Talk:Pierre Cauchon

Untitled

Revised two line stub with translation from the French Wikipedia. Durova 18:27, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorcery vs. heresy

Someone changed the wording on this technical point. According to this court's narrow interpretation of Deuteronomy 22:5, Joan of Arc's assumption of male clothing was heresy. A second trial concluded that their analysis was flawed, but that is a separate matter from the point raised here. The final twelve articles of accusation accuse her of consorting with devils, which constitutes sorcery rather than heresy. Now here's where things get sticky: they couldn't make that an actual charge. The wife of the regent of England had declared that Joan was a virgin, which precluded the court from charging her with witchcraft (all very strange to modern ears, but this was the way their legal system worked).

So to cut to the chase, the court wanted to work sorcery into the proceeding. Durova 06:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Payment

It is claimed that he was "well paid for his efforts" to "gain Joan of Arc from the Burgundians for the English". Is there any evidence in support of this defamatory allegation? The conventional wisdom is that the trial was fair in his eyes, and that as it was his diocese he had every right to try heresy charges.Royalcourtier (talk) 09:06, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Excommunication of Cauchon?

The statement on the excommunication uses a quote from The Tablet below Another "reliable" English-language source for this claim seems to be the Cauchon article in the 1910 Encyclopaedia Britannica, which relies on an French-language article in:

Cerf, Charles (1898). "Pierre Cauchon de Sommiévre, Chanoine de Reims et de Beauvais, Évéque de Beauvais et de Lisieux, Son Origine, ses Dignités, sa Mort et sa Sépulture" [Pierre Cauchon of Sommiévre, Canon of Reims and Beauvais, Bishop of Beauvais, his origin, his dignities, his death and entombment]. Des Travaux de L'Académie de Reims [Transactions of the Academy of Reims] (in French). 101. p. 15.

The Brittanica article appears to be a misreading of an isolated sentence. (It also claims it was done by a Callixtus IV, Callixtus III was the last). Cerf's page linked above, if read in full, Cerf makes the argument that if Cauchon had been excommunicated by Callixtus III and his body thrown in a ditch, the Chapter at Reims would not have continued to celebrate a mass for his repose every December, and his remains would not continue to lie Liseaux as attested as late as 1620. Also see Olivier Bouzy's note in Fresh Verdicts on Joan of Arc that Cauchon's body remains in Liseaux. If a more reliable source than these two can be found that Cauchon was posthumously excommunicated that would be great. Wtfiv (talk) 02:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

References

Material related to sock puppet issues

I recently edited material added from many years back that may be associated with long-term sock puppet issues that could have a direct impact on the integrity of this article. see User:Durova/Complex vandalism at Joan of Arc Wtfiv (talk) 03:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)