The Different Interpretations of the Understanding of the Story of Martin Guerre - Essay Example

number 3 March The Different Interpretations of the Understanding of the Story of Martin Guerre There are many historical points which are under the study up to the present time. They are so-called dark spots that require careful research work for complement of the history of the whole mankind. For many centuries people live in a certain order and are guided by particular principles which give every age its own special flavor. France of the 16th century also has its own peculiarities; still the themes from the life of the nobility are more covered by historians than the life of law estate people. Nowadays, for example, we have an access to the story of Martin Guerre, a French peasant of the 16th century, who was at the center of a famous case of imposture. It has reached the 20th century only in one interpretation, which was available for those who were interested in the “Arrest Memorable du parlement de Tolose” of Jean de Coras, the French jurist who became the participant in the trial of Martin Guerre. Only after four centuries, the story has received a new, almost opposite, light considering its features from another angle. So our goal is to explore the different versions of the story of Martin Guerre realizing their meaning for the history. To begin with, let’s see who are the authors of new research works about the mentioned French peasant, and what their main ideas can be useful for. The thing is that the work itself "The Return of Martin Guerre" of  Natalie Zemon Davis, the history professor, is followed by critical article "The Refashioning of Martin Guerre" of Robert Finlay, the historian, whose perspectives of the same story contradict each other in many points. It must be mentioned that Davis has her main interests in the socio-cultural history with the emphasis on the occasions which are ignorable by historians. Naturally the case of Martin Guerre is of a great importance for researcher’s further progress in clarifying of little studied historical themes. So with the help of all appropriate scientific approaches she conducts the study, treating all sorts of evidence, such as village archives in question, judicial records, letters, and after reevaluation all of them she concludes that the case of imposture of the French peasant, as it is enlightened in the materials of the trial by Coras, probably may have another interpretation, that is, Bertrande de Rols, Martin Guerre’s wife, is the accomplice of Arnaud de Tilh, the impostor. One of the main reasons for such a consideration for Davis is the law estimation of women’s intelligence in Europe of that period of time. Furthermore, nobody has perceived Bertrande as a conscious fraud of the villagers and the trial before Davis makes this version. Robert Finlay in his turn doesn’t believe the arguments of his colleague to be reasonable and is inclined to think that Davis by her version of Martin Guerre’s story sustains a modern social model of an independent woman who is able to make her own choice in the historical aspects of France of the 16th century. This is the fundamental difference between the historians’ approaches. The question is whose interpretation of the story is more persuasive and more objective in the respect of historical features of France of the 16th century. According to our research of the peculiarities of two mentioned critical works about the case of Martin Guerre, there are three most important differences among the versions of Davis and Finlay. The first one concerns the approach to the reliability of the information source. The key one for the research work of Finlay as well as Davis is the “Arrest Memorable” of Coras. As we can see for Robert Finlay everything is quite clear because of simple, speaking for themselves, details of the case which are perceived by him as the absolute truth. In fact, in his understanding of the essence he almost completely relies on Coras’s vision of the case of imposture. In her analysis of Arnaud’s trial Davis touches on such an important issue as the authenticity of the information provided by one of its participants (the jurist Coras) in the case of probable bias assessment of some essential details for certain reasons. In fact, she questioned the absolute truth of Coras by means of hypothesis of the identification of the inquisitor with the accused, that is, Coras with Arnaud. In such a situation the “Arrest Memorable” can’t be perceived as the true source any longer. In this respect Davis wonders “Where does reconstruction stop and invention begin?”(Finlay 569). The researcher thinks that the ambivalences are everywhere, and they need thorough consideration. The next point of contrasting views of Finlay and Davis, as for the case of Martin Guerre, is their understanding of the motivations of the French peasants of 16th century. Even if the examples of Bertrande and Arnaud are only ones taken for consideration, there is a key difference in the interpretation of their actions by the two scientists. First of all, as we said above, Finlay inherits the version of Coras, and therefore Bertrande remains a duped wife and a tricked woman for him, without any notion to be engaged in the deception as its active participant. Moreover, he criticizes the presence of those traits and the motives of the peasant woman which are ascribed to her by Davis. Finlay doesn’t accept Davis’s perception of Bertrande as a pragmatic, self-interested, passionate woman of conscience, as well as Davis’s belief in the double game of Martin’s wife. As for the analysis of Arnaud’s actions, Finlay agrees only the first part of Davis’s characteristic of the “new” Martin, that is, “…a talented trickster with gifts of memory and tongue…” (Davis 587). and decides the second one “…a man who embraces his role as the husband of Bertrande de Rols…”(Davis 587) to be “elevated and exculpatory” (Finlay 564). Again, in the respect of self-fashioning of Arnaud and Bertrande, Finlay’s consideration is that it is a 20th century trend while Davis insists it is “… among the most notable qualities of this (16th) century”. Keeping all this in mind it becomes obvious that the weakness of the Finlay’s approach is in his reluctance to accept the probability of objective validity of Davis’s arguments, as another mature historian, who practices “… conjecturing from evidence on the basis of assumptions about psychological process”. The third point of differences between Finlay and Davis’s approaches to the case of imposture lays deeply in the understanding of peculiarities of the trial process over Arnaud de Tilh. Initially hesitating the objectivity of Coras’s material from his “Arrest Memorable” (even due to the fact that “…he has devoted a passage to Arnaud’s confession and execution” (Finlay 568) that is of no use for the actual data of the case), Davis comes to the conclusion that it was a kind of reinterpretation which was more like a historical romance than a genuine source or a protocol. Along with Davis’s uncertainty of the bias assessment of the accused Arnaud by Coras a number of facts goes, and all this may indicate that Finlay, as a reasonable historian, bases his thoughts and research work on the source that cannot be undoubted and reliable one. So Finlay’s one-sided understanding of the trial essence can be also perceived as questionable. As for the analysis of the case details by Davis, there is great contemporary historical evidence that differs from the interpretation of the Martin Guerre’s story that has been accepted since the 16th century. The historian admits that this is a part of her invention, however, is closely connected with the voices of the past. So Arnaud is charged with imposture and fraud, and till the moment real Martin enters the court the judges as well as the villagers are almost sure that the unfounded case of “new” Martin. The behavior of Bertrande and Arnaud during the trial suggests their interest in each other. The woman testifies in defense of her husband, the man describes such intimate details of their personal life as if he is the real Martin. According to the version of Davis, Bertrande has invented the desirable marriage, relations which start with a false identity, and Arnaud has self-fashioned himself to become for her a good husband. They are seemed as a whole that indicates one thing – the woman told him the whole information in order to save him from the punishment, that is, she is his accomplice but not a victim of fraud (that is the belief of Finlay). The appearance of the genuine Martin changes the course of the trial in a radical way. Bertrande is forced to change her pattern of behavior in order to save her honor - now she recognizes herself to be duped by the impostor. Such motives of the woman are in no way considered by Finlay (as she is just a weak somewhat silly woman), unlike Davis. Still Finlay thinks that the return of Martin Guerre is the intervention of God not to allow evil stay unpunished. Taking everything into account, we have to say that both interpretations, Finlay and Davis’s one, have the right to exist for they shed light on the peculiarities of French peasant life of the 16th century, in general, and the case of Martin Guerre, in particular. Nevertheless, for the above mentioned reasons we tend to think the approach of Natalie Zemon Davis is more persuasive and plausible as it examines the historical issue from all sides and aspects and extracts information from all possible documentary sources. Davis’s version shows readers that there are double senses, ambivalence and complexities almost in every theme or question of the history, even in those which seem to be really easy for understanding. The historian’s way of research speaks for itself - only by questioning this or that information it is possible to reach the truth. As a result, such results are of a great meaning for the history. Works Cited Davis, Natalie Zemon. On the Lame. The American Historical Review, Vol. 93, No. 3. Oxford University Press, Jun., 1988. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1868103?sid=21105504373641&uid=2&uid=3738032&uid=4 Finlay, Robert. The Refashioning of Martin Guerre. The American Historical Review, Vol. 93, No. 3. Oxford University Press, Jun., 1988. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1868102?sid=21105504373641&uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4 Works Cited Reuters. New Drug Laws for Brazil. The New York Times. Web. 25 August 2006. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/25/world/americas/25brazil.html?_r=0 Read More