Posted on 09/22/2007 9:55:20 AM PDT by Renfield
Joan of Arc news....
|
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks Renfield. Some years ago the same claim was made -- that Joanie wasn't burned -- on "Unsolved Mysteries". A few years after the supposed execution, a woman claiming to be Joan d'Arc came back home to testify about her own identity, probably seeking some kind of inheritance, I forget... |
||
|
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Olivier Bouzy, a medieval historian and co-director of the Joan of Arc centre in Orléans, said: "These theories have been knocked down 100 times. This is about people who are not historians, who don't understand the mentality of the Middle Ages, looking for a contemporary explanation.
This guy nailed it without a doubt. They kept records about these events even back then. It is ludicrous to think that the English could have acted with such duplicity. Joan of Arc was martyred in 1431.
England's James I was interested in the study of witchcraft, which he considered a branch of theology. As the King of England, he attended the trial of the North Berwick Witches, in which several people were convicted of using witchcraft to send a storm against the ship that had carried James and Anne, his queen, from Denmark. James became obsessed with the threat posed by witches and witchcraft and in 1597 wrote the Daemonologie, a tract in favour of the existence of witchcraft.
Marcel Gay the “author” of this pablum must suffer from clutter of the mind that well known malady arising from post modern vacuum of unbelief.
La Pucelle d’Orleans was a most intriguing figure.
People will buy any novel concerning the revered Joan. After the da Vinci Code phenomena, all historical figures are fair game to be rehashed as a conspiracy.
samuel clemens worshipped joan and wrote a book propagating her myth.
Clemens also was adamant that Shakespeare wasn’t author of the plays — and of course, Clemens had socialist leanings. Figures, he wore a white suit, made a fortune on one of his early works, then pissed it away and tried to write something that would refill his coffers.
“All modern American literature comes from one book by Mark Twain called ‘Huckleberry Finn.’ There was nothing before. And there has been nothing as good since.” — Ernest Hemingway (another with socialist leanings)
> Ernest Hemingway (another with socialist leanings)
That’s a tad unfair.
Hemingway fought Franco and his Nazi allies during the Spanish Civil War because it was the right thing to do. He was therefore many years ahead of the rest of America in figuring out the threat presented by unbridled Fascism.
The American Volunteer Group got the same idea next, under Gen Claire Chennault, fighting the Japanese as “The Flying Tigers” in the airspace over China.
It took Pearl Harbor for the rest of America to get onto the same page — long after most the rest of the world were well-and-truly engaged.
Hemingway was many things, but it is just wrong to dismiss him as “another with Socialist Leanings”. McCarthy was all about that!
The “Republican” forces in Spain were not Republican at all...they were mostly communists, and, among other things, rounded up, tortured, and executed thousands of priests and nuns, for the sin of being Catholic and Christian.
Spain, and the Western world at large, would have been far worse off had the “Republicans” won the Spanish civil war.
Yea, right and the moon is made of green cheese.
Rubbish. He did it because murderous communism was fashionable in his circle. To label Franco and the loyalists as dangerous fascists is the worst sort of unthinking, propagandising cant.
> Rubbish. He did it because murderous communism was fashionable in his circle. To label Franco and the loyalists as dangerous fascists is the worst sort of unthinking, propagandising cant.
...ergo Franco kept good company./s
Um, no. That doesn't follow. Nice try, at the tu quoque though.
1) You are known by the company you keep
2) Franco kept company with Hitler and Mussolini
3) Hitler and Mussolini were Nazi and Fascist, respectively, and the “Bad Guys” collectively
4) Franco, therefore, was...?
No wonder it took America so long to figure out who the Bad Guys actually were in WW-II.
A patriot, willing to accept aid from shady sources because he was fighting for his country's life. Those were dangerous times.
No wonder it took America so long to figure out who the Bad Guys actually were
Indeed. A lot of Americans never figured out that one of the worst Bad Guys was good old Uncle Joe Stalin -- who was present at the war's creation. Given American's blind stupidity about the mortal threat of communism -- the only aid freedom-loving America sent Spain in the 30s went to the wrong side -- is it any wonder Franco took his help where he could find it? His fundamental decency -- and ultimately his ability to restrain irresponsible elements -- are evident in the plain historical fact that Spain declined to aid his Nazi/Fascist "friends" in the second World War.
Recalling America's perverse blind-eye wartime policy towards the Soviets, I can only agree.
The Republicans were not the good guys anymore than was Stalin - who provided them with arms and troops.
The Lincolns were not ahead of their time - they were old school US Communists useful as propaganda but badly used by the socialists they went to support.
I think that Hemmingway was just in love with Spain and changed his mind on their CW after penning one opus, but I could be wrong on that count.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.