What do you think?
Rate this book
The Maid and the Queen: The Secret History of Joan of Arc
“Attention, ‘Game of Thrones’ fans: The most enjoyably sensational aspects of medieval politics
—
double-crosses, ambushes, bizarre personal obsessions, lunacy and naked self-interest
—
are in abundant evidence in Nancy Goldstone's
The Maid and the Queen
.” (Laura Miller, Salon.com)
Joan of Arc, the brave peasant girl who heard the voices of angels and helped restore her king to the throne of France, astonished her contemporaries and continues to fascinate us today. Until now, though, her relationship with Yolande of Aragon, the ambitious and beautiful queen of Sicily—mother-in-law to the dauphin—has been little known. In a stunning work filled with intrigue, madness, and mysticism, Nancy Goldstone solves the thrilling mystery by showing that if you pry open the Queen's secrets, you will find the Maid's. Caught in the complex dynastic battle of the Hundred Years War, Yolande of Aragon championed the dauphin's cause. As French hopes dimmed, a courageous young woman arrived from the farthest recesses of the kingdom. But how did she gain an audience with a king? Was it only God's hand that moved Joan of Arc—or was it also Yolande of Aragon's?
Joan of Arc, the brave peasant girl who heard the voices of angels and helped restore her king to the throne of France, astonished her contemporaries and continues to fascinate us today. Until now, though, her relationship with Yolande of Aragon, the ambitious and beautiful queen of Sicily—mother-in-law to the dauphin—has been little known. In a stunning work filled with intrigue, madness, and mysticism, Nancy Goldstone solves the thrilling mystery by showing that if you pry open the Queen's secrets, you will find the Maid's. Caught in the complex dynastic battle of the Hundred Years War, Yolande of Aragon championed the dauphin's cause. As French hopes dimmed, a courageous young woman arrived from the farthest recesses of the kingdom. But how did she gain an audience with a king? Was it only God's hand that moved Joan of Arc—or was it also Yolande of Aragon's?
296 pages, Paperback
First published December 1, 2011
81 people are currently reading
4143 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 230 reviews
February 4, 2024
“[T]his is the saga of not one but two extraordinary women. It is a story filled with courage, intrigue, madness, and mysticism, which spanned a period measuring more than half a century. Best of all, although it is a work of history, at its heart lies a classic French novel, testimony to the enduring power of literature. Because [Yolande of Aragon’s] long, eventful life bookended Joan’s short, tumultuous one, several decades and many chapters pass before the Maid finally makes her appearance. But it is only in this way – by the patient unraveling of many curious twists and turns that came before, and which ultimately led to Joan’s thrilling introduction to the royal court – that what had been deliberately suppressed for so many centuries may finally be revealed…”
- Nancy Goldstone, The Maid and the Queen: The Secret History of Joan of Arc
On its face, the story of Joan of Arc – one of the most famous tales in history – feels like absurd fiction. In the midst of a century-long conflict between England and France, an unknown peasant girl from a small village arrives at the Royal Court of the Dauphin, Charles VII, asserting that she has received messages from God. According to these messages, Joan is supposed to help Charles defeat the English pretender to the throne. At a time when women were not exactly valued as equal members of society, Joan and her visions are not only accepted, but she is given an important military role.
Sent to relieve the siege of Orleans, Joan helps turn the tide of the war, and sees Charles VII crowned at the Cathedral in Rheims. Later, though, she is captured by French troops fighting on behalf of England’s Henry VI, and handed to the English. Instead of being ransomed, the English put her on trial for heresy, and burn her at the stake. Spurred by her noble sacrifice, Charles VII fights on to ultimate victory.
While undoubtedly dramatic, it feels improbable. Yet – for the most part – that is what happened.
Of course, as Nancy Goldstone makes clear in The Maid and the Queen, it was a bit more complicated than the summary above. In her telling, the saga of Joan of Arc is less about religious fervor than intricate court politics, and more about carefully plotted long-games than miracles. For all that, Goldstone’s account is wholly gripping. Not being a medievalist, I can’t place a value on her conclusions, but at the end, it felt plausible. More important – to me, at least – is that it was entirely thrilling to read.
***
The Maid and the Queen is a slim book, at only 249 pages of text. It is divided into three sections. The first is devoted to Yolande of Aragon, the ambitious, calculating Queen of Sicily, who also happened to be the mother-in-law to the Dauphin, the title given to the heir to the French throne. Joan is not even introduced until the second section, while the final one covers the years after Joan’s death. Even when Joan is onstage, Yolande retains first billing, the hidden hand moving pieces about the board.
To be entirely honest, I had never heard of Yolande of Aragon before I opened these pages. It is thus a testament to Goldstone’s skills as a storyteller that following along proved effortless. As she demonstrated in In the Shadow of the Empress, Goldstone has a knack for characterizations. People who have been gone for ages, and who lived in a world quite different from ours, become real and relatable in her hands. I was drawn to this by Joan of Arc, but have no complaints that Goldstone decided to divide her focus.
***
The emergence of Joan of Arc took place in the context of the last decades of the Hundred Years’ War. Unlike Yolande of Aragon, I knew a little about this conflict before starting, but not much. For awhile now, I’ve been slowly collecting Jonathan Sumption’s massive, just completed, and quite expensive history of the Hundred Years’ War, which runs for roughly 3,000 pages, and represents a daunting reading challenge, before which I have so far quailed.
It is to Goldstone’s credit that she is able to make this intractable war comprehensible, while still retaining a certain level of sophistication. Though it was fought in a vastly different Europe, with vastly different borders, she is a more-than-capable guide. Beyond that, Goldstone is a lively writer, and though she never dwells long in one place – the pace being quite fast, the page count low – she manages to capture a lot, despite the concision.
***
The central thrust of The Maid and the Queen is that Yolande of Aragon, a champion of the Dauphin’s cause, arranged to have Joan of Arc meet with Charles VII. In doing so, she allegedly took advantage of a widespread prophecy that France would be “restored by a virgin.”
As I’ve already admitted, I don’t know much at all about this subject, and I certainly have no familiarity with the primary sources. What I can say is that Goldstone doesn’t really have any hard evidence. For example, there is no newly-discovered document in Yolande’s hand that lays out all her supposed machinations. Goldstone energetically spins her theories and suppositions, but it’s circumstantial at best, and guesswork at worst.
The thing is, The Maid and the Queen works despite the shakiness of the premises. Yoland of Aragon is worthy of remembrance, and Goldstone does well by her. More importantly, her evocation of Joan – focusing on the secular side of her journey – is extremely affecting. Even after all these years, there is still potency in reading the transcripts from the Inquisition, and to see this young woman verbally sparring with serious old men who really want to watch her consumed by flames. Goldstone’s passion is most evident in these sequences.
***
Though Goldstone is enamored by Joan – and reasonably so – she does not let the myth overwhelm the reality. That reality, as she explains, is that Joan’s death did not suddenly tilt the war in Charles VII’s favor. Instead, the thing dragged on, as it had been dragging before Joan. One of the more interesting aspects of a consistently interesting book is Goldstone’s coverage of Joan’s “rehabilitation.” Convicted as a heretic, forced to confess, and then burned alive in Rouen while she screamed Jesus’s name, she was in danger of going down in history as a villain.
When Charles VII started winning, however, he recognized that Joan’s legitimacy was tied to his own. She had, after all, played an important part in his coronation. As such, arrangements were made to mend her reputation. Joan was retried, exonerated posthumously, and a cross erected at the spot of her murder.
She was canonized in 1920.
***
Goldstone closes The Maid and the Queen by noting that Joan of Arc remains an inspiration to oppressed people everywhere. Maybe so, but Joan did not fight to end oppression, because that’s not what the Hundred Years’ War was all about. The Hundred Years’ War – as far as I can tell – was about power, and who got to wield it. Amid this competition for the crown of France, two women – of a gender often rendered powerless – managed to emerge as the arbiters of destiny, imposing their will on soldiers, religious leaders, and kings.
- Nancy Goldstone, The Maid and the Queen: The Secret History of Joan of Arc
On its face, the story of Joan of Arc – one of the most famous tales in history – feels like absurd fiction. In the midst of a century-long conflict between England and France, an unknown peasant girl from a small village arrives at the Royal Court of the Dauphin, Charles VII, asserting that she has received messages from God. According to these messages, Joan is supposed to help Charles defeat the English pretender to the throne. At a time when women were not exactly valued as equal members of society, Joan and her visions are not only accepted, but she is given an important military role.
Sent to relieve the siege of Orleans, Joan helps turn the tide of the war, and sees Charles VII crowned at the Cathedral in Rheims. Later, though, she is captured by French troops fighting on behalf of England’s Henry VI, and handed to the English. Instead of being ransomed, the English put her on trial for heresy, and burn her at the stake. Spurred by her noble sacrifice, Charles VII fights on to ultimate victory.
While undoubtedly dramatic, it feels improbable. Yet – for the most part – that is what happened.
Of course, as Nancy Goldstone makes clear in The Maid and the Queen, it was a bit more complicated than the summary above. In her telling, the saga of Joan of Arc is less about religious fervor than intricate court politics, and more about carefully plotted long-games than miracles. For all that, Goldstone’s account is wholly gripping. Not being a medievalist, I can’t place a value on her conclusions, but at the end, it felt plausible. More important – to me, at least – is that it was entirely thrilling to read.
***
The Maid and the Queen is a slim book, at only 249 pages of text. It is divided into three sections. The first is devoted to Yolande of Aragon, the ambitious, calculating Queen of Sicily, who also happened to be the mother-in-law to the Dauphin, the title given to the heir to the French throne. Joan is not even introduced until the second section, while the final one covers the years after Joan’s death. Even when Joan is onstage, Yolande retains first billing, the hidden hand moving pieces about the board.
To be entirely honest, I had never heard of Yolande of Aragon before I opened these pages. It is thus a testament to Goldstone’s skills as a storyteller that following along proved effortless. As she demonstrated in In the Shadow of the Empress, Goldstone has a knack for characterizations. People who have been gone for ages, and who lived in a world quite different from ours, become real and relatable in her hands. I was drawn to this by Joan of Arc, but have no complaints that Goldstone decided to divide her focus.
***
The emergence of Joan of Arc took place in the context of the last decades of the Hundred Years’ War. Unlike Yolande of Aragon, I knew a little about this conflict before starting, but not much. For awhile now, I’ve been slowly collecting Jonathan Sumption’s massive, just completed, and quite expensive history of the Hundred Years’ War, which runs for roughly 3,000 pages, and represents a daunting reading challenge, before which I have so far quailed.
It is to Goldstone’s credit that she is able to make this intractable war comprehensible, while still retaining a certain level of sophistication. Though it was fought in a vastly different Europe, with vastly different borders, she is a more-than-capable guide. Beyond that, Goldstone is a lively writer, and though she never dwells long in one place – the pace being quite fast, the page count low – she manages to capture a lot, despite the concision.
***
The central thrust of The Maid and the Queen is that Yolande of Aragon, a champion of the Dauphin’s cause, arranged to have Joan of Arc meet with Charles VII. In doing so, she allegedly took advantage of a widespread prophecy that France would be “restored by a virgin.”
As I’ve already admitted, I don’t know much at all about this subject, and I certainly have no familiarity with the primary sources. What I can say is that Goldstone doesn’t really have any hard evidence. For example, there is no newly-discovered document in Yolande’s hand that lays out all her supposed machinations. Goldstone energetically spins her theories and suppositions, but it’s circumstantial at best, and guesswork at worst.
The thing is, The Maid and the Queen works despite the shakiness of the premises. Yoland of Aragon is worthy of remembrance, and Goldstone does well by her. More importantly, her evocation of Joan – focusing on the secular side of her journey – is extremely affecting. Even after all these years, there is still potency in reading the transcripts from the Inquisition, and to see this young woman verbally sparring with serious old men who really want to watch her consumed by flames. Goldstone’s passion is most evident in these sequences.
***
Though Goldstone is enamored by Joan – and reasonably so – she does not let the myth overwhelm the reality. That reality, as she explains, is that Joan’s death did not suddenly tilt the war in Charles VII’s favor. Instead, the thing dragged on, as it had been dragging before Joan. One of the more interesting aspects of a consistently interesting book is Goldstone’s coverage of Joan’s “rehabilitation.” Convicted as a heretic, forced to confess, and then burned alive in Rouen while she screamed Jesus’s name, she was in danger of going down in history as a villain.
When Charles VII started winning, however, he recognized that Joan’s legitimacy was tied to his own. She had, after all, played an important part in his coronation. As such, arrangements were made to mend her reputation. Joan was retried, exonerated posthumously, and a cross erected at the spot of her murder.
She was canonized in 1920.
***
Goldstone closes The Maid and the Queen by noting that Joan of Arc remains an inspiration to oppressed people everywhere. Maybe so, but Joan did not fight to end oppression, because that’s not what the Hundred Years’ War was all about. The Hundred Years’ War – as far as I can tell – was about power, and who got to wield it. Amid this competition for the crown of France, two women – of a gender often rendered powerless – managed to emerge as the arbiters of destiny, imposing their will on soldiers, religious leaders, and kings.
May 15, 2012
This book reads a bit like a history book, which is appropriate for the subject matter. Lucky for me, I quite enjoyed the prose. I found the majority of the book compelling and very interesting. I learned a lot more than I thought I would about the life of Joan of Arc. I thought I had a pretty firm grasp on the majority of her story but much to my delight, there was a lot that I did not know.
There are a handful of artwork and early depictions of the subjects included in the book which I found remarkable. It was nice to have an interpretation of who they were, and what they looked like, even if it was an antique artist’s impression. There are a lot of side notes which were also very informative and appreciated.
Joan the Maid was truly a strong, inspirational female. There is no doubt about it.
When asked the trick question during her trial of whether she is in God's grace, this uneducated peasant responds, “If I am not, may God bring me to it; if I am, may God keep me in it." Joan was able to verbally spar with these highly educated men who were twice her age, and not only keep up with them, but best them at their own game.
Most people already know that Joan of Arc’s time was during the end part of the Hundred Years War between France and England (and their various allies). What most people don’t realize is that one of the most powerful and influential people of this time was a woman; Yolande of Aragon. I personally had never heard of Yolande of Aragon until I read this. The Maid and the Queen explores the little known relationship and correlation of the stories between these two strong women. Joan is introduced into the book partway through and is executed before the end. The story did focus on both women but it seemed to center more on Yolande of Aragon than it did Joan of Arc. This may be partly due to the fact that the author has chosen to keep her voice more clinically unbiased and political driven than the typical biography style you would probably expect from a book of this nature.
I think the author said it best “…as it is often said, that without Joan of Arc there would be no France, it is also true that without Yolande of Aragon there would have been no Joan.”
I personally found some of the sections of the book almost too removed and clinically portrayed. For example, when Joan is about to be bought by the English, she tosses herself out of a window in the tower and nearly succeeds in killing herself. I had to actually go back and read that part again because it was stated so matter-of-factly that it didn’t really sink in.
The Maid and the Queen is not the type of book you want to rush into or out of. It is thought-provoking, and like a fine wine, wants to be sipped at, and pondered not guzzled.
“What is important about Joan is not that she heard voices, or presented the king with a special trinket, but her ferocious courage and unwavering faith. It was her willingness to fight for what she believed against seemingly insurmountable odds that has secured her place in history as an iconic figure. At her core, Joan is testimony to the transcendence of the human spirit.” “She remains an inspiration, not only to the citizens of France, but to oppressed people everywhere.”
All in all, I am glad I read this book. It was well written and very informative. If you are like me and have always been fascinated by the story of Joan of Arc, then you should look into reading Maid and the Queen.
There are a handful of artwork and early depictions of the subjects included in the book which I found remarkable. It was nice to have an interpretation of who they were, and what they looked like, even if it was an antique artist’s impression. There are a lot of side notes which were also very informative and appreciated.
Joan the Maid was truly a strong, inspirational female. There is no doubt about it.
When asked the trick question during her trial of whether she is in God's grace, this uneducated peasant responds, “If I am not, may God bring me to it; if I am, may God keep me in it." Joan was able to verbally spar with these highly educated men who were twice her age, and not only keep up with them, but best them at their own game.
Most people already know that Joan of Arc’s time was during the end part of the Hundred Years War between France and England (and their various allies). What most people don’t realize is that one of the most powerful and influential people of this time was a woman; Yolande of Aragon. I personally had never heard of Yolande of Aragon until I read this. The Maid and the Queen explores the little known relationship and correlation of the stories between these two strong women. Joan is introduced into the book partway through and is executed before the end. The story did focus on both women but it seemed to center more on Yolande of Aragon than it did Joan of Arc. This may be partly due to the fact that the author has chosen to keep her voice more clinically unbiased and political driven than the typical biography style you would probably expect from a book of this nature.
I think the author said it best “…as it is often said, that without Joan of Arc there would be no France, it is also true that without Yolande of Aragon there would have been no Joan.”
I personally found some of the sections of the book almost too removed and clinically portrayed. For example, when Joan is about to be bought by the English, she tosses herself out of a window in the tower and nearly succeeds in killing herself. I had to actually go back and read that part again because it was stated so matter-of-factly that it didn’t really sink in.
The Maid and the Queen is not the type of book you want to rush into or out of. It is thought-provoking, and like a fine wine, wants to be sipped at, and pondered not guzzled.
“What is important about Joan is not that she heard voices, or presented the king with a special trinket, but her ferocious courage and unwavering faith. It was her willingness to fight for what she believed against seemingly insurmountable odds that has secured her place in history as an iconic figure. At her core, Joan is testimony to the transcendence of the human spirit.” “She remains an inspiration, not only to the citizens of France, but to oppressed people everywhere.”
All in all, I am glad I read this book. It was well written and very informative. If you are like me and have always been fascinated by the story of Joan of Arc, then you should look into reading Maid and the Queen.
June 26, 2015
If you read one book about Joan of Arc, it should not be this one. If you read three, though, this should be the third.
First read Tuchman's "A Distant Mirror" to get the best possible picture of the Maid and her times. Then read "Joan of Arc: Her Story" by Pernoud to appreciate the depth of her achievement. Then you should read this book and find out what REALLY happened.
This is the story of Yolande of Aragon, Joan's secret patron and maybe the one who set the whole thing up. This is political revisionism of the highest order, rewriting everything that happened and casting it in a new light. When asked why Yolande's influence has gone so long undetected, Goldstone writes "there is no better camouflage in history than to have been born a woman.*"
The book has the best explanation of the assassination of John the Fearless I've read yet, and has a lot to say about Agincourt. It's a rare history that manages to be as interesting after Joan dies as it was when she is alive, but Goldstone pulls it off. She also leaves some tantalizing hints about Margaret, Henry VI of England's wife and a possible trigger for the War of the Roses.
*slight misquoting because the first time I wrote this review Goodreads ate it, and between then and now I took the book downstairs, and I'm not going to go get it just to look it up twice. Sorry, Goodreads, you blew this one.
First read Tuchman's "A Distant Mirror" to get the best possible picture of the Maid and her times. Then read "Joan of Arc: Her Story" by Pernoud to appreciate the depth of her achievement. Then you should read this book and find out what REALLY happened.
This is the story of Yolande of Aragon, Joan's secret patron and maybe the one who set the whole thing up. This is political revisionism of the highest order, rewriting everything that happened and casting it in a new light. When asked why Yolande's influence has gone so long undetected, Goldstone writes "there is no better camouflage in history than to have been born a woman.*"
The book has the best explanation of the assassination of John the Fearless I've read yet, and has a lot to say about Agincourt. It's a rare history that manages to be as interesting after Joan dies as it was when she is alive, but Goldstone pulls it off. She also leaves some tantalizing hints about Margaret, Henry VI of England's wife and a possible trigger for the War of the Roses.
*slight misquoting because the first time I wrote this review Goodreads ate it, and between then and now I took the book downstairs, and I'm not going to go get it just to look it up twice. Sorry, Goodreads, you blew this one.
January 8, 2013
I'm not sure why people are tagging this as historical fiction, because it's being marketed as non-fiction and was certainly in the library and bookshop as non-fiction. Nor is it written as though it were fiction, and it has a wealth of footnotes and a bibliography which suggests a great deal of research. Certainly I can understand being a little dubious about some of the claims made -- it's really hard to figure out what exactly people thought and said to each other back during the Hundred Years War, which makes it impossible to confirm whether so-and-so was a spy for Queen Yolande, or whether Queen Yolande had anything to do with such-and-such a rumour.
Still, it's a convincing narrative, well-written and clear. It is obviously set against the background of the Hundred Years War, which Joan of Arc fought in, and it makes sure that the context is clear -- so much so that if you're reading simply to learn about Joan of Arc, you will be disappointed, because it is really more about the way the war produced her, used her, and discarded her. Yolande of Aragon is a fascinating figure, and I half-wish she was an English queen so I could discuss her in my potential thesis about queenship... If even half of what Nancy Goldstone attributes to her is true, she was a very canny politician and an indefatigable woman.
There's also a fair number of (black and white, at least in my edition) illustrations included, as well as maps and family trees to help you keep everything straight.
Still, it's a convincing narrative, well-written and clear. It is obviously set against the background of the Hundred Years War, which Joan of Arc fought in, and it makes sure that the context is clear -- so much so that if you're reading simply to learn about Joan of Arc, you will be disappointed, because it is really more about the way the war produced her, used her, and discarded her. Yolande of Aragon is a fascinating figure, and I half-wish she was an English queen so I could discuss her in my potential thesis about queenship... If even half of what Nancy Goldstone attributes to her is true, she was a very canny politician and an indefatigable woman.
There's also a fair number of (black and white, at least in my edition) illustrations included, as well as maps and family trees to help you keep everything straight.
November 8, 2021
For those who love this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing they will love. I love this sort of thing, yet I have a terrible habit of reading biographies of tragic historical figures and thinking I'll get an alternate ending this time. Spoiler alert: this time, after being exploited, abused, interrogated and subjected to a sham trial in which the record was falsified to get the already-decided-upon verdict the English wanted, and without the ungrateful French King lifting a finger to intercede, Joan is burned at the stake and her remains dumped into the Loire. Wow, who saw that coming?!
Anyway, Yolande of Aragon is one badass bitch. Goldstone is a badass historian and one of the top draft picks for my Fantasy All-Star Teachers League. (Of course, there isn't any such thing, but there should be.)
Anyway, Yolande of Aragon is one badass bitch. Goldstone is a badass historian and one of the top draft picks for my Fantasy All-Star Teachers League. (Of course, there isn't any such thing, but there should be.)
August 28, 2015
Finally! For years I've been waiting for a book about Joan of Arc that tells the history without relapsing into religious ecstasy. Goldstone delivers this and so much more in this historical account of France's turning point during the 100 Years War. I bought this book not knowing who the Queen was, her important role in Charles VII's life, or her association with Joan. I was surprised to learn that the story of Yolande of Aragon puts this formidable woman on a par with Eleanor of Aquitaine, yet I never heard of her.
This is a book about how Joan of Arc, aided by sympathetic members of Charles' party—mainly Yolande—invigorated the French people and its King to push back against the English. Joan's role is firmly established, but there are so many other events crowding the end of the war that her tragic martyrdom is not the end of the story. "It would be gratifying to be able to confirm...that, if not quite the catalyst for a precipitous surrender, Joan's execution at least marked the moral turning point in the conflict, the moment at which the native French population, repulsed by the deed, turned against the occupation and began the slow process of throwing off the yoke of the invaders. And yet the sad truth is that Joan's death had absolutely no effect upon the war, or the politics of the period..." In fact, the war dragged on for another twenty years, and much of the effort to turn the tables on the English came from the historically unacknowledged Yolande.
Charles, the future King, was the youngest son of mad king Charles VI and an unscrupulous Isabeau of Bavaria in war-torn France. He was a nervous, neglected child whose prospects were not particularly glittering and was sent away to be raised by his future mother-in-law in peaceful and beautiful Provence. Yolande's court was enlightened and brilliant, and the future king became totally attached to the Queen of Sicily. She was a formidable, efficient ruler and her support was instrumental in keeping Charles on the right path. It was eventually through Yolande's influence that Joan of Arc managed an interview with "the Dauphin" as she called him. Also, when Charles' natural timidity held him back from committing his military forces, Yolanda often returned to take control and push matters forward. In the end, she helped forge the diplomatic ties between France and Burgundy that finally dislodged the English from their French territories.
One might ask why Charles and Yolande did not work harder to redeem Joan from her captors. Yes, by that time she had already outlived her usefulness and seemed to be in the way more often than not. There was no doubt that the common people still looked up to her, but "she was during this period kept at arm's length and regarded as a nuisance and a potential liability by those in power at court." All along her military astuteness was questionable, and even at the siege of Orleans the French commanders ignored her advice and won the day despite her objections. By the time she was captured, Joan had taken it upon herself to lead a practically suicidal mission at Compiegne, and no one in charge paid much attention to her. When she was taken, one train of thought was "Because Joan claimed to have appeared by the order of God, to interfere in her fate would have been akin to questioning a divine imperative." I can see that as a solid medieval sentiment. But more to the point, the King wouldn't have thought she was in danger. Joan had been ennobled a few months previously, and the terms of her captivity were "dictated by the time-honored rules of chivalry." She would be held for ransom, it was supposed, and given honorable imprisonment. They never thought that Joan would be ransomed by the enemy of France, the Duke of Burgundy! And Burgundy was determined to prove that Joan was a witch and anyone following her advice was dishonored. Including, of course, Charles VII.
This period of history was incredibly complex, with murders and treason, political agendas and a long cast of characters. The author does an admirable job keeping everything straight. I had no trouble following events, and the writing was smooth and enjoyable; there were even times I felt a little excitement, as though in the midst of a novel. I suspect it was difficult presenting a mystical saint as a straightforward historical figure, but Goldstone smoothly sidestepped religious issues and gave us a credible explanation of events. She had a couple of theories of her own that tied things together: she is convinced that Yolande made a connection between Joan and the "Romance of Melusine", famous in its time, which is why she supported the Maid; the author attributed the vehemence of Joan's trial and later rehabilitation to a conflict between factions in the University of Paris faculty. I thought these theories a little bit of a stretch, but they didn't stop me from enjoying the book. I would highly recommend it to students of the Middle Ages.
This is a book about how Joan of Arc, aided by sympathetic members of Charles' party—mainly Yolande—invigorated the French people and its King to push back against the English. Joan's role is firmly established, but there are so many other events crowding the end of the war that her tragic martyrdom is not the end of the story. "It would be gratifying to be able to confirm...that, if not quite the catalyst for a precipitous surrender, Joan's execution at least marked the moral turning point in the conflict, the moment at which the native French population, repulsed by the deed, turned against the occupation and began the slow process of throwing off the yoke of the invaders. And yet the sad truth is that Joan's death had absolutely no effect upon the war, or the politics of the period..." In fact, the war dragged on for another twenty years, and much of the effort to turn the tables on the English came from the historically unacknowledged Yolande.
Charles, the future King, was the youngest son of mad king Charles VI and an unscrupulous Isabeau of Bavaria in war-torn France. He was a nervous, neglected child whose prospects were not particularly glittering and was sent away to be raised by his future mother-in-law in peaceful and beautiful Provence. Yolande's court was enlightened and brilliant, and the future king became totally attached to the Queen of Sicily. She was a formidable, efficient ruler and her support was instrumental in keeping Charles on the right path. It was eventually through Yolande's influence that Joan of Arc managed an interview with "the Dauphin" as she called him. Also, when Charles' natural timidity held him back from committing his military forces, Yolanda often returned to take control and push matters forward. In the end, she helped forge the diplomatic ties between France and Burgundy that finally dislodged the English from their French territories.
One might ask why Charles and Yolande did not work harder to redeem Joan from her captors. Yes, by that time she had already outlived her usefulness and seemed to be in the way more often than not. There was no doubt that the common people still looked up to her, but "she was during this period kept at arm's length and regarded as a nuisance and a potential liability by those in power at court." All along her military astuteness was questionable, and even at the siege of Orleans the French commanders ignored her advice and won the day despite her objections. By the time she was captured, Joan had taken it upon herself to lead a practically suicidal mission at Compiegne, and no one in charge paid much attention to her. When she was taken, one train of thought was "Because Joan claimed to have appeared by the order of God, to interfere in her fate would have been akin to questioning a divine imperative." I can see that as a solid medieval sentiment. But more to the point, the King wouldn't have thought she was in danger. Joan had been ennobled a few months previously, and the terms of her captivity were "dictated by the time-honored rules of chivalry." She would be held for ransom, it was supposed, and given honorable imprisonment. They never thought that Joan would be ransomed by the enemy of France, the Duke of Burgundy! And Burgundy was determined to prove that Joan was a witch and anyone following her advice was dishonored. Including, of course, Charles VII.
This period of history was incredibly complex, with murders and treason, political agendas and a long cast of characters. The author does an admirable job keeping everything straight. I had no trouble following events, and the writing was smooth and enjoyable; there were even times I felt a little excitement, as though in the midst of a novel. I suspect it was difficult presenting a mystical saint as a straightforward historical figure, but Goldstone smoothly sidestepped religious issues and gave us a credible explanation of events. She had a couple of theories of her own that tied things together: she is convinced that Yolande made a connection between Joan and the "Romance of Melusine", famous in its time, which is why she supported the Maid; the author attributed the vehemence of Joan's trial and later rehabilitation to a conflict between factions in the University of Paris faculty. I thought these theories a little bit of a stretch, but they didn't stop me from enjoying the book. I would highly recommend it to students of the Middle Ages.
July 27, 2018
Loved reading about Yolanda of Aragon's impact on Joan of Arc's rise to fame. Nancy Goldstone writes readable history, and fills in the players very often overshadowed by Joan's greatness. She recreates the world of the French court, explaining how Joan and her alleged contact with Heaven justified Charles VII's claim to the French throne. Yolanda of Aragon, his politically astute mother-in-law read the political climate, latching onto Joan as the means to unite the fractured land of France and propel her daughter's weak husband to the throne.
Goldstone refocuses the picture allowing readers to understand how a rural young girl could command an army to change the world.
Goldstone refocuses the picture allowing readers to understand how a rural young girl could command an army to change the world.
April 28, 2012
Joan of Arc will most likely be the reigning superhero of women to come for many generations. Displaying courage equal or even surpassing that of her male counterparts; Joan is a role model, inspiration, and compelling historical figure. Nancy Goldstone attempts to look at her hidden motives and connection to Yolande of Aragon in “The Maid and the Queen”.
The first notable characteristic displayed by Nancy Goldstone is “The Maid and the Queen” is an eloquent language/writing style. Goldstone seamlessly binds flowerly terms with an easy-to-read pace which allows the average reader to “keep up” and remain interested and entertained at the same time. This tactic is necessary as the material can become quite overwhelming if one is new to the topic at hand (mostly French politics during the Hundred Years War). Goldstone passionately explains the figures and events involved which eventually leads to the emergence of Joan and her involvement (the book is split into three sections: before Joan, Joan, and after Joan). Hence, the possibility of becoming overwhelmed by the abundance of information is high. Plus, at times, Goldstone seems to stray on zealous tangents which can become tedious and slow-moving.
Don’t expect the “typical” biography of Joan of Arc or Yolande of Aragon’s influence on the maid. Versus a psyche study of Yolande and/or Joan, “The Maid and the Queen” is more of a background political discussion. However, Goldstone occasionally intertwines personal opinions on the psychological effects of early incidents for both females and they affected future events. These insights are quite compelling and result in several “ah-ha” moments. Even better is that Goldstone doesn’t allow these opinions to overflow too much into the historical tone which thus results in minimal speculation (thankfully). Goldstone’s tone is affirmative, passionate, and yet inquisitive.
The pace beginning with part 2 and the introduction of Joan is much quicker and more compelling containing a satisfying number of direct quotes and annotated sources which opens a window into Joan. These passages take more time to dissect her actions, motives, and court trial resulting in an interesting motive study and scientific breakdown. However, these sections are fleeting and I did not find Goldstone’s conclusions to be exclusive and I had many unanswered questions.
Goldstone’s hypothesis/explanation circles around politically describing the mystique of Joan versus that of religion (comparable to the evolution vs. creation debate) which could deter some readers who associate Joan with saintly traits. However, Goldstone isn’t overly forceful with these observations and merely grazes them.
Although chapter 11 (“The Trial of Joan of Arc”) is climatic and emotionally moving in its facts regarding the terrible way Joan was treated during her trial; “The Maid and the Queen” is less than enthralling. I expected “secretive” events while it was more of a re-telling. Goldstone’s hypothesis is lost as she only mentions the possible connections between Joan and Yolande a few times. Basically, the book is not what the title suggests and I found myself becoming bored at times.
A small annoyance was that the lack of a genealogical chart in the front of the book. It is placed in the back and is easily looked over as I couldn’t initially find it at all. It would make more referential sense in the beginning.
Although I was not completely captured by Goldstone’s work nor did I find it to cover the topic (the relation between Joan and Yolande) sufficiently; I do heartily recommend it for those interested in the politics of the Hundred Years War (plus, I now have a sparked interest in Rene of Anjou). Furthermore, I would read more works from Nancy Goldstone so the book was suitably enjoyable.
The first notable characteristic displayed by Nancy Goldstone is “The Maid and the Queen” is an eloquent language/writing style. Goldstone seamlessly binds flowerly terms with an easy-to-read pace which allows the average reader to “keep up” and remain interested and entertained at the same time. This tactic is necessary as the material can become quite overwhelming if one is new to the topic at hand (mostly French politics during the Hundred Years War). Goldstone passionately explains the figures and events involved which eventually leads to the emergence of Joan and her involvement (the book is split into three sections: before Joan, Joan, and after Joan). Hence, the possibility of becoming overwhelmed by the abundance of information is high. Plus, at times, Goldstone seems to stray on zealous tangents which can become tedious and slow-moving.
Don’t expect the “typical” biography of Joan of Arc or Yolande of Aragon’s influence on the maid. Versus a psyche study of Yolande and/or Joan, “The Maid and the Queen” is more of a background political discussion. However, Goldstone occasionally intertwines personal opinions on the psychological effects of early incidents for both females and they affected future events. These insights are quite compelling and result in several “ah-ha” moments. Even better is that Goldstone doesn’t allow these opinions to overflow too much into the historical tone which thus results in minimal speculation (thankfully). Goldstone’s tone is affirmative, passionate, and yet inquisitive.
The pace beginning with part 2 and the introduction of Joan is much quicker and more compelling containing a satisfying number of direct quotes and annotated sources which opens a window into Joan. These passages take more time to dissect her actions, motives, and court trial resulting in an interesting motive study and scientific breakdown. However, these sections are fleeting and I did not find Goldstone’s conclusions to be exclusive and I had many unanswered questions.
Goldstone’s hypothesis/explanation circles around politically describing the mystique of Joan versus that of religion (comparable to the evolution vs. creation debate) which could deter some readers who associate Joan with saintly traits. However, Goldstone isn’t overly forceful with these observations and merely grazes them.
Although chapter 11 (“The Trial of Joan of Arc”) is climatic and emotionally moving in its facts regarding the terrible way Joan was treated during her trial; “The Maid and the Queen” is less than enthralling. I expected “secretive” events while it was more of a re-telling. Goldstone’s hypothesis is lost as she only mentions the possible connections between Joan and Yolande a few times. Basically, the book is not what the title suggests and I found myself becoming bored at times.
A small annoyance was that the lack of a genealogical chart in the front of the book. It is placed in the back and is easily looked over as I couldn’t initially find it at all. It would make more referential sense in the beginning.
Although I was not completely captured by Goldstone’s work nor did I find it to cover the topic (the relation between Joan and Yolande) sufficiently; I do heartily recommend it for those interested in the politics of the Hundred Years War (plus, I now have a sparked interest in Rene of Anjou). Furthermore, I would read more works from Nancy Goldstone so the book was suitably enjoyable.
May 6, 2012
WOW! I thought I had a half way decent understanding about the French monarchy, but I was wrong! When it comes to Joan of Arc, most of the history books focus on her, but this book really puts her into the larger picture. As much as Joan's story is tragic, her accomplishments and her downfall, were partly politically allowed to happen, as it suited those with power in their hands. She was a catalyst for change in France. And I really like the way the author finished off the stories of some of the major players in the Hundred Years War, and how the whole balancing of truces and treaties, alliances and marriages, ends with the marriage of Henry Vi of England with Margaret of Anjou (granddaughter of Yolande of Aragon), and dovetails nicely with the War of the Roses.
I found this book very informative, well written and easy to read. Even though this is a non-fiction book, I can fully imagine this story being written into a mini-series or movie. And if there is anyone out there contemplating this, please consider casting Madeline Stowe (yes, I have become addicted to Revenge) as she would make an awesome medieval queen or duchess.
Thank you very much to Netgalley for the chance to read and review this on my Kindle.
I found this book very informative, well written and easy to read. Even though this is a non-fiction book, I can fully imagine this story being written into a mini-series or movie. And if there is anyone out there contemplating this, please consider casting Madeline Stowe (yes, I have become addicted to Revenge) as she would make an awesome medieval queen or duchess.
Thank you very much to Netgalley for the chance to read and review this on my Kindle.
October 1, 2012
This was not so much a biography or history of Joan of Arc, as a chronicle of the role Yolande of Aragon played during this part of the Hundred Years War between England and France, and her determination to have her son-in-law, Charles, crowned King of France. The research was excellent but alas, I didn't learn anything new, anything I already didn't know. Joan's mockery of a trial and her execution didn't change the war or its outcome; they had no effect save that the English and Burgundians got rid of a political threat - a teenaged girl with astounding piety and charisma who rallied an army and a country to fight and be delivered from the English. I didn't think the book gave us any secret history, just brought to the fore the extraordinary effort and power of Yolande, a woman usually glossed over in the history books. Had this been more about Yolande, I would have like it even more. Still, a recommended book for readers who like late medieval history.
April 8, 2022
3.5 stars
This is an interesting book, a dual biography of two disparate women important in the later decades of the Hundred Years’ War: Joan of Arc, and Yolande, titled Queen of Sicily, who never actually ruled Sicily at all, but was a powerful duchess in France and the mother-in-law (and only real parental figure) of King Charles VII. Though little-known today, Yolande was a skilled politician and power-broker at the time, and when the English threatened her lands she became very interested in pushing Charles VII to actually use the army she’d raised for him.
Goldstone posits that Yolande was secretly Joan’s patron, but I wasn’t entirely convinced by the notion of any substantial connection between the two. Certainly, Yolande was a leader in the faction that wanted the king to fight, for which Joan’s arrival presented an opportunity, and people connected with Yolande facilitated Joan’s arrival at court. And sure, it’s possible Yolande might have arranged to pass Joan information about how to get the king to trust her, but there’s no real evidence of that; and okay, Yolande might have been behind spreading the original rumor/prophecy about a virgin from Lorraine saving France, but that seems like a weird and risky move. However, the juxtaposition of the two stories does make for more complete and dramatic narrative than if Goldstone had only included one.
At any rate, this is interesting and readable despite the proliferation of names, and taught me something about a period and some historical figures I didn’t know much about. For me it didn’t sparkle like Goldstone’s Daughters of the Winter Queen, but I suspect a lot of that is because medieval biography is really hard. You don’t have much sense of what these people were like at their core, their personalities or thoughts or feelings. For the period, we know a fair amount about Joan because she gave a lot of testimony and so did many people who knew her, but that was in a formal and (in her case) highly adversarial context, which can only tell you so much. The most humanizing thing I learned about her was that she got frustrated with the king’s council’s endless meetings and instead ran off with a too-small army to attack someplace, which led to her downfall. (She also jumped out a window while in captivity in an attempt to kill herself, but narrowly survived.) I don’t think I learned anything similarly humanizing about Yolande, though in her time she was clearly a force to be reckoned with.
To be honest, I wish Goldstone had been willing to speculate a bit more. In the acknowledgments, she mentions talking to a doctor about teens hearing voices, but that with a gap of 600 years she wasn’t able to say anything definitive so left the psychiatric angle on Joan out of the book entirely. I thought it would have been interesting to discuss even without knowing anything for certain, and this is pretty clearly a secular biography even though Goldstone is impressed with Joan’s piety. It’s also a little odd to read a modern feminist biography of somebody whose stubborn cross-dressing inspired an international theological debate, without considering the queer angle at all. Not that we should run amok giving historical figures labels that would have been utterly foreign to them, but it seems like Goldstone just repeats what Joan’s supporters said, which was, “she did this for modesty, now shut up.” Since men’s clothes tend to be more form-fitting than dresses layered over shifts and petticoats, I thought this called for more explanation (perhaps men's clothes were considered modest because since medieval people didn’t wear underwear, it would be harder for a woman to have sex in them? Or maybe the clothes were simple practicality?).
But anyway, this was an interesting book, and fairly short, so I’m glad I read it. Also, Goldstone includes various pieces of contemporary art, which are hilarious in their failure to depict anything that looks like movement. The battles and massacres look incredibly sedate. Take a look at a sample from the book:
I do look forward to reading more Goldstone, and I’m glad that she seems to be moving a century forward in time with each biography she writes!
This is an interesting book, a dual biography of two disparate women important in the later decades of the Hundred Years’ War: Joan of Arc, and Yolande, titled Queen of Sicily, who never actually ruled Sicily at all, but was a powerful duchess in France and the mother-in-law (and only real parental figure) of King Charles VII. Though little-known today, Yolande was a skilled politician and power-broker at the time, and when the English threatened her lands she became very interested in pushing Charles VII to actually use the army she’d raised for him.
Goldstone posits that Yolande was secretly Joan’s patron, but I wasn’t entirely convinced by the notion of any substantial connection between the two. Certainly, Yolande was a leader in the faction that wanted the king to fight, for which Joan’s arrival presented an opportunity, and people connected with Yolande facilitated Joan’s arrival at court. And sure, it’s possible Yolande might have arranged to pass Joan information about how to get the king to trust her, but there’s no real evidence of that; and okay, Yolande might have been behind spreading the original rumor/prophecy about a virgin from Lorraine saving France, but that seems like a weird and risky move. However, the juxtaposition of the two stories does make for more complete and dramatic narrative than if Goldstone had only included one.
At any rate, this is interesting and readable despite the proliferation of names, and taught me something about a period and some historical figures I didn’t know much about. For me it didn’t sparkle like Goldstone’s Daughters of the Winter Queen, but I suspect a lot of that is because medieval biography is really hard. You don’t have much sense of what these people were like at their core, their personalities or thoughts or feelings. For the period, we know a fair amount about Joan because she gave a lot of testimony and so did many people who knew her, but that was in a formal and (in her case) highly adversarial context, which can only tell you so much. The most humanizing thing I learned about her was that she got frustrated with the king’s council’s endless meetings and instead ran off with a too-small army to attack someplace, which led to her downfall. (She also jumped out a window while in captivity in an attempt to kill herself, but narrowly survived.) I don’t think I learned anything similarly humanizing about Yolande, though in her time she was clearly a force to be reckoned with.
To be honest, I wish Goldstone had been willing to speculate a bit more. In the acknowledgments, she mentions talking to a doctor about teens hearing voices, but that with a gap of 600 years she wasn’t able to say anything definitive so left the psychiatric angle on Joan out of the book entirely. I thought it would have been interesting to discuss even without knowing anything for certain, and this is pretty clearly a secular biography even though Goldstone is impressed with Joan’s piety. It’s also a little odd to read a modern feminist biography of somebody whose stubborn cross-dressing inspired an international theological debate, without considering the queer angle at all. Not that we should run amok giving historical figures labels that would have been utterly foreign to them, but it seems like Goldstone just repeats what Joan’s supporters said, which was, “she did this for modesty, now shut up.” Since men’s clothes tend to be more form-fitting than dresses layered over shifts and petticoats, I thought this called for more explanation (perhaps men's clothes were considered modest because since medieval people didn’t wear underwear, it would be harder for a woman to have sex in them? Or maybe the clothes were simple practicality?).
But anyway, this was an interesting book, and fairly short, so I’m glad I read it. Also, Goldstone includes various pieces of contemporary art, which are hilarious in their failure to depict anything that looks like movement. The battles and massacres look incredibly sedate. Take a look at a sample from the book:
I do look forward to reading more Goldstone, and I’m glad that she seems to be moving a century forward in time with each biography she writes!
July 1, 2015
Excellent non-fiction historical detailing of all the interplay surrounding the French monarchy during the years bridging the French Civil War & the 100 Years War. It is the detailed history of Yolande's (Queen of Sicily)support and pivotal role in the eventual outcomes. Not just in battle support but in the safe haven for Charles, the Dauphin. Joan of Arc's mission was to crown this very Dauphin and reunite the French under his monarchy. The voices told her this.
The research is amazing in its minutia of accuracies. Goldstone states if her information is questionable or prejudicial- as in the rumor that Isabeau, Queen of France to the mad king, had more than just a political alliance with Louis, Duke of Orleans, his brother. Many other health and location facts too, not obscured for the sake of the "story". Joan was the catalyst for a vast change. And not just in centered power and authority.
After reading Haasse, this was the perfect finale.
The research is amazing in its minutia of accuracies. Goldstone states if her information is questionable or prejudicial- as in the rumor that Isabeau, Queen of France to the mad king, had more than just a political alliance with Louis, Duke of Orleans, his brother. Many other health and location facts too, not obscured for the sake of the "story". Joan was the catalyst for a vast change. And not just in centered power and authority.
After reading Haasse, this was the perfect finale.
August 17, 2015
Great, well-researched theory on how Joan of Arc came to play her role in history. Heavy on well researched details, this read as a history book (not my favorite form of learning!) but compelled me to the end. What an era of bought and paid for soldiers, nobles positioning for their status and possessions, skewed (at least by today's standards) intersections between church and law. No wonder the peasants revolted! Joan of Arc must have been a remarkable woman, unfairly treated by the laws of man. She would be one on my list of ultimate dinner guests.
November 22, 2017
Link to my review of this book:
https://flhwnotesandreviews.com/2017/...
https://flhwnotesandreviews.com/2017/...
October 10, 2015
Obviously, when one is writing a biography of a historical figure, one of the main things to keep aware of is the crucial need to remain balanced and as impartial as is possible; don't get too attached to who you're writing about, and certainly don't get swept up in some kind of reverent hysteria comparable to which Joan of Arc inspired in those who followed her into battle.
One thing I can say, is that if Nancy Goldstone (the author) was in the midst of the Hundred Years War in France, is that she would certainly be a loyal and impassioned follower of Joan of Arc. Does that make her well placed to write a biography about her (and also, importantly, Yolande of Aragon, the formidable and politically significant Queen of Sicily)? Not so much, in my opinion. It has always, to me, seemed like one should not write a biography about someone that they feel too strongly about. Obviously, this advice doesn't have to be taken, but the results of not doing so are usually evident.
To get the positives out of the way, the book has a seemly structure. Rather than simply telling the stories of Yolande of Aragon and Joan of Arc, the author makes sure to demonstrate the context of the Hundred Year's War between France and England in order for the backdrop in which the two characters operate within is well illustrated. This, she does sufficiently, as you feel like you've been briefed on the necessary details as a reader. The narrative is not severed after the deaths of both Joan and Yolande either; an epilogue which studies the re-habilitation of Joan of Arc's legacy is featured at the end of the book.
Now, as I touched on in the start of this review, the book suffers from major problems when it comes to the two chosen protagonists; there appears to be a great lack of balance and impartiality when it comes down to Joan of Arc and Yolande of Aragon. The author can safely be said to have taken a view that is 100% positive about the two women. This problem is much more evident when it comes to Joan of Arc, of whom the author often gushes with praise. As such, there is no critical debate about the voices that Joan claimed to hear; one must assume that the author believes that Joan was a true prophetess? There is no discussion of it, which I personally think is evasion. It is very possible that Joan may have suffered from some kind of neurological disorder (the knowledge of which would have been completely unknown in the Middle Ages, however it would be beyond incorrect to claim that they did not exist) which would account for her visions. There has been much academic debate into the subject, yet this is ignored by the author who, rather insultingly, would probably have claimed that any kind of speculation as to the mental state of her subject would have been the gravest of insults. As such, it doesn't feel like the reader is being presented the full story.
One of crucial claims of this book, which the author uses to hold up it's revisionist status is that (in a quote taken from the blurb of the book) Yolande of Aragon was 'a forgotten mentor' to Joan. This is the only place in this work where a reader might find reference to such a claim. The author absolutely fails to demonstrate this within the book, and it's claims to veracity are very thin indeed. What the author does write in the book was that Joan of Arc fit very well into Yolande of Aragon's plans to finance an expedition to Orléans, and therefore she was probably used for the purposes of propaganda by the Queen of Sicily, who was aware of the importance of these kind of movements. Joan was almost certainly not mentored by Yolande, nor granted any extended contact with her.
Another crutch that this book, rather half-heartedly, falls upon is The Romance of Melusine. The author demonstrates, somewhat convincingly, that many of the significant figures in the book had probably read the romantic tale. The harm this does to the narrative, is that every so often she tries to claim that they were influenced completely by the book, which seems highly far fetched (The Romance of Melusine seems to be a very stylish book for royal historians of late-Medieval England and France to draw comparisons with) and hems her narrative around this.
Beyond just the characters, the author writes in a highly biased way around the English and the French, allowing her own opinions skew her historical narrative. She writes, regarding the aftermath of the death of Joan of Arc, that 'it would be gratifying to b able to conform the widespread belief that this one act, the terrible martyrdom of Joan of Arc- so unjust, so cruel, so iniquitous- resulted ... in the immediate vanquishing of the English'. As a historian, one should not be 'taking sides' but it appears that the author cannot help herself from doing so. She should also take care to not load her narrative with such emotive vocabulary. Her vaunting of the French at the expense of the English extends also to her opinions of English historians, claiming that one's opinion of a certain battle amounted to them having 'harrumphed'. Well, there are many things that I can say about my experience reading the works of American historians but I realise that extending too much on that fact is extra-ordinarily petty (especially when you are using a work of so-called professional history to do so).
On the subject of the style of the author's prose, the manner of writing can often be far too informal, with some extremely misfired and misplaced attempts at humour (which, upon execution, are largely humourless and inappropriate). She also doesn't seem to see the issue at exploiting historical clichés in order to humour her prose. On the subject of French princesses not being married to English monarchs for two hundred years following the queenship of Margaret of Anjou (the granddaughter and something of a protégé of Yolande of Aragon) she writes that this was 'an astute policy that had the added undeniable benefit of saving the head of at least one French princess during the reign of Henry VIII', a comment which is neither funny, relevant, nor historically appropriate.
I would be lying to say that I didn't enjoy reading this book, but there are far too many eyebrow raising moments to call this 'good history'. The author, as far as I imagine, has come in and fit her research around her pre-conceived notions of who Joan of Arc and Yolande of Aragon are without any sort of consideration of the alternatives. The helm of revisionism that she has taken, she seems to think has protected her from accusations of inaccuracy. The problem is that a revisionist viewpoint is also an agenda, and this is often not recognised by the historians who write with them.
One thing I can say, is that if Nancy Goldstone (the author) was in the midst of the Hundred Years War in France, is that she would certainly be a loyal and impassioned follower of Joan of Arc. Does that make her well placed to write a biography about her (and also, importantly, Yolande of Aragon, the formidable and politically significant Queen of Sicily)? Not so much, in my opinion. It has always, to me, seemed like one should not write a biography about someone that they feel too strongly about. Obviously, this advice doesn't have to be taken, but the results of not doing so are usually evident.
To get the positives out of the way, the book has a seemly structure. Rather than simply telling the stories of Yolande of Aragon and Joan of Arc, the author makes sure to demonstrate the context of the Hundred Year's War between France and England in order for the backdrop in which the two characters operate within is well illustrated. This, she does sufficiently, as you feel like you've been briefed on the necessary details as a reader. The narrative is not severed after the deaths of both Joan and Yolande either; an epilogue which studies the re-habilitation of Joan of Arc's legacy is featured at the end of the book.
Now, as I touched on in the start of this review, the book suffers from major problems when it comes to the two chosen protagonists; there appears to be a great lack of balance and impartiality when it comes down to Joan of Arc and Yolande of Aragon. The author can safely be said to have taken a view that is 100% positive about the two women. This problem is much more evident when it comes to Joan of Arc, of whom the author often gushes with praise. As such, there is no critical debate about the voices that Joan claimed to hear; one must assume that the author believes that Joan was a true prophetess? There is no discussion of it, which I personally think is evasion. It is very possible that Joan may have suffered from some kind of neurological disorder (the knowledge of which would have been completely unknown in the Middle Ages, however it would be beyond incorrect to claim that they did not exist) which would account for her visions. There has been much academic debate into the subject, yet this is ignored by the author who, rather insultingly, would probably have claimed that any kind of speculation as to the mental state of her subject would have been the gravest of insults. As such, it doesn't feel like the reader is being presented the full story.
One of crucial claims of this book, which the author uses to hold up it's revisionist status is that (in a quote taken from the blurb of the book) Yolande of Aragon was 'a forgotten mentor' to Joan. This is the only place in this work where a reader might find reference to such a claim. The author absolutely fails to demonstrate this within the book, and it's claims to veracity are very thin indeed. What the author does write in the book was that Joan of Arc fit very well into Yolande of Aragon's plans to finance an expedition to Orléans, and therefore she was probably used for the purposes of propaganda by the Queen of Sicily, who was aware of the importance of these kind of movements. Joan was almost certainly not mentored by Yolande, nor granted any extended contact with her.
Another crutch that this book, rather half-heartedly, falls upon is The Romance of Melusine. The author demonstrates, somewhat convincingly, that many of the significant figures in the book had probably read the romantic tale. The harm this does to the narrative, is that every so often she tries to claim that they were influenced completely by the book, which seems highly far fetched (The Romance of Melusine seems to be a very stylish book for royal historians of late-Medieval England and France to draw comparisons with) and hems her narrative around this.
Beyond just the characters, the author writes in a highly biased way around the English and the French, allowing her own opinions skew her historical narrative. She writes, regarding the aftermath of the death of Joan of Arc, that 'it would be gratifying to b able to conform the widespread belief that this one act, the terrible martyrdom of Joan of Arc- so unjust, so cruel, so iniquitous- resulted ... in the immediate vanquishing of the English'. As a historian, one should not be 'taking sides' but it appears that the author cannot help herself from doing so. She should also take care to not load her narrative with such emotive vocabulary. Her vaunting of the French at the expense of the English extends also to her opinions of English historians, claiming that one's opinion of a certain battle amounted to them having 'harrumphed'. Well, there are many things that I can say about my experience reading the works of American historians but I realise that extending too much on that fact is extra-ordinarily petty (especially when you are using a work of so-called professional history to do so).
On the subject of the style of the author's prose, the manner of writing can often be far too informal, with some extremely misfired and misplaced attempts at humour (which, upon execution, are largely humourless and inappropriate). She also doesn't seem to see the issue at exploiting historical clichés in order to humour her prose. On the subject of French princesses not being married to English monarchs for two hundred years following the queenship of Margaret of Anjou (the granddaughter and something of a protégé of Yolande of Aragon) she writes that this was 'an astute policy that had the added undeniable benefit of saving the head of at least one French princess during the reign of Henry VIII', a comment which is neither funny, relevant, nor historically appropriate.
I would be lying to say that I didn't enjoy reading this book, but there are far too many eyebrow raising moments to call this 'good history'. The author, as far as I imagine, has come in and fit her research around her pre-conceived notions of who Joan of Arc and Yolande of Aragon are without any sort of consideration of the alternatives. The helm of revisionism that she has taken, she seems to think has protected her from accusations of inaccuracy. The problem is that a revisionist viewpoint is also an agenda, and this is often not recognised by the historians who write with them.
Read
December 16, 2023I'm going to leave this one unrated as I skim read most of it, so it wouldn't be fair to rate.
I thought this would focus a lot more on Joan of Arc and the relationship between her and Yolande of Aragon. In reality, the book focused mostly on Yolande and her family's extensive court/regal history. I'm not strictly a history buff unless it's someone I'm really into (Joan of Arc), so the lack of focus on Joan made me disengaged.
I'm sure for those really interested in all aspects of this time in history, it would be a good book. For me, it was the wrong focus and therefore the wrong book for me. Never mind.
I thought this would focus a lot more on Joan of Arc and the relationship between her and Yolande of Aragon. In reality, the book focused mostly on Yolande and her family's extensive court/regal history. I'm not strictly a history buff unless it's someone I'm really into (Joan of Arc), so the lack of focus on Joan made me disengaged.
I'm sure for those really interested in all aspects of this time in history, it would be a good book. For me, it was the wrong focus and therefore the wrong book for me. Never mind.
September 5, 2024
Engaging portraits of two remarkable women. While Joan of Arc's story, at least in rough outline, is well known, Yolande of Aragon was a name I was unfamiliar with going into this book - which in consequence had a lot to teach me about a fascinating woman.
August 13, 2012
Queen Yolanda illustrates how women in the middle ages wielded power. Coming from a childhood of privilege, she married into an even more wealthy and powerful family. In her husband's absence she managed estates, collected rents and resolved disputes among other nobles all the while raising children to assume thrones and leadership roles. When her husband died she took a larger diplomatic role, advising the would be king (even when he ignored the advice) negotiated marriages and worked to free a son taken as a hostage. By contrast, Joan's life was simple and uncomplicated until her voices compel her to action. Despite their regional proximity and their shared aims, the two women do not meet.
This book is a marked improvement in readability over Goldstone's The Lady Queen: The Notorious Reign of Joanna I, Queen of Naples, Jerusalem, and Sicily. The text is much smoother and for those not steeped in French history, and its descriptions make the story easier to envision. For instance, the total disaster of the reign of Charles VI, is told through a description of his madness. The reader sees how he was incapacitated and how this made him easy to manipulate. Goldstone shows how the Bavarian roots and reputation of his Queen, Isabeau, spawned rumors as to the legitimacy of their third son who eventually inherited the throne. All of this gives the context you need to understand the role Yolanda had in raising that third son, and why Joan is so pivotal in motivating him and his supporters to take his rightful role.
There is interesting material on how it was that Joan eventually got an audience with Charles, and how she lived while waiting for his response, what she did between battles and Charles's responses to her at the various points. After the persecution of Joan and the natural death of Yolanda there is a chapter on Joan's rehabilitation an epilogue on the significance of the two women.
I am not certain which parts of this are the "secret" history. Perhaps the subtitle refers to the previously neglected role of Yolanda. I'd have liked a bit more on Yolanda and the Naples and Sicily situations. For instance, how did Yolanda govern Sicily from afar, and more specifically what were the issues in Naples? Also the title Queen of Jerusalem is curious. What was her governance role there? While this is a book on France, a few pages on these lands might help the reader understand Yolanda's situation a bit more.
While you can see the weaving of these lives and how both worked towards the same goal, the p. 249 conclusion "Without Yolanda there would have been no Joan." is not fully drawn. Given Yolanda's influence on Charles as a boy, the support she gave him as a mother-in-law (even when he did not heed her advice) she was a major source of influence and support. A more accurate statement is "Without Yolanda there would have been no Charles."
I highly recommend this volume for the general reader. For those more knowledgeable about this period, I believe they will find the sections of Yolanda worthwhile.
This book is a marked improvement in readability over Goldstone's The Lady Queen: The Notorious Reign of Joanna I, Queen of Naples, Jerusalem, and Sicily. The text is much smoother and for those not steeped in French history, and its descriptions make the story easier to envision. For instance, the total disaster of the reign of Charles VI, is told through a description of his madness. The reader sees how he was incapacitated and how this made him easy to manipulate. Goldstone shows how the Bavarian roots and reputation of his Queen, Isabeau, spawned rumors as to the legitimacy of their third son who eventually inherited the throne. All of this gives the context you need to understand the role Yolanda had in raising that third son, and why Joan is so pivotal in motivating him and his supporters to take his rightful role.
There is interesting material on how it was that Joan eventually got an audience with Charles, and how she lived while waiting for his response, what she did between battles and Charles's responses to her at the various points. After the persecution of Joan and the natural death of Yolanda there is a chapter on Joan's rehabilitation an epilogue on the significance of the two women.
I am not certain which parts of this are the "secret" history. Perhaps the subtitle refers to the previously neglected role of Yolanda. I'd have liked a bit more on Yolanda and the Naples and Sicily situations. For instance, how did Yolanda govern Sicily from afar, and more specifically what were the issues in Naples? Also the title Queen of Jerusalem is curious. What was her governance role there? While this is a book on France, a few pages on these lands might help the reader understand Yolanda's situation a bit more.
While you can see the weaving of these lives and how both worked towards the same goal, the p. 249 conclusion "Without Yolanda there would have been no Joan." is not fully drawn. Given Yolanda's influence on Charles as a boy, the support she gave him as a mother-in-law (even when he did not heed her advice) she was a major source of influence and support. A more accurate statement is "Without Yolanda there would have been no Charles."
I highly recommend this volume for the general reader. For those more knowledgeable about this period, I believe they will find the sections of Yolanda worthwhile.
December 28, 2020
Joan was an illiterate maid from eastern France in the 15th century. Legend has it that she saved France from English takeover during the Hundred Years War and is one of the figures with most statues around France. But the question remains – how did an illiterate teenager put up such a courageous fight and led the demoralised French forces against all odds (in decisive battles at Orléans, Beaugency, Reims, etc.)? Nancy Goldstone in this book tries to demystify Joan and rationalise the events surrounding her rise.
The first I knew of Joan was when I was a child; while playing Age of Empires II; wherein Joan’s story is one of the campaigns and since then – this history surrounding England and France has always fascinated me. This book does not start with Joan’s origins at Domrémy in eastern France, which was her birthplace, but instead in Aragon (present day Spain). It introduces us to another prominent woman from those times – Yolande of Aragon. The writer builds her case as to how Joan’s whole story was prop used by Yolande for her power grab (coincidentally or otherwise, Joan was from the Duchy of Bar – which was Yolande’s matrilineal place of origin).
To provide a context – the latter phase of the Hundred Years War was effectively a civil war between two factions, the Burgundian faction which had King Charles VI on their side who backed the English king – Henry V’s, claim to the French throne; the other faction known as the Armagnacs – wanted the succession to remain with the Valois family – the King’s son. And what was Yolande’s interest in this? Charles VII, the son of the King was Yolande’s son-in-law.
I would say the book highlights three aspects – the first is to provide us a brief account of the Hundred Years War during the latter phase and in particular – the role of Yolande and her diplomatic skills in bringing various factions together as France was a highly divided country during the time. The second was to demystify the myths surrounding Joan of Arc – while the book certainly portrayed her as heroic – it also emphasised as to how not all on the Armagnac side were in favour / in awe of Joan. The third was also to demonstrate how divided France was and while we might know Henry V’s exploits in the Battle of Agincourt through Shakespeare’s play, he also had the advantage of attacking a country so divided that his victory was not as surprising as dramatisations have portrayed.
I got a good sense of who was Joan of Arc, her motivations, and the legal systems in place in the 15th century, considering how her trial is one of the most documented events of the era. I also got to know of some interesting anecdotes which I would surely like to read (like the folklore The Romance of Melusine).
My only suspicion is the extent to which the author’s bias has influenced the work. The book has two principal characters – the Maid – Joan of Arc and the Queen – Yolande of Aragon, Queen of Sicily. The book certainly glorifies Yolande a lot, and sometimes I suspected it was far more than her importance in history. Yolande held her court in her castle at Saumur (in the western French region of Pays de la Loire) and after having read the book, I visited Saumur and the castle. The museum in the castle had more mention of René I of Naples than Yolande herself. This was strange as the book was dismissive of René and described him as the incompetent son of Yolande who often needed his mother’s diplomatic skills to bail himself out. Yolande’s name was mentioned in the castle only once and if that is the extent to which her history is savoured in Saumur, I wonder to what extent it remains elsewhere. However, I would also consider that modern French historians are downplaying or ignoring her role during the Hundred Years War.
To conclude, this is one of the most interesting historical accounts that I have read so far, and I would look forward to reading more about the insights I picked up from this book. On that note, I would award the book a rating of four.
The first I knew of Joan was when I was a child; while playing Age of Empires II; wherein Joan’s story is one of the campaigns and since then – this history surrounding England and France has always fascinated me. This book does not start with Joan’s origins at Domrémy in eastern France, which was her birthplace, but instead in Aragon (present day Spain). It introduces us to another prominent woman from those times – Yolande of Aragon. The writer builds her case as to how Joan’s whole story was prop used by Yolande for her power grab (coincidentally or otherwise, Joan was from the Duchy of Bar – which was Yolande’s matrilineal place of origin).
To provide a context – the latter phase of the Hundred Years War was effectively a civil war between two factions, the Burgundian faction which had King Charles VI on their side who backed the English king – Henry V’s, claim to the French throne; the other faction known as the Armagnacs – wanted the succession to remain with the Valois family – the King’s son. And what was Yolande’s interest in this? Charles VII, the son of the King was Yolande’s son-in-law.
I would say the book highlights three aspects – the first is to provide us a brief account of the Hundred Years War during the latter phase and in particular – the role of Yolande and her diplomatic skills in bringing various factions together as France was a highly divided country during the time. The second was to demystify the myths surrounding Joan of Arc – while the book certainly portrayed her as heroic – it also emphasised as to how not all on the Armagnac side were in favour / in awe of Joan. The third was also to demonstrate how divided France was and while we might know Henry V’s exploits in the Battle of Agincourt through Shakespeare’s play, he also had the advantage of attacking a country so divided that his victory was not as surprising as dramatisations have portrayed.
I got a good sense of who was Joan of Arc, her motivations, and the legal systems in place in the 15th century, considering how her trial is one of the most documented events of the era. I also got to know of some interesting anecdotes which I would surely like to read (like the folklore The Romance of Melusine).
My only suspicion is the extent to which the author’s bias has influenced the work. The book has two principal characters – the Maid – Joan of Arc and the Queen – Yolande of Aragon, Queen of Sicily. The book certainly glorifies Yolande a lot, and sometimes I suspected it was far more than her importance in history. Yolande held her court in her castle at Saumur (in the western French region of Pays de la Loire) and after having read the book, I visited Saumur and the castle. The museum in the castle had more mention of René I of Naples than Yolande herself. This was strange as the book was dismissive of René and described him as the incompetent son of Yolande who often needed his mother’s diplomatic skills to bail himself out. Yolande’s name was mentioned in the castle only once and if that is the extent to which her history is savoured in Saumur, I wonder to what extent it remains elsewhere. However, I would also consider that modern French historians are downplaying or ignoring her role during the Hundred Years War.
To conclude, this is one of the most interesting historical accounts that I have read so far, and I would look forward to reading more about the insights I picked up from this book. On that note, I would award the book a rating of four.
September 17, 2020
I'm not quite sure that the link Goldstone was trying to make between Yolande of Aragon and Joan of Arc was strong enough for my liking... It more or less felt like a biography of two women who may have occupied the same time and place and shared similar ambitions, but still had nothing else in common. Obviously Goldstone was looking to play on the thread of subtle networks and patronage, but maybe the thread was just a little too subtle for me. Nevertheless, her writing continues to be highly readable and accessible, and I always enjoy reading her non-fiction texts.
April 14, 2024
As a kid I had a fascination with Joan of Ark making this a truly enjoyable read. The book depicts how Joan’s story came to be through the hidden support of Yolande of Aragon. Yolande of Aragon, a queen I knew nothing about, was a remarkable person to learn about.
The title of this book certainly gives the impression the focus is on Joan when in fact Yolande and the general time period in France are the primary topics. Joan’s story is certainly told but through a lens of how it progressed the war and was likely made possible. I always enjoy Goldstone’s writing style and this book was no exception.
For an intro into the time and a focus on lesser talked about personages this was a quick, fun, and easy read.
The title of this book certainly gives the impression the focus is on Joan when in fact Yolande and the general time period in France are the primary topics. Joan’s story is certainly told but through a lens of how it progressed the war and was likely made possible. I always enjoy Goldstone’s writing style and this book was no exception.
For an intro into the time and a focus on lesser talked about personages this was a quick, fun, and easy read.
March 6, 2018
I really enjoyed this look at Yolande, the powerful queen who helped shape Medieval France, and set the stage for Joan of Arc. The beginning of the book is a bit scattered, but it starts getting focused after 50 or so pages. The whole thing gave me a much different image of France in that era, and helped connect some dots. I knew Henry V and Joan of Arc, but I didn't realize how connected they were, for example. Good stuff.
January 24, 2023
I’m astounded that I had never heard of Queen Yolande or what she did to help Joan’s story happen. I almost felt knowing this information cheapened my view of Joan of Arc as a spiritual figure and world shaper. But after reading the whole book, I much appreciated the research and work done to put Joan’s life, actions and sacrifice into historical context. I marched in the Joan of Arc parade on Epiphany (Joan’s birthday) this year and felt so proud to pay homage to my city’s unofficial patron Saint, as well as one of the most interesting young women in history.
November 23, 2022
Interessante opzet, hoewel ik het bewijs dat Yolande van Aragon alles heeft gearrangeerd niet heel erg overtuigend vind. Ze zal vast een vinger in de pap zal hebben gehad, maar bewijs voor meer is er mi niet.
Gedeelte over Jeanne's proces interessant en goed geschreven.
Mijn editie had als enige nadeel een zeer klein lettertype, waardoor ik moeite had het boek te lezen.
Gedeelte over Jeanne's proces interessant en goed geschreven.
Mijn editie had als enige nadeel een zeer klein lettertype, waardoor ik moeite had het boek te lezen.
August 12, 2020
A fascinating read. I only knew about Joan of Arc from Catholic school and after reading this book I realize I really didn’t know that much about her. Of course, I didn’t know anything about Yolande at all. Although the book was a bit dry in places, I loved all the historical detail and the almost novelistic writing style. I can’t wait to read more by Nancy Goldstone.
December 22, 2025
I love a good biography of a woman written by a woman, what can I say.
Goldstone's prose was succinct, accessible, and often very tongue-in-cheek. I can't wait to info dump about this to people who do not care and I love Joan of Arc even more now
Goldstone's prose was succinct, accessible, and often very tongue-in-cheek. I can't wait to info dump about this to people who do not care and I love Joan of Arc even more now
June 20, 2021
Dude I learned so much from this book. So good.
October 4, 2025
This book was more about French:English history than just Joan of Arc and Yolanda. It explained the Hundred Years’ War and the concept of a double monarchy for England’s Henry VI. I feel for the local people, who are totally at the mercy of the ruling class.
June 4, 2017
I can't believe how much I enjoyed this book. If all historic accounts were written by Goldstone, I would happily pick up each one to read. I'll definitely be looking at other books she wrote. History is full of so many interesting and crazy stories, but in school it seems to only be about names and dates. Goldstone captured the events of this time in such a clear, interesting, and easy-to-follow way that I eagerly turned the page looking forward to learning more.
History is not my strong point, mainly because I seem to have an inability to remember dates. They all just blend together for me. (The same will hold true with this book, but I at least have a much better grasp of all the players). First, let me say that the chart showing the Royal House of France in the 14th and 15th centuries was invaluable. I referred to this constantly throughout the book. This chart gets the MVP award from me.
There is no way that I will be able to summarize this book. I mean, the book IS already a summary of events. I'll just mention the things that stood out to me.
The first: Yolande of Aragon, Queen of Sicily, was a badass. This woman was so intelligent, and so politically astute; I can very much believe, after reading this, that she was the puppet-master behind the throne(s). She spent a lot of money and effort to fight for lands and titles for her children.
The second: King Charles VI was truly nuts. His nickname of 'The Mad King' was completely appropriate (today he'd most likely be diagnosed as schizophrenic). For a few months a year, he'd lose it; he would think he was someone called George, wouldn't bathe, would constantly think he was being attacked (would consequently attack his own people), and would generally behave like a lunatic. But they he'd 'come out of it' and the first person to be with him when this happened would be in his favor (until his next bout). So people would strategize to be with him at the end of one of his mad cycles so they could essentially control him for the next few months. Seriously. This happened for YEARS. Is it any wonder that France found itself in deep trouble, mainly with the English, during this time?
The Third: Yolande arranged for her daughter Marie to be betrothed to Charles VI's son, Charles VII. Charles VII was a neglected child that was constantly in fear of attack or being captured. He was frequently moved from city to city, depending on the threats coming from the English. His mother was pretty hands off and didn't have interest in her children. So when Charles VII became engaged, he went to live with Yolande (I think he was about 10 years old when this happened). For the first time he experience family, love, and caring. Yolande essentially became his mother. (Charles VII did not appear to have much affection for his wife, Marie). Yolande had a huge influence over the next King of France.
The Fourth: Charles VII's sister, Catherine, was married to Henry V, King of England. So when The Mad King died, Henry the V claimed the title King of France, as did Charles VII. DRAMA. (I mean, there was already a TON of drama, but this was pretty big for what was to come). So to recap, there are now two King's of France. Not good.
The Fifth: Two prophecies went out (thought to be from a seer named Marie of Avignon) that "France ruined by a woman would be restored by a virgin from the marches of Lorraine" and the second "A Maid would come would would carry arms and would free the kingdom of France from its enemies". This is when Joan started hearing voices. She was the daughter of a farmer and was considered poor. But from a young age was incredibly devout, told her father she was to stay a maid. when she began hearing the voices (Saint Michael the Archangel, Saint Catherine of Alexandria, and Saint Margaret of Antioch). Joan needed to get to Charles VII and began working to make this happen. She cut her hair, dressed in men's clothes, and found her way (most likely with Yolande's help) to an audience with Charles VII.
The Sixth: Charles VII was an idiot. He was incompetent (true, he was young), indecisive, flighty, and constantly worried about his own self, more than his country. He had John the "Fearless" Duke of Burgundy killed, which was a huge mistake, especially in the long run. And then wouldn't act to fight for his cities and lands. Orleans was under siege and was in danger of being starved out if Charles VII didn't get an army there soon to help. Realizing that Charles VII needed a 'push' Yolande seems to have worked to put Joan in Charles VII's path. Knowing that Charles VII had doubts regarding his legitimacy (both in parentage and the crown) he was desperate for validation. Joan gave this to him by saying "I say to you, on behalf of the Lord, that you are the true heir of France, and a king's son, and He has sent me to you to lead you to Rheims, so that you can receive your coronation and consecration if you wish it". Joan had two reasons for which she had a mandate from the King of Heaven; "One, to raise the siege of Orleans, the other to lead the King to Rheims for his sacring (coronation). Part of the legend of Joan of Arc was that she immediately knew him (he was 'blending' in with his court as he was concerned about meeting her) and told him a secret which proved to him she was legit. (most likely it was the above statement proving his legitimacy).
The Seventh: Joan went to Orleans and saved the city. Then Joan led the king to Rheims where he was crowned (she stood next to him as he was crowned). But then it's like Joan went a bit nuts. She had fulfilled her duties, but didn't seem to have any more direction, so she focused on getting rid of the English. She went looking for battles, and against the advice of others, found herself captured by the English. This was strange to me, that to have so clear of a purpose, to then flounder.
The Eighth: The English were total jerks and didn't abide by the laws of chivalry and even proper proceedings. Joan may not have been raped, but she was most definitely abused and degraded. She was kept in irons at all times (even while she slept) and she had three rough English prison guards IN her room, and two outside. I found that incredibly sketchy not to mention horrible. (There was also this weird thing when they forced her to wear men's clothes or go nude. She went with men's clothes and they used this to prove she went back to her heretic ways. But if she was always in the presence of these prison guards, I can't imagine she had kept her modesty in all this time. Anyway).
Joan was incredibly gifted with her speech and ability turn words and phrases to her benefit. She was interrogated for some time. The English pretty much tricked her to confess, then tricked her again to reverse it (the clothes) and was then taken to a stake and burned alive. It apparently lasted for over half and hour and was quite horrific.
The Ninth: Charles the VII is still a jerk. It doesn't appear that he gives a rat's ass about Joan or her fate. Years later, when the English are finally pushed out of France, that some of the clergy want to clear Joan's name (as it would clear those clergy members who had verified her in the first place). They convinced Charles VII, not by showing it would help Joan's name, but by helping his own. He agreed and eventually they got the Pope to agree. An investigation was launched and Joan was cleared of her charges. The good news, is that by now Charles VII could at least rule in a competent fashion.
Seriously, this book was awesome. A great read, a great help in understanding the Hundred Year War and one piece of that struggle. And also to learn more about Joan and to learn about Yolande at all. Very fascinating. Highly recommend.
History is not my strong point, mainly because I seem to have an inability to remember dates. They all just blend together for me. (The same will hold true with this book, but I at least have a much better grasp of all the players). First, let me say that the chart showing the Royal House of France in the 14th and 15th centuries was invaluable. I referred to this constantly throughout the book. This chart gets the MVP award from me.
There is no way that I will be able to summarize this book. I mean, the book IS already a summary of events. I'll just mention the things that stood out to me.
The first: Yolande of Aragon, Queen of Sicily, was a badass. This woman was so intelligent, and so politically astute; I can very much believe, after reading this, that she was the puppet-master behind the throne(s). She spent a lot of money and effort to fight for lands and titles for her children.
The second: King Charles VI was truly nuts. His nickname of 'The Mad King' was completely appropriate (today he'd most likely be diagnosed as schizophrenic). For a few months a year, he'd lose it; he would think he was someone called George, wouldn't bathe, would constantly think he was being attacked (would consequently attack his own people), and would generally behave like a lunatic. But they he'd 'come out of it' and the first person to be with him when this happened would be in his favor (until his next bout). So people would strategize to be with him at the end of one of his mad cycles so they could essentially control him for the next few months. Seriously. This happened for YEARS. Is it any wonder that France found itself in deep trouble, mainly with the English, during this time?
The Third: Yolande arranged for her daughter Marie to be betrothed to Charles VI's son, Charles VII. Charles VII was a neglected child that was constantly in fear of attack or being captured. He was frequently moved from city to city, depending on the threats coming from the English. His mother was pretty hands off and didn't have interest in her children. So when Charles VII became engaged, he went to live with Yolande (I think he was about 10 years old when this happened). For the first time he experience family, love, and caring. Yolande essentially became his mother. (Charles VII did not appear to have much affection for his wife, Marie). Yolande had a huge influence over the next King of France.
The Fourth: Charles VII's sister, Catherine, was married to Henry V, King of England. So when The Mad King died, Henry the V claimed the title King of France, as did Charles VII. DRAMA. (I mean, there was already a TON of drama, but this was pretty big for what was to come). So to recap, there are now two King's of France. Not good.
The Fifth: Two prophecies went out (thought to be from a seer named Marie of Avignon) that "France ruined by a woman would be restored by a virgin from the marches of Lorraine" and the second "A Maid would come would would carry arms and would free the kingdom of France from its enemies". This is when Joan started hearing voices. She was the daughter of a farmer and was considered poor. But from a young age was incredibly devout, told her father she was to stay a maid. when she began hearing the voices (Saint Michael the Archangel, Saint Catherine of Alexandria, and Saint Margaret of Antioch). Joan needed to get to Charles VII and began working to make this happen. She cut her hair, dressed in men's clothes, and found her way (most likely with Yolande's help) to an audience with Charles VII.
The Sixth: Charles VII was an idiot. He was incompetent (true, he was young), indecisive, flighty, and constantly worried about his own self, more than his country. He had John the "Fearless" Duke of Burgundy killed, which was a huge mistake, especially in the long run. And then wouldn't act to fight for his cities and lands. Orleans was under siege and was in danger of being starved out if Charles VII didn't get an army there soon to help. Realizing that Charles VII needed a 'push' Yolande seems to have worked to put Joan in Charles VII's path. Knowing that Charles VII had doubts regarding his legitimacy (both in parentage and the crown) he was desperate for validation. Joan gave this to him by saying "I say to you, on behalf of the Lord, that you are the true heir of France, and a king's son, and He has sent me to you to lead you to Rheims, so that you can receive your coronation and consecration if you wish it". Joan had two reasons for which she had a mandate from the King of Heaven; "One, to raise the siege of Orleans, the other to lead the King to Rheims for his sacring (coronation). Part of the legend of Joan of Arc was that she immediately knew him (he was 'blending' in with his court as he was concerned about meeting her) and told him a secret which proved to him she was legit. (most likely it was the above statement proving his legitimacy).
The Seventh: Joan went to Orleans and saved the city. Then Joan led the king to Rheims where he was crowned (she stood next to him as he was crowned). But then it's like Joan went a bit nuts. She had fulfilled her duties, but didn't seem to have any more direction, so she focused on getting rid of the English. She went looking for battles, and against the advice of others, found herself captured by the English. This was strange to me, that to have so clear of a purpose, to then flounder.
The Eighth: The English were total jerks and didn't abide by the laws of chivalry and even proper proceedings. Joan may not have been raped, but she was most definitely abused and degraded. She was kept in irons at all times (even while she slept) and she had three rough English prison guards IN her room, and two outside. I found that incredibly sketchy not to mention horrible. (There was also this weird thing when they forced her to wear men's clothes or go nude. She went with men's clothes and they used this to prove she went back to her heretic ways. But if she was always in the presence of these prison guards, I can't imagine she had kept her modesty in all this time. Anyway).
Joan was incredibly gifted with her speech and ability turn words and phrases to her benefit. She was interrogated for some time. The English pretty much tricked her to confess, then tricked her again to reverse it (the clothes) and was then taken to a stake and burned alive. It apparently lasted for over half and hour and was quite horrific.
The Ninth: Charles the VII is still a jerk. It doesn't appear that he gives a rat's ass about Joan or her fate. Years later, when the English are finally pushed out of France, that some of the clergy want to clear Joan's name (as it would clear those clergy members who had verified her in the first place). They convinced Charles VII, not by showing it would help Joan's name, but by helping his own. He agreed and eventually they got the Pope to agree. An investigation was launched and Joan was cleared of her charges. The good news, is that by now Charles VII could at least rule in a competent fashion.
Seriously, this book was awesome. A great read, a great help in understanding the Hundred Year War and one piece of that struggle. And also to learn more about Joan and to learn about Yolande at all. Very fascinating. Highly recommend.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 25, 2015
Fascinating read! I don't feel I can write a review to do it justice, though, because I had too many interruptions (life, darn it!) while reading through. It covers a lot of complicated history (so many battles and characters to keep straight!) so you have to have your A game focus while reading this one. The tongue-in-cheek humor (reminiscent of Monty Python's "The Holy Grail") Ms. Goldstone employs, while laying out the facts, makes for an enjoyable read:
"...finally she arrived at the king's apartments dressed and accessorized as splendid as art and money could achieve. Charles, who had spent a long, fraught, teenaged male night thinking about her portrait, was in that state of anticipation that lent itself mightily to the success of the enterprise." (33)
"As dictated by chivalry, John the Fearless went down on one knee before Charles and swept off his large black velvet chapeau in the required gesture of homage, at which point Charles, also following protocol, politely took him by the hand, raised him to his feet, and indicated that he could return his hat to his head. The niceties having been satisfied, Tanneguy du Chastel then shoved the duke of Burgandy from behind, so that another of Charles's entourage could slash at his face more easily with his sword, and then Tanneguy du Chastel finished him off with his axe." (72)
"She found Charles's campaign to be a disaster on nearly every front. If he had been trying to lose the monarchy he could not have done a more efficient job of it." (90)
"Charles positively excelled at doing nothing." (150)
Most people, I'm sure, know something of Joan of Arc, yet Yolande of Aragon mas a major player in freeing France from English rule and in guiding/grooming King Charles and many other leading public figures of the time. Surrounded by so many inept men, what else is a Queen to do? Yolande of Aragon had a heavy hand in utilizing Joan of Arc and in assisting Joan to accomplish her ultimate destiny. "...there is no more effective camouflage in history than to have been born a woman." (xviii)
"...finally she arrived at the king's apartments dressed and accessorized as splendid as art and money could achieve. Charles, who had spent a long, fraught, teenaged male night thinking about her portrait, was in that state of anticipation that lent itself mightily to the success of the enterprise." (33)
"As dictated by chivalry, John the Fearless went down on one knee before Charles and swept off his large black velvet chapeau in the required gesture of homage, at which point Charles, also following protocol, politely took him by the hand, raised him to his feet, and indicated that he could return his hat to his head. The niceties having been satisfied, Tanneguy du Chastel then shoved the duke of Burgandy from behind, so that another of Charles's entourage could slash at his face more easily with his sword, and then Tanneguy du Chastel finished him off with his axe." (72)
"She found Charles's campaign to be a disaster on nearly every front. If he had been trying to lose the monarchy he could not have done a more efficient job of it." (90)
"Charles positively excelled at doing nothing." (150)
Most people, I'm sure, know something of Joan of Arc, yet Yolande of Aragon mas a major player in freeing France from English rule and in guiding/grooming King Charles and many other leading public figures of the time. Surrounded by so many inept men, what else is a Queen to do? Yolande of Aragon had a heavy hand in utilizing Joan of Arc and in assisting Joan to accomplish her ultimate destiny. "...there is no more effective camouflage in history than to have been born a woman." (xviii)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 230 reviews