What exactly distinguishes a “monograph” from a mere book? I don’t know. Perhaps it’s the academic tone, the focus of its subject matter, or the idea that it was written with a specialist audience in mind. Screech’s monograph on Montaigne is fine. I have no big complaints. I’m well enough read to follow his arguments. And the subject matter is right up my alley. Reading and rereading Montaigne over the past ten years has done more than anything else to shape my approach to life and my personal philosophy, such as it is. And yet Screech succumbs to repetition and hero-worship at times. And his book is no substitute for reading Montaigne himself.
One stand-out: Despite the fact that Montaigne declares himself several times to be a committed Catholic, modern readers have generally treated him as a secret atheist. You’ll see this, for instance, in Sarah Bakewell’s recent biography.
Montaigne certainly was a skeptic – and he doesn’t talk very often about religion. But Screech, to his credit, takes Montaigne at his word on issues of faith. What’s more, he places him into the proper Counter-Reformation context. To be a skeptic today may mean to be generally godless. To be a skeptic of Montaigne’s kind in Montaigne’s own day, however, was to uphold tradition and revelation and the authority of the church against the liberal innovations of the Protestants. The Reformers asked “On what basis do you know that the Church is infallible and inspired?” Catholic skeptics like Montaigne replied by asking, “How do you really know anything at all?”