or was unaware of. Sackville-West was a novelist rather than a historian, and may have been following the usual habit of novelists to invent plot elements while nonetheless presenting this book as a work of historical fact.

It seems inevitable that such an approach would elicit criticism especially when applied to a personage who is well-documented in historical sources. There are two matters in particular which seem to have sparked the most opposition.

The first issue is Ms. Sackville-West's suggestions with regard to Joan's sexuality, which include the implication (although never explicitly stated) that Joan may have been a lesbian. Historians - and, somewhat paradoxically, Sackville-West herself - have pointed out that this claim was based on nothing more than the standard medieval practice of coping with limited bedspace by having guests share a bed with others of the same gender. Sackville-West herself points out in Chapter VI that Joan's occasional practice during her childhood of having sleepovers with a little girl named Hauviette was "a common custom, especially between girls who had made their first communion together". But the author then cites a Latin translation of Hauviette's description of these sleepovers which Sackville-West claims is "curious" - as if it implies something less common - but without explaining why. Here again is an indirect implication of lesbian activity but without presenting any direct evidence. Joan of Arc was also occasionally bunked with girls such as the nine-year-old child Charlotte Boucher and other girls or women. But the eyewitnesses who mention such situations specify that Joan of Arc was chaste rather than sexually active, therefore any theory proposing a lesbian context to their statements would need to explain how they could be describing lesbian sex while simultaneously saying that Joan didn't have sex at all. This is the case with Marguerite la Touroulde, whom Sackville-West claims had said that Joan had slept with her "on terms of considerable intimacy"; but historians have pointed out that Marguerite la Touroulde had actually said that Joan "was a virgin", and the practice of sleeping in the same bed was the routine custom. Whatever Sackville-West may have meant by "intimacy" - a term which she doesn't elaborate on - an implication of sexual intimacy is not supported by the evidence, but in fact is contradicted by it.

The cross-dressing issue is another point which has provoked criticism or has been contradicted by historians. Although Sackville-West briefly touches upon the practical side of dressing as a soldier while traveling with soldiers through enemy territory, on the other hand the book makes no mention of the other practical side of the issue covered by various historians, an issue which became the crucial context for the final stage of the trial : the need to prevent rape by tying the various parts of her outfit together with cords at the waist, attaching the long boots and underlying hosen to the doublet so they couldn't be pulled off by someone trying to rape her. Joan was convicted of cross-dressing when she put this male clothing back on, but Sackville-West only mentions the issue of attempted rape briefly, and only in order to dismiss it. Sackville-West mentions Martin Ladvenu's statement that Joan told him she had put this clothing back on after having "been raped" - historians have translated his words as "tried to rape" instead - but then dismisses this account by bringing up the unrelated issue of whether Joan knew the Latin words of the "Pater Noster" and "Ave Maria". The book also fails to mention other eyewitnesses who also said Joan had told them she was using this clothing to prevent rape, such as Guillaume Manchon, Pierre Cusquel, and Isambart de la Pierre. Sackville-West does mention Jean Massieu's statement that the English guards had taken away her dress while giving her back the male clothing, then refused to allow her anything else.

Another point of contention concerns the following statement by the author in reference to Joan: "I think it is not unfair to qualify her as unattractive". This statement is based on testimony from several eyewitnesses to the effect that soldiers and other people with whom she spent much time, felt no carnal desire for her. However, these eyewitnesses also said that she was "beautiful and shapely", noting that they were surprised by a lack of desire for her, attributing this to the effect of Divine grace suppressing their normal impulses. Ms. Sackville-West has therefore been criticized for glossing over this context in order to make an unsupportable claim.

Historians have rejected a number of other of the author's interpretations.

Such issues have led some critics to condemn the entire book outright. For example, Bonnie Wheeler of the International Joan of Arc Society and the author of a book about Joan, has stated that the book is "dead wrong". And yet, as a whole, Ms. Sackville-West's treatment of her subject shows a great deal of sympathy and respect. In fact, even her harshest critics generally qualify the book as being one of the most readable treatments of the Joan of Arc story, as the author was a professional and successful novelist.