Ethnographies and theories that deal with identity today portray it as fluid, multifaceted. A lot of the 20th-century anthropological knowledge on identity conceptualizes it as a performance, construction and/or dichotomy. What was the treatment of identity in 16th century England, when fingerprints and photos weren’t available? How was a person identified and recognized? What was the 16th-century identity process? These were questions I had to ask myself when I was investigating a case where an impostor raped a village in Europe in 16th-century. This essay is a reaction to “The Return of Martin Guerre”, the movie about a French peasant named Martin Guerre. It follows his journey to his village, where he has been missing for between 8-9 years. A trial was initiated after villagers realized that the man returning to his village was actually Martin Guerre.
The film begins with the settlement at Artigat by the Guerre family. Bertrande and Martin Guerre are arranged to marry. Martin Guerre and Bertrande de Rols are not mature teenagers so they cannot marry immediately. Later, however, Martin is seen to be an impotent and unsuccessful husband. Martin still struggles to be a father after their first child is born (cured by various witchcraft processes). It is revealed in some scenes that Martin isn’t a skilled farmer or skilled at manual labor, despite his village background. These notions may be explored in Nathalie Zemon-Davis’ “Boundaries” text. Davis says that the 16th-century individual is embedded within the family structure and that this plays a significant role in shaping one’s personal identity. Martin is described as a weak, failing, and incompetent husband. He treats his child poorly and reflects his own self-deprecating fatherhood. Davis also demonstrates the importance vocations have had on identity and the 16th century. Martin, who was raised in a village, was expected to become a farmer and good at agriculture. Martin Guerre has not found his vocational identity since he was a child. The “supposed Martin” returns after running from the discomfort. He has made a huge change. He can be even more than Martin. He is a husband who loves his wife Bertrande and works hard to protect their family. This is not the “old Martin Guerre”. However, is this the real Martin Guerre? We must also be ready to recognize that illusions of reality created by performances are fragile and susceptible to being distorted by minor mishaps. Martin is now confused when the man pretending that he is Martin begins to forget details. Even though physical appearance and memory are indicators, there is still doubt because of the essentialist view of identity. The “old” Martin has been returned to them and is now completely different. Martin’s original essence cannot ever be altered or reinvented. Goffman says that we are able to create and control roles, masks and other appearances. We take on different roles depending on the situation. We act who we want to be, depending on who we are interacting with. It can be argued, however, that this man did not steal Martin’s identity. Martin’s name was stolen by him, but it is only a form to identify Martin. However, this cannot be considered an identity in its entirety if you consider the essentialist perspective (essence prior to existence). It is possible that he was really Martin. He just tried to be better and put on a different mask to get love and acceptance again. His travels, adventures and knowledge have changed his life.
E. Goffman summed it up: The roles do not define the performer, and there is no authentic self. Similar, Martin Guerre was not a person, but there were different Martin Guerre roles played by different people.
