According to Davis, it is clouded through the eyes of a patriarchal society. However, there is room to doubt whether Bertrande was really an accomplice to Arnaud du Tilh, as told by Davis, since the original case does not write her in as one. In “The Refashioning of Martin Guerre” by Robert Finley, he very much disagrees with Davis. He questions her “reconstruction” of the case. He does not agree with Davis, in the way she suggests that Bertrande was an accomplice. Perhaps, he blames her “modernistic” views taking an undertone on her interpretation, rather than letting the 16th century peasant life speak for itself. It is fair to say that one may never know the truth behind Bertrande’s role in the case. However, through careful research of the time period and social roles, without the context of modernist ideologies, Bertrande de Rols can be viewed as a willing accomplice to Arnuad du Tilh. Due to social obligations (or limitations) for women of the 16th century, not only was Bertrande de Rols a willing accomplice, but had her own agenda for why she allowed