The Return Of Martin Guerre

Despite the risks that one might have associated with his defense of a slave that had killed her master, regardless of the motives, Jameson appears to have made every effort to defend her to the best of his abilities. Even though Jameson appeared to be a good lawyer “according to those who knew him: as a lawyer [Jameson] was not profound” (McLaurin 85), so to aid Jameson in “labor and research” (McLaurin 85) Hall appointed two lawyers that were subordinate to Jameson. Now Jameson may not have been the best at trial research,but when it came to his courtroom skills “his contemporaries nevertheless admired him…” (McLaurin 85). Though not for his presentation, or his cross-examination skills, but for his “almost uncanny ability to read a jury” (McLaurin 85). Due to this skill of reading a jury many who knew him said he was “an excellent judge of men…” (McLaurin 85) which would have given him and advantage during Celia’s trial, unfortunately the prosecution in this case was (also/to) strong, led by Robert Prewitt, they virtually prevented Jameson from making any sort of case for the defense of Celia. Despite the fact that Jameson encountered some resistance from the “presiding judge whose consistent rulings to sustain the state’s objections revealed, if not his hostility toward the defendant, at least a desire for a perfunctory defense

The Return of Martin Guerre, written by Natalie Zemon Davis, is the tale of a court case that takes place in sixteenth century France. Martin Guerre is a peasant who deserted his wife and family for many years. While Martin Guerre is gone, a man named Arnaud du Tilh arrives at Martin’s village and claims to be Martin Guerre. Bertrande, who is Guerre’s wife, Guerre’s sisters, and many of the villagers, accepts the imposter. After almost three years of being happily married, Bertrande takes the fraud to court under pressure of Pierre Guerre, her stepfather and Guerre’s brother. Arnaud du Tilh is almost declared innocent, but the real Martin Guerre appears in the courthouse. Throughout this tale, many factors of the peasant life are

There are many similarities between the Scottsboro trial and the trial of Tom Robinson in the novel, To Kill a Mockingbird. “No crime in American history—let alone a crime that never occurred—produced as many trials, convictions, reversals, and retrials as did an alleged gang rape of two white girls by nine black teenagers on a Southern railroad freight run on March 25, 1931” (Linder 1). The author of To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee, was a young girl during the Scottsboro trial and based the trial of Tom Robinson in her novel off of the Scottsboro trial of 1931. The three main similarities between the Scottsboro trial and the trial of Tom Robinson are the geographic settings, the portrayal of racism, and the specifics of the court

Starting with the premodern society and moving on to our modern society I will compare and contrast the two societies.

The topic of war is hard to imagine from the perspective of one who hasn't experienced it. Literature makes it accessible for the reader to explore the themes of war. Owen and Remarque both dipcik what war was like for one who has never gone through it. Men in both All Quiet on the Western Front and “Dulce Et Decorum” experience betrayal of youth, horrors of war and feelings of camaraderie.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce, discuss, and analyze the book "The Return of Martin Guerre" by Natalie Zamon Davis. Specifically, it will discuss the life of the peasant during the Middle Ages. This book is a fascinating account of a true case that happened during the 16th century in France. The book is also an excellent example of how the peasants lived in the Middle Ages, from what they ate, to how they traveled and what their family lives were like.

“His testimony was responsible for the execution of some 35 persons, but, as the frenzy subsided, inconsistencies were discovered in his story.”

Throughout most of the book the judge of the courtroom is up for a retention election. He is a circuit court judge and that means he has to do a partisan election and he must get 60% majority to keep his job on the bench. This makes a huge impact on some of the decisions judges will make in the courtroom. During the trail of white men who were going trail over beating a young black kid who was in their neighborhood. The judge was being affected harshly by this because if he was easy on the men then the black community would vote against him because the beating was racially motivated. On the other hand if he gives them a harsh sentence he could be looked at bad because these men were first time offenders. He gets accused of rushing the case because what he planned on doing was gives the one man who was the one who did the beating a harsh sentences and give the others probation. He wanted to get it on the record that he gave him a harsher sentence, and even after the sentence he was telling the media all about his reasoning for why and how he came up with this decision. He ended up give

Natalie Zemon-Davis’s 1983 book The Return of Martin Guerre provided both the public and academic world with a fresh and interesting take on a classic story. Presented like a mystery thriller, Davis weaves a tale of deception based on a solid framework of cultural history. Her narrative depends on grounding the characters of Bertrande de Rols, Martin Guerre, Arnaud du Tihl, and their associates within a web of social context. Davis draws heavily on the traditional Coras narrative, but also supplements the established story with the version presented in Le Sueur, a new source she discovered. Additionally, she incorporates unusual sources dealing with broader social context and infers specifics from a general study of period interactions. It is this latter approach that historian Robert Finlay disagrees with. He claims that Davis does not appropriately rely on the source material provided by the Coras narrative and thus gives an unnecessarily dramatic version of events. The AHR forum on the subject includes both Finlay’s review and Davis’s response, providing a model of scholarly debate that extends beyond the actual content of the book in question. In addition to being a rhetorical critique, Finlay is attacking the foundational methodology of modern social history that Davis is then compelled to defend.

The decision from the first case was reached in just one day, rather expeditiously for a case, which took fourteen months to get to trial; yet there were valid reason. For Example, the judge ruled, “the testimony could not prove that Irene Emerson owned Dred Scott.” (Lukes, 21) This shows that the burden of proof was on Dred Scott to prove his ownership, in order to have a ruling on his freedom. This also shows how one tiny oversight by one side can affect the outcome of a case. In addition, the record indicated, “The said defendant is not guilty in manner and form as the plaintiff hath in his declaration complained against her.” (Lukes 22) This shows that because of Scott’s attorney’s error in argument, the court had to rule in favor of Mrs. Emerson. This also shows that in a strange twist of fate, in effect, allowed Mrs. Emerson to keep her slaves because no one had proven they were her slaves. In conclusion, Dred Scott had lost in the first court appearance, but the case was far from over. 182

The entire book was based on the transcripts of court, how is it possible that the authors of the book knew the dialogue between these two men. The dialogue was not in the court transcript, and definitely not recorded, so that has to mean the authors elaborated it. Although it fits in perfectly with the story, almost too perfect, it makes no sense how the authors had access to

Innocent until proven guilty is a phrase that applies to our judicial system in modern times; however, when the play Doubt by John Patrick Stanley was written this phrase did not always apply. The play is a parable that makes you think about how gossip and rumors can cause havoc and potentially ruin someone’s career. In the play the rumors that are flying are rumors about whether or not Father Flynn is innocent or guilty to the crime of molesting a young boy named Donald Muller. Critics still argue whether he was innocent or guilty to the crime today, and no answer is known. However, based on the evidence in Patrick Shanley’s play Doubt: A Parable, one could conclude that Father Flynn is innocent due to the fact that he had reasonable evidence

Two short novels “The Wife of Martin Guerre” by Janet Lewis and “Good Country People” by Flannery O’Conner have very different plots, however, many connections can be made between certain characters. A strong example of this would be Arnaud (posing as Martin), and Manley, two antagonists from each of the novels listed above, respectively. In Janet Lewis’ short novel “The Wife of Martin Guerre” the main character Bertrande is taken on an emotional roller coaster as her husband Martin doesn’t return from a trip he promised would only be a week. Just as she is learning to embrace being the head of the household and a single mother, a man claiming to be the Martin who left her eight long years ago appears out of the blue, throwing her life and emotions into complete chaos. In Flannery O’Conners short story “Good Country People” a woman named Hulga, who is unpleasant to the majority of people, is seduced by a young man, claiming to be nothing more than a simple country boy selling bibles. Later in these short stories, it is revealed that both of these men are not who they claim to be, and their lies caused rather dreadful repercussions. These two antagonists delude Hulga and Bertrande in their respective stories by enticing them with desirable amounts of knowledge and causing them to lose perception of reality by using manipulation throughout the entire plot.

The only thing that Arnaud and Martin really had in common was that neither was happy or had become very bored with their lives they were born into to remain where they were. The question in hand is, how could Arnaud successfully trade his identity for the identity of Martin Guerre?

To start of the novel Fear, by Gabriel Chevallier, Jean Dartemont is in France observing all the civilians celebrate the start of the new war. He criticizes their behavior and strongly disapproves, however, he admits a curiosity in him that convinces him to volunteer for the war for it will be a ‘remarkable spectacle.” After being approved to go to war, Dartemont heads to a training camp. There he becomes a private after failing to become an officer. Here he commands a group, but realized he finds the maintenance of soldiers to be tedious and useless work. Already he becomes quite eager to arrive at the front lines, which soon happens.