Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhand
You just proved what i said lol... almost being a key-word. Alot of what Joan of Arc achieved is hypothetically speaking, "would have" and so on. She did not achieve everything that she set out to do. I'm not trying to make her appear weaker because she is a woman, i'm just trying to prove a point. She was never granted full military control, she had to confer with the Duke of [insert] before any major decisions were made.
She was burned at the stake, whether it was anulled or not, the "mockery" was successful and the mighty Joan of Arc was made a martyr... get over it.
|
Not wishing to go too off-topic here, but please reread what I said. I stated
"She did complete her primary aim, the reversal of France's fortunes in the 100 Year's War and almost single-handedly had Charles VII crowned king of France at Rheims." The 'almost' you are referring to does not mitigate her achievement. She did get Charles crowned king, which was her aim, and she did so 'almost' single-handedly (incredible for a teenage girl of the era).
As far as conferring with Duc de Alençon, yes she did, what of it? She eventually became co-commander of an army with him. She also had many heated arguments with Dunois of Orleans over tactics. Had she not prevailed with her strategy, Dunois was ready to retreat before the taking of les Tournelles and the raising of the siege of Orleans would have failed. She completed in nine days what the French army did not do in five months. Bluntly, the French achieved victory because of her choice of tactics over the established leadership's cautious and defeatist attitudes. The raising of the siege of Orleans marked the turning point in the Hundred Year's War. There are no hypotheticals about it.
As far as 'getting over it', please watch your tone. I would hate to see this thread locked because of unnecessary attitude.