Where a dethroned monarch lingers in visions, relics, and the fervent hopes of those he left behind, a study in posthumous royal sanctity..

---

---

From Beyond the Grave: Miracles, Cult, and Canonisation in the Posthumous Veneration of King James II and VII

Summary

The article examines how James II and VII, deposed in 1688 and dying in exile in 1701, became the focus of a small but persistent devotional following that blended political loyalty, Catholic piety, and the emotional needs of Jacobite communities. The article evaluates the evidence for miracles, relics, and intercessory claims associated with the king, situating them within the wider Stuart tradition of sacral monarchy and the long history of royal sanctity.

It also considers the formal attempts to open a canonisation cause, comparing them with other early‑modern saint‑making efforts and assessing whether the surviving documentation meets the thresholds normally required by the Catholic Church.

The article ultimately argues that while James’s relics and memory carried real affective power, especially among exiled or dispossessed supporters, the evidentiary basis for a viable canonisation cause remains thin, shaped more by political longing and dynastic symbolism than by verifiable miracle claims. This creates a portrait of a king whose afterlife was spiritually meaningful to his followers but institutionally fragile, suspended between devotion, nostalgia, and the limits of historical proof.

Introduction

The death of King James II and VII [1] in 1701 marked the end of the last Catholic monarch of England, Scotland, and Ireland. His subsequent exile and burial in France, the distribution of his bodily relics, and the emergence of a cult of veneration among Jacobite supporters and within Catholic circles have prompted scholarly interest in whether James was regarded as a saintly figure after his death. Certainly images present the king at pray as a good catholic monarch.

This report investigates, the extent and nature of James II and VII’s posthumous veneration, the manifestation of devotional activity, the existence and progress of any formal canonisation process, and the Catholic Church’s official response. The analysis draws on primary sources, ecclesiastical records, contemporary accounts, and the most reputable secondary scholarship, with particular attention to the role of the Benedictine church on Rue St Jacques in Paris, the distribution and veneration of relics, reports of miracles, and the legal-procedural context of 18th-century canonisation causes.

1. Historical Context: James II and VII’s Death and Burial

James II and VII died in exile at the Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye, France, on 16 September 1701. His death followed years of political and religious turmoil, culminating in his deposition during the “Glorious Revolution” or “Protestant revolution” of 1688. James fled to France, where he lived under the protection of his maternal cousin Louis XIV¹². Upon his death, James’s body was eviscerated and his remains distributed among several ecclesiastical institutions, a practice with both religious and political resonance in the early modern period³⁴.

The principal resting place for his body was the English Benedictines’ church on the Rue St Jacques in Paris, specifically in the Chapel of St Edmund. His heart was placed in a silver-gilt locket and given to the convent at Chaillot; his brain was placed in a lead casket and given to the Scots College in Paris; his entrails were divided between the parish church of Saint-Germain-en-Laye and the English Jesuit college at Saint-Omer; and the flesh from his right arm was given to the English Augustinian nuns of Paris³⁴¹. This distribution of body-part relics was not only a reflection of Catholic funerary custom but also a deliberate act to promote the Stuart cause and the sanctity of the exiled king³.

2. The Distribution and Veneration of Relics

2.1. Relic Distribution and Custodianship

Only two sites in England retain the relics of the saints they represent as they did before the English Reformation. The tomb relics of Edward the Confessor are in Westminster Abbey and as royal relics they had protection from the English reformation. . The relics of Saint Wite in Dorset seem to have slipped through the net at the Reformation and survived in-situ. The relics of Saint Wite allow us to experience the way that relics were once spread throughout parish Churches in England and how the relics of King James were donated as religious items of veneration.

The division of James II and VII’s remains among five institutions as part of the embalming process was a significant event, both religiously and politically. The heart, preserved in a silver-gilt locket, was entrusted to the convent at Chaillot [1] while the brain, entrails, and other bodily parts were distributed to institutions with strong Stuart or Jacobite associations³⁴¹. The main body was placed in a triple sarcophagus at the Benedictine church on Rue St Jacques, Paris, which became the focal point for subsequent veneration⁴⁵.

The distribution of these relics was intended to advertise the righteousness and piety of the exiled king, and by extension, the legitimacy and sanctity of the Stuart dynasty’s claim to the thrones of England, Scotland, and Ireland³. The relics, particularly those in the form of bodily remains, were considered especially potent, echoing the medieval and early modern belief in the therapeutic and quasi-religious power of contact relics³.

2.2. Relics as Political and Religious Symbols

The use of relics in the Stuart cause wasn’t unique to James II and VII. Throughout the 18th century, Jacobite supporters used relics and memorial objects to maintain loyalty and affection for the exiled dynasty. The possession of relics, including lockets containing segments of James’s heart or hair, served as both tokens of personal devotion and as political statements of allegiance to the Stuart cause³⁶.

The heart-shaped locket, now in the collection of National Museums Scotland, is a notable example. It is said to contain a segment of James II’s heart (pericardium) and was part of a set of relics that included a velvet pouch and a circular box with hair and other materials associated with the king³. Such objects were imbued with amuletic and affective qualities, believed to transmit the king’s virtue and sanctity to those who possessed or venerated them³.

2.3. The Benedictine Church on Rue St Jacques

The English Benedictine community in Paris, established in the early 17th century, played a central role in the veneration of James II after his death. The church on Rue St Jacques became the centre of the cult and the site of his principal tomb and a locus for pilgrimage and devotion among Jacobite exiles and Catholic sympathisers⁷. The Benedictines actively promoted the cult of James II, preserving his memory and compiling accounts of miracles attributed to his intercession⁸.

2.4 The viscera burial of Mary of Modena

Mary of Modena’s viscera burial reflects the same devotional logic that shaped the posthumous treatment of James II and VII, creating a paired landscape of memory in which the royal couple’s bodies became instruments of recollection, loyalty, and quiet veneration.

When Mary died in 1718 at Saint‑Germain‑en‑Laye, her body was interred at the Visitandines convent at Chaillot, the same house that had received James’s heart in 1701. This placement was not incidental. Early modern Catholic funerary practice often separated the viscera from the body, but in Mary’s case the choice of Chaillot echoed and reinforced the sacred geography already established around her husband’s remains. James’s heart at Chaillot, his brain at the Scots College, his entrails at Saint‑Germain‑en‑Laye and Saint‑Omer, and the flesh of his right arm with the English Augustinian nuns formed a network of devotional sites that allowed Jacobite exiles to encounter the king as a dispersed, sanctified presence.

Mary’s viscera burial inserted her into this same network, binding her memory to his and extending the emotional and spiritual reach of the Stuart dynasty. Her remains, like his, became objects through which supporters could articulate fidelity, grief, and hope, transforming the couple’s shared exile into a materialised form of dynastic devotion.

 Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.

3. Evidence of Posthumous Veneration

3.1. Immediate Reactions and Early Cult Activity

Contemporary accounts indicate that, almost immediately after James II and VII’s death, a cult of veneration began to develop around his tomb in the Benedictine church in Paris. The prior of the church referred to receiving “the joyful relics of a most Holy Confessor, perhaps even a Revered Martyr,” and at his funeral, James was described as “a victim for his Church and his Religion”⁸. The idea of royal king and martyr suffering for the faith appears in the life and death of Charles I was King of England, Scotland, and Ireland who was the father of James

The funerary chapel became a place of pilgrimage, with reports of healings and other miraculous occurrences associated with visits to his sarcophagus and memorial⁹. These reports were not confined to the immediate aftermath of his death but continued into the following decades, particularly among Jacobite supporters and Catholic communities sympathetic to the Stuart cause⁸.

3.2. Reports of death and later the Miracles

Numerous accounts of miracles attributed to the intercession of James II were compiled by the Benedictines and other religious communities. On 15 June 1702, Cardinal de Noailles, Archbishop of Paris, commissioned an investigation into the authenticity of these miracles, with the intention of gathering evidence for a possible canonisation cause⁹¹⁰.

From the large number of testimonies collected, nineteen miracles were verified as authentic by Joachim de la Chétardie, who was tasked with examining the evidence⁹. These miracles included cures attributed to contact with relics or objects associated with James II, such as a piece of cloth dipped in his blood during embalming, echoing similar accounts from the cult of Charles I⁹.

Thomas Pennant, writing in 1765, described seeing several crutches left by people who claimed to have been cured by the deceased king, with the miracles said to be fully attested by Cardinal Noailles⁹. Such physical evidence of veneration and claims of miraculous cures are consistent with the patterns observed in other royal and non-royal cults of sanctity in early modern Europe¹¹.

3.3. Pilgrimage and Cultic Practices

The Benedictine church on Rue St Jacques became a site of pilgrimage for those seeking the intercession of James II. Pilgrims visited his tomb, prayed for his intercession, and left votive offerings in gratitude for favours received⁸. The veneration of James II and VII’s relics and the attribution of miracles to his intercession were central features of this cultic activity.

The distribution of relics, the compilation of miracle accounts, and the encouragement of pilgrimage were all part of a deliberate effort by the Benedictines and other Jacobite supporters to promote the sanctity of James II and to advance the cause of the Stuart dynasty⁸⁷.

4. The Canonisation Cause: Legal and Procedural Developments

4.1. Initiation of the Cause

The process of canonisation in the Catholic Church, by the 18th century, was governed by strict legal and procedural norms, overseen by the Congregation of Rites in Rome¹²¹³. The promotion of James II’s cause followed the established pattern: the collection of evidence of heroic virtue, the compilation of miracle accounts, and the submission of formal petitions to ecclesiastical authorities.

In the years following James II and VII’s death, the Benedictines and the Visitation nuns at Chaillot compiled accounts of miracles on behalf of the widowed queen, Mary of Modena. The initial investigation, commissioned by Cardinal de Noailles in 1702, resulted in the verification of nineteen miracles, but the cause appears to have lost momentum in the subsequent decades⁹.

4.2. Renewal and Submission to Rome

The cause was revived in 1734, when “memorials” of James II’s life from eyewitnesses, with the intention of submitting them to the Congregation of Rites in Rome¹ were drawn up. By January 1735, the cause was reportedly ready for transmission to Rome, and when Benedict XIV was elected pope in 1740, the cause was still proceeding¹.

The formal opening of the cause in 1734 by the Archbishop of Paris, Charles du Luc, conferred upon James II the title “Servant of God,” the first step in the canonisation process¹⁸⁹. However, after this initial progress, the cause appears to have lapsed and was never brought to completion¹⁸⁹.

4.3. The Catholic Church’s Official Response

The Catholic Church’s response to the cause of James II and VII, was cautious and ultimately non-committal. While the Archbishop of Paris and other ecclesiastical authorities in France supported the investigation and compilation of evidence, there is no record of the cause being formally advanced to the stage of beatification or canonisation by the Congregation of Rites in Rome¹⁸⁹.

The cause remained dormant after the mid-18th century, and there is no evidence that the Church ever granted James II the title of “Blessed” or “Saint,” nor that any public cultus was officially authorised beyond the local context of the Benedictine church in Paris¹⁸⁹.

5. Comparative Perspectives: Royal Causes and Canonisation Procedures

5.1. Comparison with Other Royal Causes

The cause of James II can be compared with those of other English monarchs who were venerated as saints or martyrs, notably Edward the Confessor and Henry VI of England. Edward the Confessor was canonised in 1161, following a process that involved the compilation of hagiographical lives, the attribution of miracles, and the promotion of his cult by Westminster Abbey and the monarchy¹⁴.

Henry VI, who died in 1471, was the subject of a widespread cult of veneration, with numerous miracles attributed to his intercession and a formal process of canonisation initiated but never completed¹¹¹⁵. The cult of Henry VI was actively promoted for political reasons by the Tudor dynasty, and a substantial body of miracle accounts and devotional literature survives¹¹¹⁵.

In both cases, the promotion of royal sanctity served political as well as religious purposes, and the success or failure of the cause depended on a combination of popular devotion, ecclesiastical support, and papal approval¹¹¹⁴.

5.2. Legal and Procedural Steps for Canonisation in 18th-Century France

By the 18th century, the process of beatification and canonisation was highly centralised under papal authority, with the Congregation of Rites responsible for regulating the process and maintaining strict standards for the recognition of miracles and heroic virtue¹²¹³. The process typically involved:

• The compilation of evidence of the candidate’s life and virtues.
• The collection and verification of miracles attributed to the candidate’s intercession.
• The submission of a formal petition (positio) to the Congregation of Rites.
• The examination of the evidence by theologians, canon lawyers, and medical experts.
• The issuance of a decree of beatification or canonisation by the pope, if the evidence was deemed sufficient¹²¹³.

In practice, the process was lengthy and expensive, and relatively few canonisations were completed in the 17th and 18th centuries¹²¹³. The cause of James II followed this pattern: initial enthusiasm and the collection of evidence, followed by a loss of momentum and eventual dormancy.

6. Archival Sources and Modern Status of the Cause

6.1. Archival Sources

The principal archival sources for the cause of James II and VII, are located in Paris and Rome. The records of the English Benedictine community, the archives of the Archbishop of Paris, and the collections of the National Archives of France contain documentation related to the burial, relics, and early veneration of James II¹⁶¹⁷¹⁸. The Vatican Archives and the records of the Congregation of Rites may contain correspondence and documentation related to the submission and consideration of the cause in Rome¹²¹³.

In Britain, the British Library and other repositories hold contemporary accounts, letters, and printed materials related to the Jacobite promotion of James II’s sanctity and the wider context of Stuart loyalism¹⁹²⁰.

6.2. Status of the Cause in Modern Times

The cause for the canonisation of James II and VII, has remained dormant since the mid-18th century. While he was often accorded the designation, “Servant of God” following the opening of the cause in 1734, there has been no further progress towards beatification or canonisation¹⁸⁹. The cult of James II, once promoted by the Benedictines and Jacobite supporters, has faded, and there is no evidence of any ongoing public veneration or official recognition by the Catholic Church.

The fate of James II and VII’s relics and tomb was sealed during the French Revolution, when the Benedictine church on Rue St Jacques was destroyed and the tomb was desecrated. Some remains, such as the urn containing part of his bowel, may have been rediscovered and reburied in the 19th century, but the principal site of veneration no longer exists⁴⁵.

7. Analysis of the Evidence: Miracles, Cult, and Church Response

7.1. Nature and Documentation of Miracles

The miracles attributed to James II and VII, were primarily healings, often associated with contact with his relics or tomb. The investigation commissioned by Cardinal de Noailles in 1702 resulted in the verification of nineteen miracles, based on the testimony of witnesses and the examination of physical evidence such as crutches left at the tomb⁹.

The documentation of these miracles followed the procedures established by the Catholic Church for the recognition of miracles in canonisation causes: the collection of sworn testimony, the examination of medical evidence, and the assessment of the absence of natural explanations for the cures¹²¹³. However, the standards for the recognition of miracles became increasingly stringent in the 18th century, and the cause of James II does not appear to have advanced beyond the initial stages of investigation and local veneration¹²¹³.

7.2. Cult Activity and Pilgrimage

The cult of James II and VII, was centred on the Benedictine church in Paris, where his tomb became a site of pilgrimage and devotion. The veneration of his relics, the attribution of miracles, and the compilation of miracle accounts were all features of this cultic activity⁸.

The promotion of James II and VII’s sanctity was closely linked to the political aims of the Jacobite movement, which sought to legitimise the Stuart claim to the thrones of Britain and Ireland by associating the dynasty with sanctity and martyrdom⁸². The use of relics, pilgrimage, and miracle accounts was part of a broader strategy to maintain loyalty and support among exiled and domestic supporters of the Stuart cause⁸².

7.3. The Catholic Church’s Official Position

The Catholic Church’s response to the cause of James II and VII was characterised by caution and restraint. While local ecclesiastical authorities in Paris supported the investigation and compilation of evidence, there is no record of the cause being formally advanced to the stage of beatification or canonisation by the Congregation of Rites in Rome¹⁸⁹.

The cause remained dormant after the mid-18th century, and there is no evidence that the Church ever granted James II the title of “Blessed” or “Saint,” nor that any public cultus was officially authorised beyond the local context of the Benedictine church in Paris¹⁸⁹. The destruction of the church and tomb during the French Revolution effectively ended any possibility of a revival of the cult or the cause.

8. Synthesis: The Limits of Royal Sanctity and the Stuart Cause

The case of James II and VII illustrates the complex interplay between politics, religion, and sanctity in early modern Europe. The promotion of his cult and the initiation of a canonisation cause were motivated by a combination of genuine religious devotion, dynastic loyalty, and political strategy⁸².

The evidence for posthumous veneration is substantial: the distribution and veneration of relics, the attribution of miracles, the compilation of miracle accounts, and the encouragement of pilgrimage and devotion at his tomb. The initiation of a formal canonisation cause, the verification of miracles, and the submission of evidence to ecclesiastical authorities demonstrate a serious effort to secure official recognition of James II’s sanctity¹⁸⁹.

However, the cause ultimately failed to achieve its goal. The Catholic Church, while willing to investigate and consider the evidence, did not grant James II the status of “Blessed” or “Saint,” and the cult remained localised and unofficial. The destruction of the principal site of veneration during the French Revolution and the decline of the Jacobite cause in the later 18th century ensured that the cult of James II faded into obscurity⁴⁵⁷.

9. Conclusion

The posthumous veneration of King James II and VII as a saintly figure is a well-documented phenomenon, rooted in the religious and political culture of the early 18th century. The distribution and veneration of his relics, the attribution of miracles, the promotion of pilgrimage and cultic activity, and the initiation of a formal canonisation cause are all attested by primary sources and reputable secondary scholarship^3189457.

The Catholic Church’s response was cautious: while local investigations were conducted and miracles were verified, the cause did not advance to beatification or canonisation, and no public cultus was officially authorised. The cult of James II, once promoted by the Benedictines and Jacobite supporters, has faded, and there is no evidence of any ongoing public veneration or official recognition by the Catholic Church.

In summary, James II and VII was indeed venerated as a saintly figure by supporters and within certain Catholic circles after his death. This veneration manifested in the distribution and veneration of relics, reports of miracles, and pilgrimage to his tomb. A formal canonisation process was initiated, with miracles investigated and evidence submitted to ecclesiastical authorities, but the cause ultimately lapsed and was never completed. The Catholic Church did not grant James II the status of “Blessed” or “Saint,” and the cult remained local and unofficial.

Table: Key Evidence for the Posthumous Veneration and Canonisation Cause of James II and VII

Aspect	Evidence	Source(s)	Church Response
Distribution of relics	Heart, brain, entrails, arm flesh distributed to ecclesiastical institutions; main body at Benedictine church, Rue St Jacques, Paris	341	Local veneration permitted
Veneration at tomb	Pilgrimage, prayers, votive offerings, reports of healings at tomb in Paris	8	No public cultus authorised
Reports of miracles	Nineteen miracles verified by ecclesiastical investigation; physical evidence (crutches, etc.)	9	Local investigation only
Compilation of miracle accounts	Benedictines and Visitation nuns compiled accounts for submission to Rome		Cause opened, then lapsed
Formal canonisation process	Cause opened in 1734 by Archbishop of Paris; title “Servant of God” conferred	189	No progress beyond initial stage
Submission to Rome	Memorials and evidence prepared for Congregation of Rites; cause ready by 1735	1	No beatification or canonisation
Church’s official response	Local support, but no papal decree of beatification or canonisation	18	Cause dormant, no public cultus
Fate of relics and tomb	Tomb and church destroyed during French Revolution; relics lost or reburied	45	No revival of cult possible

The evidence demonstrates that, while James II and VII was venerated as a saintly figure and a formal canonisation cause was initiated, the process was never completed and the Catholic Church didn’t grant him official recognition as a saint. The cult of James II, once a significant feature of Jacobite and Catholic devotion, has faded into history, leaving behind a rich but ultimately unfulfilled legacy of royal sanctity.

Analytical Commentary

The case of James II and VII’s posthumous veneration is emblematic of the intersection between dynastic politics and religious devotion in early modern Europe. The deliberate distribution of relics, the encouragement of pilgrimage and miracle reports, and the initiation of a canonisation cause were all strategies employed by the Stuart dynasty and its supporters to maintain legitimacy and inspire loyalty among their followers⁸².

The Catholic Church’s cautious response reflects the complexities of canonising a figure whose sanctity was closely tied to political controversy and whose cult was promoted for both religious and political reasons. The failure of the cause to advance beyond the initial stages is consistent with the Church’s reluctance to canonise figures whose cults were not universally accepted or whose causes were tainted by political considerations¹²¹³.

The comparison with other royal causes, such as those of Edward the Confessor and Henry VI, highlights the importance of widespread popular devotion, ecclesiastical support, and papal approval in the successful canonisation of royal figures¹¹¹⁵¹⁴. In the case of James II, the lack of universal support and the decline of the Jacobite cause contributed to the dormancy of the canonisation process.

Final Assessment

King James II and VII was venerated as a saintly figure by supporters and within certain Catholic circles after his death. This veneration manifested in the distribution and veneration of relics, reports of miracles, and pilgrimage to his tomb in Paris. A formal canonisation process was initiated, with miracles investigated and evidence submitted to ecclesiastical authorities, but the cause ultimately lapsed and was never completed. The Catholic Church did not grant James II the status of “Blessed” or “Saint,” and the cult remained local and unofficial. The destruction of the principal site of veneration during the French Revolution and the decline of the Jacobite cause ensured that the cult of James II faded into obscurity.

People Also Ask

What miracles were attributed to King James II after his death?

Accounts from Jacobite exiles and Catholic communities describe healings, answered prayers, and moments of intercession linked to James II’s relics and burial places. These reports formed the core of early attempts to argue for his sanctity, though none met the evidentiary standards required for a formal canonisation cause.

Why did supporters venerate James II as a saintly figure?

His exile, suffering, steadfast Catholic devotion, and perceived injustice at his deposition created a narrative of a pious, wronged monarch. For Jacobites, this made him a spiritual symbol as much as a political one, and his memory became a focus of prayer, loyalty, and hope.

Was there ever a formal canonisation process for James II?

There were informal efforts and early inquiries, especially among English and Scottish Catholic clergy in France, but no cause progressed far within the Roman Congregation of Rites. Surviving documentation shows interest rather than a viable, evidence‑supported case.

How were James II’s relics distributed after his death?

His body was eviscerated and divided among several religious houses: his heart at Chaillot, his brain at the Scots College in Paris, his entrails at Saint‑Germain‑en‑Laye and Saint‑Omer, and the flesh of his right arm with the English Augustinian nuns. This created multiple devotional sites for Jacobite exiles.

Did Mary of Modena receive similar posthumous treatment?

Yes. Her viscera were buried at Chaillot, the same convent that held James’s heart, creating a paired devotional landscape. Her burial echoed the Stuart practice of using bodily remains as loci of memory, fidelity, and Catholic identity.

How did Jacobite communities use relics and burial sites in their devotional life?

These sites became places of prayer, remembrance, and political identity. They allowed exiles to maintain a sense of continuity with the Stuart monarchy and to express hope for restoration through spiritual rather than political means.

Why did the canonisation cause ultimately fail?

The evidence for miracles and heroic virtue was thin, inconsistent, and often shaped by political longing rather than verifiable testimony. Without strong documentation, the cause could not advance within the Catholic Church’s formal procedures.

---

References (20)

1James II of England – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_II_of_England

2Jacobitism – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobitism

3Silver locket relic set — Chiddingstone Castle. http://www.chiddingstonecastle.org.uk/silver-locket-relic-set/

4The Final Resting Places of King James II – Quiz Monkey. http://www.quizmonkey.net/history/kings queens classified info james-ii-burial.htm

5The Battlefields Trust – Civil War Memorial Database. https://www.battlefieldstrust.com/memorial/memorial.asp?MemorialID=201

6Exile, rebellion, and vanquishment: The Jacobite challenge. https://www.nms.ac.uk/discover-catalogue/the-jacobites

7Our_Houses_Douai_Abbey – English benedictine Congregation. https://www.benedictines.org.uk/our_houses_douai_abbey/

8The Forgotten Canonisation Cause of King James II – Fellowship & Fairydust. https://fellowshipandfairydust.com/2023/06/06/the-forgotten-canonisation-cause-of-king-james-ii/

9The cause of canonization for James II, the last Catholic King of …. https://nobility.org/2019/12/the-cause-of-canonization-for-james-ii-the-last-catholic-king-of-england/

10Louis Antoine de Noailles – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Antoine_de_Noailles

11The Miracles of King Henry VI of England – JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24445972

12New procedures in the Rite of Beatification – Vatican. https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/csaints/documents/rc_con_csaints_doc_20050929_saraiva-martins-beatif_en.html

13How is a miracle recognized for beatification/canonization? – Aleteia. https://aleteia.org/2024/06/03/how-is-a-miracle-recognized-for-beatification-canonization/

149 – The Sanctity and Canonisation of Edward the Confessor. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/edward-the-confessor/sanctity-and-canonisation-of-edward-the-confessor/45118ACB8F4197A8791F026CCB8FCD4D

15Henry VI of England – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI_of_England

16Bienvenue aux Archives nationales | Archives nationales. https://www.archives-nationales.culture.gouv.fr/

17Archives numérisées – Archives de Paris. https://archives.paris.fr/archives-numerisees

18National Archives Museum – VisitParisRegion. https://www.visitparisregion.com/en/national-archives-museum

19Letters from King James II to Lord Dartmouth and from the Prince of …. https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/archive/rmgc-object-506445

20Savile correspondence. Letters to and from Henry Savile, esq., envoy at …. https://archive.org/details/trent_0116401962422_71

---

Last Curated: 10 03 2026

Return to: The Home Page