The 1456 rehabilitation process nullifies the 1431 Rouen condemnation
In 1456 a rehabilitation trial declared the 1431 Rouen condemnation null. In the causal graph this event weakens Judicial independence erosion (court capture), a driver that strengthens Rule of Law Gap from the Highest Governance Score — an improving welfare path.
Read the full account
In 1456 a rehabilitation trial declared the 1431 Rouen condemnation null. The hearings used the archbishop’s palace at Rouen among other sites. Joan did not attend; she had been burned in 1431.
Context
A nullification can restore legal memory without restoring a life. It is also a Valois political need after reconquest.
Joan of Arc is not the sole author of every later object, law, or museum label that uses the name. Shared work with courts, excavators, printers, spouses, officials, and later states does not erase a documented role, and it does not make an ancient person the signer of a twentieth-century statute.
Why it matters
High confidence on the nullification; she is not the sitting judge.
A quashing is not a canonization. 1920 is a separate Vatican act.
Who was responsible
Contribution type and responsibility level for each recorded actor — not sole-author shorthand.
Joan of Arc
PersonDirect responsibility
responsibility level 0.2 · verified
Complex: she is the subject of the nullification. Charles’s officers and church lawyers ran the 1455–56 process.
What changed
Fact → Driver → Indicator. Relationship strength orders the paths; it is not the observed indicator movement.
- FactThe 1456 rehabilitation process nullifies the 1431 Rouen condemnation
- weakensDriverJudicial independence erosion (court capture)
- strengthensIndicators (4)Rule of Law Gap from the Highest Governance Score
impact weight 0.55 · Effect from 7 July 1456 · verified
A public quashing of an occupation-era heresy sentence is a documented check on a political inquisition’s finality.
- Better
Strengthens · Relationship strength 0.4 (weight 0.55 × strength 0.72)
Observed
43.9 Score · 43.9 above the normal line (2024)
Worse than normal26 readings, 1996–2024: rose from 43 Score to 43.9 Score.
Normal is zero · any amount = worse
Weakens · Relationship strength 0.39 (weight 0.55 × strength 0.7)
Observed
0.55 index score (0-1) · 0.26 below the normal line (2024)
Worse than normalAbove normal = better
Weakens · Relationship strength 0.38 (weight 0.55 × strength 0.69)
Observed
0.62 score from 0 to 1 · 0.25 below the normal line (2024)
Worse than normal125 readings, 1900–2024: rose from 0.37 score from 0 to 1 to 0.62 score from 0 to 1.
Above normal = better
All indicators on this path (4)
- Better
Weakens · Relationship strength 0.17 (weight 0.55 × strength 0.3)
Observed
42.5 index score (0-100) · 7.53 below the normal line (2025)
Worse than normalAbove normal = better
Evidence
The sources behind this fact and its verification state.
- 1.Historial Jeanne d’Arc — RouenHistorial Jeanne d’Arc / Rouen · High credibility · verified
- 2.Britannica — Saint Joan of ArcEncyclopaedia Britannica · High credibility · verified
What the sources establish
The Historial occupies the officiality site of condemnation and rehabilitation. Britannica independently dates the 1456 process.
Established: 1456 rehabilitation nullifying 1431. Not established: that 1456 created later women’s rights law, or that it unburned anyone.
Causal path
How this event connects to drivers and indicators in the graph.
- ActorJoan of Arc
- contributed toFactThe 1456 rehabilitation process nullifies the 1431 Rouen condemnation
- weakensDriverJudicial independence erosion (court capture)
- strengthensIndicatorRule of Law Gap from the Highest Governance Score
Cite this page
Factrail. (2026). The 1456 rehabilitation process nullifies the 1431 Rouen condemnation. Factrail. https://factrail.ai/facts/joa-rehab-1456
https://factrail.ai/facts/joa-rehab-1456
Accessed 16 October 2026.
By the Factrail desk · Method: how we source and score · Last reviewed
Dispute this factNamed here, or represent someone who is? Request a right of reply.