What will you learn more if a young woman in the fifteenth century and illiterate peasant could arrogate the prerogative of the nobility by riding a horse without anyone find nothing wrong while we one that blithely burned was suspected of witchcraft because she had a black cat or simply because it bothered ...?
They told us ... ... and even taught the Virgin Mary had a child of "God" (Joseph was absent in Phoenicia, it was difficult to explain things differently and I remember that at that time it was not in lace: the stoning was the sentence for an adulteress).
We forget too that Joseph had four young son of his first wife, who died prematurely, and he let a young woman, Mary, to take care of as it is forced to go home to work abroad. Leave a young woman for over a year with young men in full hormonal thrust ... you really seek to be declared a "Saint" for posterity, but not be sane to know what would happen.
We can still recognize this man the fact of the mental torture which was presented to him on his return; or do and he let Mary was stoned, or it "contrived" for that stoning should not take place. I grant it, as such, a real moral recognition that few men are able to date.
Why you talk about Joseph and Mary while we are on Joan of Arc. Just because Régine PERNOUD tells the same story ... but very pretty incredible and it did a lot of research to justify the unjustifiable.
I put two stars for the excellent research work; three stars are missing due to the conclusion and deductions this huge task. The justification for these researchers is always the same: "we can not refer to products Text" ...
Okay for references but these people have an idea of the emotional life of a single human being? No, they seem disembodied; entrenched behind their archives, which appear to protect a drive fear.
However, I recommend reading this book to understand how it can work for those who can decode it.
Kind regards. JM MARTIN
