Joan’s
Violated
“Purity”?
Jeanne d'Arc |
Much has been and will continue to be
written about Jeanne d’Arc. (Joan of Arc in English) Her story is one of the
strangest and yet one of the most compelling stories to have really happened.
If it had been made up it would have been dismissed as unbelievable. Many small
mysteries still remain concerning her life and mission. We do not have for
example a clear idea of when she was born for one.1
One small mystery is the question of
what precisely happened to her after her recantation in Rouen before she recanted her recantation. In other words was Jeanne raped?
Two brief articles reject this idea on
the grounds that it is contradicted by Jeanne’s own testimony afterwards and
shortly before her execution.2 These arguments are flawed in many respects.
In order to get the argument straight
that I am making a quick go through of what do we mean by the term rape? Rape
recently has acquired the connotation of any sort of sexual assault. In fact in
Canada "Rape” is no longer an actual offence it has been replaced by “Sexual Assault”.
The only distinction is between attempted and completed versions of the
offence.
The offence itself is basically physical
assault of a sexual nature this replaced the old idea of “rape”. The reason was
that traditionally “rape’ was an extremely narrow type of offence. To put it
most bluntly “rape” was traditionally coerced penetration by a penis into a
women’s vagina. In Some jurisdictions there was the requirement was that the
penetration had to result in ejaculation into the vagina for “rape” to have occurred.3
It is important to note that with this
definition of rape, forcible penetration of either the anal or oral orifices
was not “rape”, neither was any form of sexual assault that did not involve
penis penetration of the vagina. Thus in this definition there was no such an
offence as Homosexual rape. Further such penetration could not partial or
momentary it had to be “full and complete”. Not surprisingly given that rape is frequently
extremely traumatic for the victim this helped to make it hard to prove.4
There is no need here to go into the
various myths about rape or the fact that until recently rape was subject to a
whole series of victim blaming myths that made it hard for women to come
forward let alone prove that a rape had occurred.5
It is here pertinent to know that
because “rape” until recently required a very specific act that the victim in a
trial for “rape” was frequently subjected to detailed questioning about the
exactly what happened. An experience that was not surprisingly quite upsetting
and demoralizing to the victim being subject to such intimidating questioning.
Thus a Defence Attorney would ask questions about exactly when and how the
alleged assailant had penetrated her. That combined with myths and sometimes
the legal requirement that a rape victim be of “chaste” character intimidated
many rape victims into not testifying.6
Now the reason why this is important is
that during the time of Jeanne d’Arc “rape” was in fact conceived of in
precisely the manner described; basically forcible penis penetration of the
vagina. Penetration of other bodily orifices other than the vagina was not “rape”.
Thus a women who was sexually assaulted but not vaginally raped was not only
still a virgin in that so long has her vagina had not been penetrated and her
hymen remain intact she was still a virgin, but that she had not been “raped”.
Before during and after Jeanne d’Arc’s
time virginity was highly valued in Christian society as an indication of
purity and virtue. Virgins were believed to have a special sanctity and power.
To lose that was to lose a special sort of access to God. Jeanne d’Arc believed
and was believed by others to have had through her virginity special access to
God; a special purity that gave her a sort of divine power that enabled her to
accomplish great things.7
There is no doubt that Jeanne d’Arc
valued her virginity and believed that it sanctified her mission. It is also
important to remember that loss of virginity through rape was believed to sully
not the perpetrator(s) but the victim. The victim became a “broken”, tainted, sullied person and frequently un-marriageable and a source of shame. That this
was stunningly unfair to the victim is obvious.
We know that after Jeanne’s recantation
of her alleged heresies she was led back to prison and there put on women’s clothing.
We know that she wore men’s clothing not just as a sign of her mission but has a way
of de-sexing herself and preserving her sanctity as a virgin by making her both
sexless and frankly harder to violate because men's clothing of the time period
were harder than women’s clothing to take off.8
By this time Jeanne was in emotional turmoil
because of her recantation, emotionally weak and shattered; the long months of
the trial and imprisonment having quite shattered her physically and emotionally.
Finally her sanctity had been stripped away she was no longer a divine figure
but a heretic, associated in myth with sexual irregularity and wantonness, and
on top of that she was an admitted heretic, along with no longer being so to
speak a honorary man. She was also now more physically vulnerable due to now
wearing women’s clothing.9
She was then in this truly abject state assaulted.
On top of the horror of denying her
mission and her long prison ordeal she was now subject to a vicious brutal
intimate violation. That she was able to draw herself together and recant her
recantation and endure the inevitable death by fire she would draw has a relapsed
heretic is truly extraordinary.
Some authors10 mention that Jeanne
afterwards denied that she had been raped and stated that she was still a
virgin. They then go on to say how can we possibly believe that such a wicked
thing has to say that Jeanne was a liar. Well aside from shifting from the men
who at the very least tried to rape her and who should be along with the authorities
who let it happen and be the objects of moral censure, this is rather like straining
at a moral nat and a totally misplaced moral condemnation.
Joan was probably close if not in a
total breakdown frame of mind when several men at least tried to rape her. I
rather doubt given her all too likely state of mind that she was able too or
much wanted to remember clearly what happened to herself. Further given the
very narrow definition of what was considered “rape” at the time, Joan could
have been violated in many ways and still preserve what would then have been
called her virginity. Certainly given the status of virginity at the time and
its importance to Jeanne I would think it possible she didn’t want to think to
closely about what happened to herself.
Further Jeanne was a strong capable
young women it is possible that she was able to fight long and hard enough to
preserve what she considered to be her virtue and prevent penile penetration of
her vagina. Thus preserving in her times and her own eyes her essential purity.
Frankly if Jeanne lied or deceived herself
into thinking she had not been “raped”, it is nothing to get upset about. Under
the circumstances it is entirely understandable and human not some wicked lie
that besmirches her character.
Thus I would conclude the following.
1, Jeanne was certainly according to
modern definitions of “rape” raped.
2, Jeanne's jailers were criminally remiss
in allowing it to happen.
3. Jeanne was almost certainly in
extreme emotional turmoil at the time.
4. The above along with the horror of
the actual attack may have led Jeanne to not remember all of the attack and
thus she genuinely thought that she had preserved herself according to her
societies definition of a virgin as someone who has never been penetrated vaginally
by a penis.
5. Less likely than the above Jeanne may
have remembered the attack but lied. A lie that is perfectly understandable
given her societies morality.
6. More likely than 4 or 5 Jeanne
although not able to fight off the attack was able to preserve her virginity
intact according to her societies definition of virginity.
What is clear is that this horror was
part of the process by which Jeanne became a martyr and like her imprisonment and
death by fire inexcusable.
1. Warner, Marina, Joan of Arc, Penguin
Books, London, 1981, pp. 33.
2. Fein, Judith Was Joan Raped in Prison?, Saint
Joan of Arc Center, Here, and
Williamson, Allen, Was Joan of Arc Raped?,
Joan of Arc Archive Here.
3. Brownmiller, Susan, Against Our Will,
Bantam Books, New York, 1975, pp. 6-22, Bourke, Joanna, Rape, Virago, New York,
2007, pp. 5-20, Canadian Criminal Code, s. 752 Here.
4. IBID, Brownmiller, pp. 285-296.
5. Bourke, pp. 21-49.
6. Ibid, Bourke, pp. 21-85, Brownmiller,
pp. 387-420.
7. Warner, pp. 35-45, 238.
8. Footnote 1, See also Warner, pp. 165,
174-176.
9. Warner, pp. 126-145.
10. Footnote 2.
Pierre Cloutier
Agreed. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteGlad you liked it.
ReplyDelete