Reading History
A lesson from Montaigne
Why should I care about a collection of essays written by a French nobleman? This is a question of relevance and utility. What is Michel Montaigne good for? This is a question a person who hasn't read him could ask. The history of The Essays' reception provides answers too. Essayists claim him as a model. Philosophers pull him into their ranks. Historians welcome him into their company. Many readers, I am sure, will find more than a dozen answers to life's questions in Montaigne. However, this is Montaigne's answer to the question of relevance and utility:
I have dedicated this book to the private benefit of my friends and kinsmen so that, having lost me (as they must do soon) they can find here again some traits of my character and of my humours.
Ending his note to readers, he writes:
And therefore, Reader, I myself am the subject of my book: it is not reasonable that you should employ your leisure on a topic so frivolous and so vain.
In his first essay, Montaigne intends more than the presentation of a self-portrait to his readers. It is in this implicit intention that readers will find an inclusive utility and relevance. This utility appeals to readers of all ages. It goes beyond the mirror-like; we see more than ourselves in these essays. We see more than options for existential questions. The first essay typifies the rest. The question it asks is this: in what way can the offender soften the heart of the offended when the offended has the capacity for vengeance? Montaigne presents two options - submission and bravery.
Montaigne presents exemplars as proofs of both options. He cites Edward, Prince of Wales, who butchered the inhabitants of Limoges until three soldiers in the city resisted him. The bravery of these soldiers, unlike the pleas of the city's women and children, "blunted the edge of his [Edward's] anger."
Starting with those three he showed mercy on all the other inhabitants of the town.
Also, Scanderberg, Prince of Epirud wasn't swayed by the "submission and supplication" of a soldier he wanted to execute. However, when the soldier "resolved to await him, sword in hand" Scanderberg was moved to pardon him.
Besides these exemplars, Montaigne sets a portrait of himself.
Both of these means would have swayed me easily, for I have a marvelous weakness toward mercy and clemency…
He bears a similarity to Alexander. The conqueror is "most generous toward the vanquished." He is also known to have tortured a vanquished commander of an enemy army before ordering
his [the commander's] heels to be pierced and dragged alive behind a cart until he was lacerated and dismembered.
If there is a lesson here, it is this:
Man is indeed an object miraculously vain, various and wavering. It is difficult to found a judgement on him which is steady and uniform.
The answer, for readers faced with the question Montaigne starts with, is simple - no matter the option chosen, a favorable result is not guaranteed.
Montaigne's essays are often characterized by three moves. First, the presentation of an existential question or situation. Second, the suggestion of answers or presentation of exemplars in this situation. Third, the presentation of a self-portrait about this question or situation. Once readers apprehend these moves it becomes easier to see how Montaigne does more than what he explicitly intends to do in the prologue.
Never take a writer or historian's word at face value. Be wary of authorial intention. These are part of the Essays' offerings. These other ways of reading a text (historical text especially) are what Montaigne teaches and demonstrates. He detaches historical facts from their contexts and sets them into his essays for his purposes. He took from many historians without any sense of obligation to the authors of these primary sources. History, Montaigne's essays show, can be read in many ways.