The ambivalent connection between the two parts of this book (the first dedicated to Machiavelli, the second to Pascal) is embodied by the comma (,) in its subtitle. Is this comma a conjunction or a disjunction? In fact, both.

«Through his repeated use of the adverb nondimanco (“nevertheless”), Machiavelli indicated that there is an exception to every rule. This may seem merely to confirm the traditional image of Machiavelli as a cynical, “machiavellian” thinker. But a close analysis of Machiavelli the reader, as well as of the ways in which some of Machiavelli’s most perceptive readers read his work, throws a different light on Machiavelli the writer. The same hermeneutic strategy inspires Ginzburg’s essays on the Provinciales, Pascal’s ferocious attack against Jesuitical casuistry, or case-based ethical reasoning.

Casuistry vs anti-casuistry; Machiavelli’s secular attitude towards religion vs Pascal’s deep religiosity. We are confronted, apparently, with two completely different worlds. But Pascal read Machiavelli and reflected deeply upon his work. A belated, contemporary echo of this reading can unveil the complex relationship between Machiavelli and Pascal—their divergences as well as their unexpected convergences.»

«Carlo Ginzburg incarnerait-il la dernière figure de l’ “historien total”? Reprenant à son compte la célèbre distinction du philosophe britannique Isaiah Berlin entre le chercheur renard, puisant à divers domaines, et le chercheur hérisson, qui s’attarde obstinément sur un seul objet, Carlo Ginzburg a répondu: “Si l’on regarde la variété des sujets que j’ai abordés, je suis un renard... Mais en fait, je suis un hérisson masqué”.» Nicolas Weill, Le Monde, 30/9/22