Contenu du sommaire

Urban Entries: origins and development of an urban ritual (Montpellier, 14th-15th centuries). The urban chronicle of Montpellier known under the nickname of the “Petit Thalamus” and written between 1204 and 1423 keeps the memory of about thirty urban entries in a general meaning because it includes not only the rare royal entries that occured during this period but also the entries of French and Navarrese princes or even the king's officers or bishops' entries from the very first one of Jacques II, king of Aragon and lord of Montpellier, in 1277, until the one of Guillaume Forestier, bishop of Maguelone, which is the last one recorded. Thus, the “Petit Thalamus” offers us the occasion to plunge ourselves into the internal perception of such a ritual seen by the consulate itself and not any more from a royal point of view : it allows to see, more than a princely entry, the town welcoming the prince. The detailed study of such narratives composed under the close supervision of the consuls themselves highlights the flexibility of the ritual as well as the possibility of variations from an absolute model that has been designed for the entry of the pope Urbain V in 1367 when he came to visit a town where he founded an important university college. It must, then, be underlined, that before the 1350's, such a ritual does not seem to really exist or does not seem to be noteworthy enough to be recorded in the urban chronicle, which is more or less the same : what is recorded about the kings of Aragon and of Majorque is not their entries but why they came to Montpellier and what they accomplished during their stay in connection with urban politics. But, from the middle of the 14th century, the entry itself, or the narration of the entry, began to become prominent in the urban memory. Nevertheless, the princely entry is perhaps more constraining for the prince himself than what has been generally thought as, for instance, the king of Navarre, Charles III, is the very first one to express publicly some reluctance to comply with such a ritual, first as a prince in 1378 and then as a king in 1408 and again in 1410. In fact, the leverage of the ceremony from the second half of the 14th century led to a certain banalisation of the phenomenon which comes along with a weakening of the ritual which recovers its strength and its majesty only under very special circunstances such as the entry of the emperor Sigismond of Luxembourg in 1415 or the one of the Dauphin Louis in 1420, in spite of the martial appearance of his cortege. Last but not least, Montpellier is the very first town of the French kingdom to use a processionnal canopy on these occasions, a major innovation first appeared for the entry of the pope Urbain V and then used only twice, for the entry of Charles VI in 1389 and the one of the Dauphin Louis in 1420. But, finally, considering the urban entries on one hand as a global phenomenon, which is to say by not isolating the king entries from the other ones, and on the other hand from an urban perspective, allows us to understand how such a ritual could be used by the town authorities to reinforce their own power on the community itself.

Execution sites as burial spaces. Treatment and future of the criminals' body (12th-14th century). This paper deals with the places of execution during the Middle Ages, no more as areas only dedicated to the death sentence, but as areas also intended to inhumation. This study aims at apprehending the treatment and the future of the criminals' corpse and considers within a multidisciplinary approach – for the first time in France – the places of justice. From 12th-14th – century written sources and archaeological and archaeo-anthropological data, several lexical or topographical approaches are carried out which all provide preliminary food for thought on the inhumation of criminals, as well as on the fields and patibulary forks which host them. Raising the question of the different authorities which administrate these areas of execution, aims at showing that all these places of justice are used for visually marking the space, symbolizing the jurisdiction limits and fixing a power.

The Prince, the Duke and the Minister : Social Consciousness and Nobiliary Revolt under Louis XIII. On 11 June 1632, Gaston d'Orléans lead a small army into France. A manifesto in which he denounced the “tyranny” of Cardinal Richelieu and encouraged the French to join him in his efforts to oust his brother's prime minister was published the same day. His call was largely unheeded. Only one provincial governor joined him. Quickly, the royal forces defeated the rebels' troops. Taken into custody, the Duke of Montmorency, governor of Languedoc was tried, sentenced to death and executed. Why did he choose to join Monsieur's revolt, a move that subsequently appears almost suicidal? To be understood, the political and social logic of time must be taken into accounts. Aristocratic revolts were first and foremost an attempt to position oneself on an equal footing with the royal authority in order to negotiate with it. The inability of Monsieur to establish himself as an equal to his brother led to his defeat, and strengthened the power exercised by the cardinal in France.

Every Soviet citizen wants to make films ! Soviet Nationalities Policies and cinema in the USSR at the time of the Great Terror. In 1937, the Soviet people suffered from the Great Terror. This large-scale purge led to the arrest and murder of almost one million Soviet citizens. The same year, the Soviet authority decided to celebrate the Twentieth anniversary of October Revolution, with major public celebrations, including music, literature and dance festivals. Cinema was noticeably absent. Having in mind how important cinema was for propaganda at this time, it seems strange that this “most important of the arts” was not mobilized during the Anniversary Year. Documents related to a proposed Festival of National cinema for 1937, founded in the Central Committee archives of Communist Party, and extensive correspondence between the secretary of the Soviet of Nationalities, Aleksandr Hatskevitch, and the head of the Soviet cinema industry, Boris Shumiatskij, show that cinema was also planed to celebrate the anniversary Revolution. Why has this festival been canceled? The arrest of several leaders of the Soviet cinema industry cannot be considered as the only reason. The study of archive documents helps understanding why the festival did not occur. This event aimed at showing how each Union republic had developed its film production since 1917, how national film studios worked together in friendship and collaboration, and how former “backward” republics participated in this wonderful development. 51 people, responsible for central and local cultural institutions, participated in a conference held on February the 5th 1937, to review cinema industry development. Heads of the Committee of cinema and people of different nationalities expressed their point of view on questions such as the national issue in cinema, or the development of infrastructures. But contrary to what the festival was expected to demonstrate, the representatives from national organizations complained about the bad state of the development of cinema in their territories, the lack of theatres and sound theatres, the bureaucratic slowness, the difficulties that non-Russian students experienced in cinematography teaching and training, the way non-Russian audience understood – or did not understand – Russian films without translation. More broadly, the study of the conference and the difficulties to organize the festival illustrated the difficulty of the Soviet society in the end of the Thirties: bad relationships between centre and peripheries, interethnic conflicts, economic competition between nationalities and the limits of propaganda power.