The Return Of Martin Guerre Analysis

When one reads about history, it is easy to accept the events and facts that are presented. Although, when one learns and study about history there may be another view or side of the story that someone else perceives to be true than another person. This fact is still true today about much of America’s history, and the eye of the beholder when reading different accounts of history. Natalie Zemon Davis retells the history of Martin Guerre and his imposture in her book The Return of Martin Guerre. One historian named Robert Finlay questions Davis’ account of the Martin Guerre story where he explains Davis’ weaknesses in his article, “The Refashioning of Martin Guerre.” To clear up Finlay’s misunderstandings, Davis writes a counter article entitled,
Finlay claims that Bertrande, the real Martin Guerre wife, was dupe in the whole scheme of the impostor of Martin Guerre, whereas Davis told the story as if Bertrande was an accomplice. While using Jean de Coras account, Finlay discuss how Coras saw Bertrande as a dupe because in the 16th century a female would have be “easily deceived by the cunning and craftiness of men” (Finlay 555). In fact, it is true that in the 16th century, “men exclusively dictated the societal expectations of women” (“Women of 16th Century Venice”). Because of this view, women often were denied of freedom of mind and body. Finlay questions how Davis concludes that Bertrande was a part of the impostor plans when Bertrande was nervous and uncertain about who the real Martin Guerre was during the trial. Finlay asserts that even Coras did not get the feeling that Bertrande was playing a role of an accomplice because Bertrande was “weeping and trembling upon being confronted with Martin Guerre” (Finlay 560). This gives off the impression that Bertrande was deceived the whole time and unsure who was he real
Davis notes that Coras reported that Arnaud, the impostor, “greeted by name almost everyone he met who knew Martin Guerre” (Davis 577). How could Arnaud know who these people were in the town face by face, if not working with an accomplice such as Bertrande or even Martin Guerre’s sisters who could feed him the answers. Davis asserts that Bertrande was playing double role in her testimony at trial where she was hesitant to take the stand claiming that she was tricked and deceived by Arnaud. Although in Coras and Le Sueur account of a different interrogation of Bertrande, she claims that Arnaud knew everything even secret intimate details of their early life that only the real Martin Guerre would know (Davis 581). Bertrande had to be in the whole ordeal so she could keep up her act of “not knowing.” Again, t in those times, no one would expect for a female to as smart to pull off a situation such as this one with the impostor, which makes this scenario more