1. The Present Tense as Historical Argument
Mortimer's choice to write in the second person and the present tense is not a stylistic gimmick but a considered intellectual position. He is claiming that truly understanding a historical period requires simulating the perspective of someone who does not yet know how it ends, who cannot step back from the fear of plague or the authority of a lord because those forces are simply the conditions of existence. By removing the retrospective comfort that usually separates the reader from the past, the book insists that historical empathy is a form of knowledge, not a distraction from it.
Why it matters: This approach challenges the assumption that detachment is always the more rigorous historical stance. It suggests that some truths about the past are only accessible when you stop treating it as safely over.