Concerning the omission of certain crucial statements made by Joan on her submission to the Church and her reasons for wearing male clothing, a selection of the witness testimony includes the following:

First, on the subject of the omission of certain points concerning her submission to the Church, here are some examples - either explicit descriptions of items that were deliberately left out, or descriptions of Joan's clarifications that are not found in the transcript:

From the first deposition (March 5, 1450) of Isambart de la Pierre (an assessor at the Condemnation trial):
"[after he advised Joan to submit to the Council of Basel] ... immediately, in great anger and indignation, the Bishop of Beauvais began to shout: 'Be quiet, in the Devil's name!' and told the notary that he should be certain to never write down the submission she had made to the General Council of Basel."
He describes Joan's reaction as follows in his third deposition: "Joan then said to the Bishop: 'Oh! You certainly write down whatever is against me, but won't record anything that is favorable to me.' And I believe that this wasn't written down, as a result of which there arose a great muttering in the court."
His second deposition includes the following further clarification:
"The Bishop [Cauchon] sometimes asked her whether she was willing to submit to the Church; to which she replied: 'What is meant by the Church? As for you, I do not wish to submit to your judgment, for you are my mortal enemy.' [i.e., Cauchon was a member of the English Council] And then, after I told her that a General Council was being held, attended by many prelates, including those of her faction, she replied that she submitted to this Council."

From the deposition of the assessor Richard Grouchet (May 9, 1452):
"...when Joan was asked whether she was willing to submit to the Bishop of Beauvais and some of those present who were cited by name, Joan replied no, but that she submitted to the Pope and Catholic Church, pleading that she be brought to the Pope. And when they told her that her case's transcript would be sent to the Pope so he could give judgement, she replied that she didn't want this to be done, because she didn't know what they might put down in the record; but instead she wanted to be brought there, and questioned by the Pope.
I don't know whether it was written in the transcript that she didn't submit to the Church... but I do know that, in my presence, Joan always submitted to the judgement of the Pope and Church."

From the third deposition of the bailiff Jean Massieu (May 8, 1452):
"... I heard Joan saying to the theologians who were questioning her: 'You are asking me about the Church Triumphant and Militant; I don't understand these terms, but I wish to submit to the Church, as a good Christian should.'"

From the third deposition of the assessor Pierre Miget (May 12, 1456):
"... I well remember that Joan said many times she referred her words and actions to our lord the Pope.
I heard from her several times during the trial, when she was being questioned, that she asserted that she didn't wish to believe in anything which would be contrary to the Catholic faith, and that, if she had deviated from the faith in any of her words or actions, she would reject such things; and she expressly declared many times that she submitted all her words and actions to the judgement of the Church and our lord the Pope."

From the deposition of the Rouen citizen Pierre Cusquel on May 12, 1456:
"... I heard from Joan's own mouth, during the sermon made by Guillaume Erard at Saint-Ouen, that Joan didn't wish to believe anything contrary to the Catholic faith, and, if anything in her words or actions had deviated from the faith, she wanted to reject such and submit to the judgement of the clergy."

Concerning her stated reasons for wearing and resuming male clothing, which were also left out of the Condemnation transcript, we have depositions such as the following examples which detail the actual reasons she gave on the matter - i.e., the necessity of wearing a type of clothing for which the pants and tunic could be securely tied together as a defense against rape, a motive which the Church recognized as an acceptable reason. This was left out of the Condemnation transcript, except for some very vague allusions to it.

From the second deposition (May 2, 1452) of Guillaume Manchon, chief notary at Joan's trial:
"...at that time she was dressed in male clothing, and kept complaining that she could not do without it, fearing that the guards would violate her in the night; and once or twice she had complained to the Bishop of Beauvais [Pierre Cauchon], the Vice-Inquisitor [Jean LeMaitre] and Master Nicholas Loiseleur that one of the guards had attempted to rape her."
And from his fourth deposition (May 12, 1456): "[when asked why she wore male clothing] she said that she didn't dare give up her hosen [the pants or 'tights' worn by men in that era], nor to keep them but firmly tied [i.e., tied to the tunic as a protection against rape], because the Bishop and Earl [Richard, Earl of Warwick] well knew that her guards had tried to rape her several times; and once when she cried out [for help], the Earl himself came to her aid in response to her cries, and if he hadn't arrived, the guards would have raped her..."

Other witnesses said that the same motive was behind her resumption of male clothing after her abjuration:
From the third deposition (May 13, 1456) of the assessor Friar Martin Ladvenu:
"I heard from Joan that a great English lord entered her prison and tried to violate her by force. And she told me that this was the reason why she resumed male clothing after the first sentence."

From the first deposition (May 3, 1452) of Pierre Cusquel:
"... people said that there was no other cause for her condemnation except the resumption of male clothing, and that she had not, and was not, wearing male clothing except in order to avoid giving herself to the soldiers [i.e., the guards] whom she was with; and I asked her once in prison why she wore male clothes; she replied the same [as above]."

From the second deposition on May 3, 1452 of Friar Isambart de la Pierre:
"... after her abjuration she put on female clothing, and asked to be brought to the prisons of the Church; which they didn't allow. In fact, as I heard from Joan herself, someone of great authority tried to rape her; as a result of which, in order to be better able to prevent such things, she said she resumed male clothing, which had been deliberately left near her in prison. Similarly, after she resumed this clothing, I saw and heard the aforesaid Bishop, along with other Englishmen, exulting and saying openly to everyone, to Lord Warwick and others: 'It is done!' "
And from his first preliminary deposition on March 5, 1450:
"... I and a number of others were present when Joan defended herself for having resumed male clothing, publicly saying and affirming that the English had committed, or ordered to be committed, much wrong and violation against her in prison when she had been dressed in female clothing; and in fact I saw her weeping, her face full of tears, disfigured and outraged in such fashion that I felt pity and compassion for her. When they labeled her an obstinate and relapsed heretic, she replied publicly in front of all of those present: 'If you, my lords of the Church, had brought me to, and kept me in, your own prisons, perhaps things wouldn't be this way for me.' "

From the fourth deposition (May 12, 1456) of Guillaume Manchon:
"And in my presence she was asked [by the judges] why she had resumed this male clothing. She replied that she had done it to protect her virginity, because she was not safe in female clothing among her guards, who wanted to rape her; concerning which she had complained many times to the Bishop and Earl, and the judges had promised her that she would be in the custody of the Church, and would have a woman with her [i.e., a nun, to serve as a guard, as was standard procedure in Inquisitorial prisons]; additionally, she said that if it would please the lord judges to put her in a safe place in which she would not be afraid, then she was prepared to put the female clothing back on..."

Another witness gave further details and an additional reason for her "relapse":

From the first deposition (March 5, 1450) of Jean Massieu, priest and bailiff at the trial:
"And that day [May 24th] after dinner, in the presence of the ecclesiastic council, she put aside the male clothing and put on women's clothing, as they had ordered her. It was then Thursday or Friday after Pentecost, and her male clothing was put in a sack, in the same room in which she had been held prisoner and stayed under the guard of five Englishmen, three of whom stayed at night inside the room, and two outside at the door to the room... And when the following Sunday morning came, which was Trinity Sunday, when she had to get up, as she told me, she had said to these Englishmen, her guards, "Unchain me, so I can get up." And then one of these Englishmen removed the female clothing which she had on, and emptied the sack which contained the male clothing and threw this clothing to her while saying, "Get up," and put her female clothes in the sack. And, according to what she said, she put on the male clothing they had given her, after saying, "M'lords, you know this is forbidden me: without fail, I will not take it." And nevertheless they wouldn't give her any other, so that she remained engaged in this argument until noon; and finally, she was compelled by bodily necessity to go out and therefore wear this clothing; and after she had returned, they wouldn't give her any other [clothing], despite any supplication or request that she might make."

And subsequent events from his third deposition: "For that Trinity Sunday many people were summoned to view her in this situation, to whom she stated her reasons for doing so; and among these I saw Master André Marguerie, who was in great peril because, when he said, 'It would be good to ask her why she has resumed male clothing', an Englishman [one of the soldiers] lifted a spear which he was holding with the intent of stabbing Master André. At which point Master André and many others left, terrified."

On both of these points and others, the Condemnation transcript clearly does not include Joan's actual statements: only a few, far more vague, statements on these subjects managed to make it into the document.

Translations copyright © 2002, Allen Williamson All rights reserved.