Popcorn

How can you not fall in love with the story of Martin Guerre?  It has all the element of a good movie, so when Natalie Zemon Davis does this historical treatment, for a history lover, reading her book is like sitting in a movie theater eating a bucket of popcorn.  But yet, doesn't she go a little too far for what seems to set out to be a historical inquiry?  She excuses herself by admitting at the end of her introduction that her book is "in part invention," but she also claims that it is "held tightly in check by the voices of the past."

How tightly in check?  The main thrust is to interpret Bertrande as having known of the imposter's duplicity and having become his accomplice.  Lots of assumptions are made.  Bertrande "dreamed of a husband and lover who would come back, and be different." (34)   By the time she received her lover "in her bed, she must have realized the difference; as any wife of Arigat would have agreed, there is no mistaking 'the touch of the man on the woman.'" (44)  Where in the book is there anything giving the reader information on the sexual practices or attitudes of the wives of Arigat?  Davis writes that Bertrande and the imposter justified their scam to themselves because they became Protestants. (49-50)  There seems to be no evidence of any role of religion in their actions.

Davis simply goes too far in imagining how things might have been for these actors.  Yes, she does base her story on facts, and yes, history is often a matter of assumptions based on facts, but generally there needs to be a stronger nexus between the facts and the hypothesis than that found in Davis' Martin Guerre.  In the case of Martin Guerre, Davis writes an enjoyable retelling of the story from a historical perspective but yet her grander assumptions fall somewhat short of having a firm historical footing.