Davis Ginzburg and the History of Microhistory

Ginzburg and Davis

A Look into Microhistory

Thanks to notable figures like Carlo Ginzburg when he first emerged onto to the scene in the mid-1970's, micro-history has seen long-lasting popularity. The 1970's heralded the emergence of micro-history as it coincided with post-modernism, another historiographical development, a period that deeply challenged the profession and brought it to another intellectual level of exploration. Since micro-history relies on narrative, there are no historian-driven "Why?" questions, making it easy for post-modernists to test drive their modes of thought. While Le Roy Laduries Montaillou represents one aspect of micro-history, Davis's Return of Martin Guerre helped provide new insight into a popular story by applying her own critical lens into the narrative. With Ginzburg own contribution, The Cheese and The Worms, creating the framework with which other microhistories were and are written, micro-history became what some would say is the middleman" of fiction and historical writing as seen in present microhistory authors and their own interpretations of history.

Microhistory or micro-history, is an intensive historical examination often of an individual, a single event, or a community that historians display in a form that is interesting to read and provides insight into what happened. The original concept of microhistory and writing microhistory originated in Italy, during the 1970's. It is a mix of cultural history, which Ginzburg's The Cheese and the Worms displays, and social history. While Ginzburg may not be the first person to pioneer microhistories, his work made micro-history gain traction.

The Cheese and the Worms or seen as seen in the original Italian translation, Il formaggio e I vermi is an important and notable scholarly work by Caro Ginzburg, a famous Italian historian. Many see the book as a wonderful example of microhistory and cultural history, providing the framework with which other writers can portray their versions of historical events. In order to see how great its contribution has been to micro-history and history in general, it is important to see who the book examined and what information was revealed from the narrative.

The book observes the world-view and beliefs of Domenico Scandella or also known as Menocchio. Menocchio was from the village of Montereale, and worked as an Italian miller. He earned the title of heresiarch as he gained a reputation for teaching philosophy. Although he helped educate and inspire, he led a tragic end in 1599 at age 67, when he was burned at the stake on the order of then Pope Clement VIII.

When some books were loaned to Menocchio, his interpretation of the text could have provided the motivations that would lead to his execution for preaching unorthodox ideas. The narrative focuses in the beginning on the preliminary questioning Menocchio endured and his desire to speak freely as he believed he was innocent. "I have said that in my opinion, all was chaos, that is, earth, air, water, and fire were mixed together; and out of that bulk a mass formed-just as cheese is made out of milk- and worms appeared in it, and these were the angels." [footnoteRef:1] It was through this mixture of objective facts and subjective interpretation that Ginzburg managed to provide readers not just with entertaining literature, with actual information from the events that took place at that time. [1: Ginzburg, Carlo. 1980. The Cheese And The Worms. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.]

Research is an important aspect of micro-history. However, it is not the only aspect. Historians that document or collect information from the past tend to simply write down the dates and details, not giving any look into how the person or event shaped the world at the time nor how the person examined may have felt. Microhistory does that in that, it gives a deeper look into a period or person in history that makes one examine it even more and ignites the curiosity within. While critics of micro-history say the examination of the topic of person does not go as in depth as needed, in actuality, the manner of which the examination goes about in the narrative is all individual and hard to determine within a standard context. What is generally found in most micro-history narratives is that there is added emphasis and importance on contextualization.

What is contextualization? Contextualization is the placing of small units of study within a broader context. Contextualization is the "bread and butter" of micro-histories and without it, microhistorical studies would be deemed to have little significance and meaning. Contextualization is what keeps micro-histories from existing as mere works of fiction and puts in the realm closer to empirical scholarship.

It is very important that micro-history has gained the traction it has thanks to Ginzburg and other historians like Davis. It is because it allows history to reach people without the drudgery of facts and objective display of events. When writers of micro-histories highlight a person of interest or event, they bring it to life and add a level of intrigue that empirical scholarship cannot. As many have noted in their own research and writings, history as it is, is not as interesting as its interpretation. "Do we mean the old-fashioned high school history with lots of dates and battles, biographies that detail who had tea with whom, Whiggish history, strict historicism, Marxist history, or even Foucauldian genealogy?" [footnoteRef:2] That is why books like The Cheese and The Worms made not only Ginzburg a well-known historian, but also catapulted micro-history into the academic world. [2: Lyons, Andrew P. 2012. "Historical Anthropology And Anthropological History Andrewwillford And Erictagliacozzo, Eds. Clio/Anthropos: Exploring The Boundaries Between History And Anthropology. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2009, Vi + 306 Pp, Chapter Notes And Bibliographie." Anthropology And Humanism 37 (2): 256-259. doi:10.1111/j.1548-1409.2012.01135.x.]

Going back into research and the approach historians take when developing micro-histories, the work is grounded similarly in the same principle as seen in the qualitative approach. Meaning, the pursuit of a small unit such as an individual can reflect the larger whole. This is the opposite of traditional historical research as a quantitative approach is more actively pursued. Things like historical demography, are often more important to traditional history writing versus the effect/significance of a person/event/community to society and so forth.

Ginzburg's heretic, Menocchio and his tragic end at the hands of the then Pope shows how Menoccio's behavior and philosophy helped play a role in how society and the powers in place at the time saw him. Microhistorians like Ginzburg thus try to recreate the relationship between the people involved and the source text or information provided by historical accounts. This can be seen as the concept of normal exceptions.

People like Ginzburg attempt to see history not just within a single light, but in many so that readers can understand and interpret the person/event/community in a way that is clearer and more thought provoking. As one article states, the various ways in which Ginzburg attempts to master a subject and then move onto another provides a plethora of wells of knowledge historians like Ginzburg can dip into, to write compelling and significant literature. "Threads and Traces: True False Fictive, Ginzburg's latest collection of translated essays on historiography and historical method, abounds in references to philisophers from Plato to Wittfenstein, anthropologists from Lafitau to Geertz, and literary figures from Home to Prost." [footnoteRef:3] [3: Thomas, Keith. 2015. "Historians And Storytellers." Common Knowledge 20 (1): 9-10. http://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals/common_knowledge/v020/20.1.thomas.html.]

This variety allows microhistory to have a connection with and perhaps proliferate postmodernism. Postmodernism is a movement in the late 20th century that focuses on skeptical interpretations on architecture, the arts, and criticisms. It is seen as a movement that deconstructs various aspects of society like fiction and history (more specific examples), that gives a new meaning and provides a new context for the observer. That is why postmodernism and microhistory share such similar audiences. Microhistories seek to change the historical account into a historical narrative, deconstructing what was there, into something that can challenge the very nature of the meaning behind the facts and give light into a different interpretation.

Going back to the 1920's postmodernism was used as a term to describe new forms of music and art. Micro-history is a new form of history as it was spearheaded by Ginzburg in the 1970's. Perhaps postmodernism and microhistory fuel each other as the ne interpretations of microhistorians give rise to a keener interest in the criticisms and observations in postmodernism. The kind of radical narrativism seen in microhistories provides microhistorians a mode in which to operate with language instead of just quantitative aspects that detract from the possible reality of the subject.

Exploring the contribution of Natalie Zemon Davis, Ginzburg wrote the introduction for Davis's Return of Martin Guerre, prompting him to re-evaluate the position of the historian and the interpretation of history. [footnoteRef:4] Davis in turn also gave insight into not just the exploration of history through narrative but also how such exploration could contribute to overall knowledge of a subject. "Knowing about Martin Guerre brings understanding of the peasant world, which is also important for the trajectory of Luther's Reformation. Knowing about Martin Luther brings knowledge of major religious change, essential to understanding Martin Guerre's village world and what happened in it." [footnoteRef:5] With her contribution of Return of Martin Guerre to the world of micro-history, Davis has delivered to the world at large, the importance of multiple viewpoints of historical account. [4: Ginzburg, Carlo. 2012. Threads and Traces. Berkeley: University of California Press.] [5: Davis, Natalie. 2014. "MARTIN LUTHER, MARTIN GUERRE, AND WAYS OF KNOWING." Common Knowledge 20 (1): 4-8. doi:10.1215/0961754X-2373706.]

Natalie Zemon Davis is an American historian of early modern France and feminist. Through her journey into microhistory writing, she has explored the use of fiction in explaining the past, instead of depending solely on true facts like traditionally done by her historian predecessors. It is through her belief in the possibility of mutually and multiple incomparable "truths" in co-existence with one another that the telling of different versions and presentation of multiple viewpoints of the same story could have the potential to explain history more than how traditional historical accounts have. As was done with Ginzburg, analysis of Return of Martin Guerre provides confirmation of what Davis wishes to instill in readers of her work, that people can learn more from dissecting things through different viewpoints than from mere facts alone.

To begin, who is Martin Guerre? Martin Guerre was a French Basque peasant from the sixteenth-century and provides one of the most compelling tales from the earlier periods of French history. That is why several interpretations have been created in order to illustrate the remarkable true story. Guerre was born the village of Hendaye as Martin Daguerre in 1525, in the French Basque country. Within two years, the family moved and changed their name to Guerre. Martin eventually married although had issues consummating the marriage due to being impotent. In time through "breaking a sorcerer's spell and consummated the marriage and had a baby boy. As a landlord, he hated his existence and stole grain from his father. Fleeing, he became a French soldier and had his leg amputated.

Bertrande had a hard time dealing with her husband missing. Soon then came a man that presented himself as Martin Guerre. The man was actually Arnaud du Tilh from Gascony, nicknamed Pansette. [footnoteRef:6] He was clever and while Pierre, Martin's father never believed he was Martin, his wife did. It lead to a court case and the real Martin appearing before the court leading to Pansette being hung and Bertrande forced to live with a man that did not love her, but deserted her. This was all interpreted by Davis in Return of Martin Guerre. [6: Davis, Natalie Zemon, Martin Guerre, and Arnault Du Tilh. 1983. The Return Of Martin Guerre. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.]

To have someone write such a compelling narrative from an already interesting story, reminds the reader that history of this nature actually existed. While it seemed almost like a soap opera, the narrative invited people to attempt to see whether this story was true. It also gave insight into how society viewed women. For example, Martin's wife could not remarry unless there was proof her husband died.

Furthermore, although she was as guilty as the impostor for fueling the lie of him being Martin, she was not punished as Pansette was her gender saved her from such a fate. Adding to the already purified view society of the time had of women, was the fact that Bertrande did not want to give up the charade because of how the people around her viewed her with the impostor in town, as an upstanding citizen. Going back to Davis being a feminist, some of her viewpoint mingled with the narrative adding to the troublesome burden Bertrande had to endure, being with a man that did not love her and abandoned her.

It is as if Davis sympathized with Bertrande and also provided context surrounding the view of women during this time. Microhistories have the ability to highlight such nuances in interpretation history and gives readers reason to explore things further. As with all narratives, the story has a central theme of "politics of patrimony," suggesting why perhaps someone like Martin could abandon his wife and his wife would not be punished as severely as the impostor was. There are subtle intricacies that existed in the laws of inheritance and marriage at the time. Like for example, the stealing of grain from a family member. In that region, theft was considered a grave crime, especially when it is from a family member.

Also at play was the fact that Martin was unhappy with his inheritance and did not want to be what his father was. This is far more than a mere skilled exercise in quantification. Rather it transitions the narrative into a realm of modern opinion, elucidating relationships among son and father, husband and wife, society and gender, and person and nature. Microhistories such as the account of Guerre, Davis wrote, is a wonderful example of how people and narratives can be reshaped and redone in a way that creates renewed interest and vitality. That is why Davis and Ginzburg have contributed so much to the microhistory movement. Their works have given those that perhaps might want to apply a different lens to literature, a chance to explore things beyond facts, and give their own spin on history.

In order for Davis to write the story of Guerre, she had to take from sixteenth century accounts. These accounts told of the trial and described Tilh or Pansette as a charlatan who faced hanging for his crimes. Here Davis adds a touch of "photographic memory" and "cleverness" to make Pansette seem almost super human as he became skilled enough to dupe even Martin's sisters. By placing importance on Bertrande's character and making Martin and his lost leg inconsequential, it shows the pain the abandoned wife endured and the helplessness she felt in that society. What was more touching and perhaps the reason why the work became so popular, was Davis's inclusion of the love Pansette and Bertrande had for each other and Pansette's loyalty to her, stating she had been just as fooled as the others. In the traditional version of accounts, Bertrande was the fool that believed Pansette was Martin. However, in Davis' version, she was in on it and loved him regardless.