If you close your eyes and picture Joan of Arc, what do you see? Honestly, it’s probably a tall, ethereal woman with flowing hair, glowing skin, and shiny silver armor. Maybe she’s looking toward the sky like she’s caught in a trance. We can thank centuries of European oil painters and Hollywood directors for that. But if you were looking for a real Joan of Arc picture—something captured while she was actually breathing—you’re going to be disappointed.
She lived in the 1400s. Cameras weren't a thing, obviously. But even the "official" portraits you see in textbooks weren't painted by people who ever met her. It's kinda wild when you think about it. One of the most famous women in human history, and we’re basically guessing what she looked like.
The One Contemporary Doodle We Actually Have
There is exactly one drawing of Joan of Arc that exists from her actual lifetime. It’s not a masterpiece. It’s not even a proper painting. It is a tiny, hurried doodle in the margin of a court register.
Clément de Fauquembergue, a clerk for the Parliament of Paris, sketched it on May 10, 1429. He had just heard the news that Joan had liberated Orléans. He was probably bored or excited—maybe both—and he drew a little figure of a woman with a sword and a banner.
Why the doodle is "wrong"
- The hair: He drew her with long, flowing hair and a dress.
- The reality: We know from her trial records she had her hair cropped short "in a circle above her ears," like a man.
- The witness: Fauquembergue never actually saw her. He was in Paris; she was in Orléans. He was just drawing what he imagined a "Maid of Heaven" should look like.
So, the only Joan of Arc picture from 1429 is basically a 15th-century version of fan art.
The Mystery of the Lost Portrait
Here’s where it gets interesting. Joan herself mentioned a painting during her trial in 1431. She told her judges that while she was in Arras, she saw a painting of herself in the hands of a Scotsman. She said it showed her in full armor, kneeling to hand a letter to the King.
✨ Don't miss: Why T. Pepin’s Hospitality Centre Still Dominates the Tampa Event Scene
She even said, "It was like me."
That’s the closest we’ve ever gotten to a confirmed likeness. But that painting? Gone. Vanished into history. Some historians think it was destroyed during the iconoclasm of later wars, or maybe it’s just rotting in some French basement. Either way, the only Joan of Arc picture she ever personally vouched for is missing.
How Painters Changed Her Face Over Time
Since there was no "real" image to go off of, artists just used Joan as a blank canvas for whatever France needed at the time.
In the 1800s, France was feeling a bit bruised after the Franco-Prussian War. They needed a hero. Suddenly, Joan of Arc was everywhere. You’ve probably seen the Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres painting from 1854. She’s standing at the coronation of Charles VII, looking very poised and very... well, clean. Ingres used a professional model for her body and basically created a Neoclassical goddess.
Then you have Jules Bastien-Lepage. His 1879 painting, which hangs in the Met, is probably the most famous Joan of Arc picture today. He didn't want a goddess. He wanted a peasant. He used his cousin, Marie-Adèle Robert, as the model for Joan’s body. He wanted her to look like a girl from the dirt who was genuinely confused by the voices she was hearing.
🔗 Read more: Human DNA Found in Hot Dogs: What Really Happened and Why You Shouldn’t Panic
"I believe that I found the head of my Joan of Arc. Everyone thinks that she beautifully expresses the resolution to leave her home, while still retaining an entirely naïve peasant charm." — Jules Bastien-Lepage
But even this "realistic" version is a guess. Bastien-Lepage was painting 450 years after she died.
What Science Says She Actually Looked Like
If we ignore the pretty paintings and look at the actual testimony from people who knew her—like her page Louis de Contes or the Duke of Alençon—we get a very different image.
Forget the supermodel. Joan was described as a "short, sturdy" girl. She was around 5'2", which was normal back then. She had dark hair, a tanned face from working in the sun, and a small red birthmark behind her right ear.
One soldier who helped dress her wounds noted she was "well-proportioned" but also emphasized her "virile bearing." She wasn't delicate. She was a teenager who could spend six days straight in heavy plate armor without complaining. You don't do that with a "ethereal" physique.
💡 You might also like: The Gospel of Matthew: What Most People Get Wrong About the First Book of the New Testament
Quick Reality Check on Her Appearance
- Hair: Black and cut like a bowl (pudding-basin style).
- Skin: Sunburned and weathered.
- Neck: Described as "short and strong."
- Voice: Surprisingly high and feminine, which contrasted with her tough exterior.
The Iconography vs. The Human
The reason every Joan of Arc picture looks so different is that Joan isn't just a person; she's a symbol. To the Church, she's a saint. To the French state, she's a patriot. To feminists, she's a rebel who refused to follow gender norms.
She insisted on wearing men's clothes even when it literally led to her death sentence. She told her judges that her choice of dress was "a small thing," but to the world, it was everything. Every time an artist paints her, they have to decide: do they show the woman who broke the rules, or the saint who followed God?
Usually, they choose the saint. They put her in a dress she never wore or give her a sword she rarely used (she actually preferred carrying her banner into battle so she wouldn't have to kill anyone).
How to Spot a "Fake" Joan
If you're browsing art or looking for a historically accurate Joan of Arc picture, here are a few red flags that tell you the artist was taking "creative liberties":
- Long hair: This is the biggest giveaway. Joan specifically cut her hair to fit into the military lifestyle and to avoid unwanted attention.
- Fancy armor: Most paintings show her in polished, ornate silver. In reality, her armor was functional, likely scuffed, and eventually stolen or confiscated.
- The "Trance" Look: If she looks like she’s about to faint or is staring at a light bulb, it’s 19th-century Romanticism. The real Joan was known for being incredibly sharp-witted and sassy during her trial. She wasn't "away" in her head; she was very much present.
What We Can Learn From the Lack of a Picture
Maybe it’s better we don’t have a photo. Not having a definitive Joan of Arc picture allows her to belong to everyone. She can be the girl next door, the warrior queen, or the quiet mystic.
If you want to get as close as possible to the "real" Joan, stop looking at the paintings. Read the transcripts of her trial. Her voice is preserved there in a way her face never was. She was funny, stubborn, and remarkably brave.
Next Steps for History Buffs:
- Check out the National Archives in Paris online to see a high-res scan of the Fauquembergue doodle.
- Visit the Musée des Beaux-Arts in Orléans; they have a "statue head" that was long thought to be modeled after Joan, though modern historians now think it might be a St. George.
- Look up the reconstruction by Royalty Now—they use the written descriptions to create a modern "photo" of what she likely looked like based on the 1431 descriptions.