Littérature scientifique sur le sujet « 1745-1824 »

Four Jerningham Augustinian canonesses from Bruges were at Cossey, the home of Sir William Jerningham (1736–1809), in the summer of 1794, and then lived at Hengrave Hall near Bury St. Edmunds Suffolk. They were Ann, Elizabeth, Edwardina, and Frances Henrietta Jerningham, Sir William's cousins. The sixteen bound volumes of correspondence received by Lady Bedingfield 1776–1833 and now at Birmingham University, from which Egerton Castle's Jerningham Letters were taken, include three unpublished letters from Elizabeth, Sister Mary Agnes Jerningham (1727–1807) and three unpublished letters from her American niece, Frances Henrietta, Sister Mary Sales Jerningham (1745–1824). Sister Mary Sales's 1803 letter to Lady Jerningham is now at the Stafford Record Office.

In the General State Archives, in Athens, specifically in the “Giannis Vlachogiannis” archive collection, there is a file containing seventeen fragments, that are one-sheet, two-sheet, four-sheet and, one among them, five-sheet. Vlachogiannis does not mention anything about their origin; in order to describe, however, the contents of this file, he wrote: “Χειρογράφων αποσπάσματα (βιογραφικά λογίων και κληρικών)” (excerpts from manuscripts (biographical information of scholars and clergymen)). This study aimed initially at tracing the philological identity and origin of these fragments.The identification of two scribes, who have written the majority of the fragments (fifteen out of seventeen), has given the first clue: Nikolaos Karatzas, a scholar, collector and manuscript scribe all together, owner of one of the biggest libraries in Constantinople in the 18th century, has written eleven texts; in the remaining four, we recognize the handwriting of his son and inheritor of his library, Konstantinos Karatzas. The second piece of information arose from the discovery of the fact that the fragments are not actually fifteen, as textual evidence demonstrated their coherence of content: in fact they form six sections.But are they indeed excerpts, fragments from “manuscripts”, as Vlachogiannis had assumed?Evidence from various sources brought forward in this study demonstrate the fact that the fragments were fascicules incorporated into printed books that once belonged to Karatzas' library, probably until the beginning of the second decade of the 19th century.The printed books in question are the following: Meletios Pegas, Ὑπὲρ τῆς χριστιανῶν εὐσεβείας πρὸς Ἰουδαίους ἀπολογία, Léopol 1593.Gregorios Palamas, Λόγοι ἀποδεικτικοὶ… [London 1626-1626].Ioannes Karyophylles, Ἐγχειρίδιον περί τινων ἀποριῶν…, Monastery of Synagovou 1697.Johann Michael Lange, Philologiae Barbaro-Græcæ, Noribergae 1707-1708.Ioannes Komnenos, Προσκυνητάριον τοῦ ἁγίου Ὄρους…, Venice 1745.Gabriel Severos, Συνταγμάτιον περὶ… μυστηρίων, Venice 1791. How were these fragments found in Athens, although they originated from printed books located in Constantinople? The answer to this plausible question is that they followed a labyrinthine path: the books that included them were bought by Lord Guilford and were donated to the Ionian Academy, the School he had established in 1824 on Corfu. After Guilford's death, when the books of his library were to be given back to the heirs of the donor, the librarian on Corfu, who was claiming his unpaid salaries, detached the fragments. They remained in the hands of A. Papadopoulos-Vretos and when his archive was sold to the General State Archives in 1920, Vlachogiannis put them aside in order to study them. It should be noted that most of the printed books from which the fragments were detached were bought by the British Museum in an auction, and are today located in the British Library.DIMITRIS G. APOSTOLOPOULOS

Abstract A manuscript preserved in the Royal Academy of History of Madrid shows that Pedro Montengón (1745–1824) translated the Sophoclean dramas Oedipus Rex, Electra and Philoctetes. This author wrote an interesting prologue with reflections on the Greek tragedy. In this paper, we will try to situate this production in its cultural context, analyze these translations, examine his thoughts and disquisitions on Greek tragedy and search for the reasons that prompted him to make these translations, silenced until the end of the twentieth century.

Le propos de cette thèse consiste à démontrer le rôle primordial de L’espace dans le roman de Pedro Montengón, grâce aux propositions méthodologiques du Professeur Jacques Soubeyroux qui a introduit l’espace comme une troisième catégorie du récit, à l’image du temps et de la narration considérés par la critique moderne comme étant les deux principaux éléments fondamentaux de la “représentation”. Devenu un lieu du sens, l’espace est dès lors une “catégorie textuelle” à part entière. Quant à son application au roman de Pedro Montengón (1745-1824), on se rend compte de ses différentes fonctions, puisqu’il sert à embrayer le récit en permettant à la fois le déroulement de l’action et la progression de l’intrigue romanesque. Par conséquent, l’analyse de la topographie romanesque facilite l’accès à l’univers littéraire de Pedro Montengón, voire des Lumières en Europe et de l’Ilustración en Espagne. C’est ainsi que nous parvenons à classifier sa production romanesque tantôt picaresque et sentimentale dans Eusebio (1786), tantôt éducative et sentimentale dans Eudoxia (1793), tantôt épique et gothique dans El Antenor (1788-1789) et El Rodrigo (1793), et tantôt pastorale, adaptée dans El Mirtilo (1795). Mais, dans quel contexte ces écrits avaient-ils vu le jour ? La réponse à cette question nous ramène dans le vif du sujet, eu égard à l’émergence difficile du roman qui était considéré comme une histoire feinte (historia fingida), dangereuse, en raison de la liberté des personnages dans la fiction. C’est ce qui explique son absence dans les genres officiellement reconnus, tels que le théâtre et la poésie, et bien encadrés par des canons rigides. Outre la censure sociale et étatique, le Saint Office était intransigeant pour faire respecter la littérature « utile », antinomique de la distraction et des idées philosophiques. Ainsi l’écrivain d’Alicante avait-il eu recours à l’autocensure esthétique en fuyant vers des mondes idéaux, que ce soit dans l’espace ou dans le temps. Il s’agit en effet d’une subversion de la réalité qui l’oblige à être en perpétuelle quête d’une utopie. D’où les connections entre l’imaginaire et le réel dans les écrits de Montengón, y compris la jonction de l’utile à l’agréable, les voyages et les métarécits des romans interpolés. Enfin, l’opposition de la ville tumultueuse et périlleuse, à la campagne tranquille et paisible est presque permanente dans le roman de Montengón, à l’aune du Menosprecio de Corte y Alabanza de Aldea De Fray Antonio de Guevara<br>The goal of this dissertation is to show the essential role of Space in the novels by Pedro Montengón thanks to the methodological proposals of Professor Jacques Soubeyroux who has introduced space as a third category of narrative along with time and narration which are considered by modern review as being the main two fundamental elements of “representation”. Once it has become a meaningful place, space is from then on a full “textual category”. When specifically applied to the novels of Montengón (1745-1824), one better understands its different functions since it serves to get started on the narrative by both allowing action to proceed on and plot to progress. Thus, analyzing the novel topography makes it easier to enter the literary universe of Pedro Montengón and even the Age of Enlightenment in Europe and the Ilustración in Spain. This approach helps us classify his literary work at the same time picaresque and sentimental in Eusebio (1786), educative and sentimental in Eudoxia (1793), epic and gothic in El Antenor (1788-1789) and adapted pastoral in El Mirtilo (1795). But in what context did those writings come to light? The answer to this question brings us right back to the subject matter of our dissertation considering the difficult surfacing of the novel which was considered as a fake story (historia fingida) and also dangerous because of the characters’ liberty in fiction. This is why it is absent in the officially recognized genres well controlled by rigid canons such as theater and poetry. In addition to social and state censorship, the Holy Office was uncompromising in enforcing the « useful » literature which is the antinomy of entertainment and of philosophical ideas. That’s why the writer from Alicante did indeed use esthetic self-censorship by fleeing to ideal worlds, whether it is in space or in time. It is actually a subversion of reality which obliges him to be perpetually in search of a utopia. Hence we find connections between the imaginative world and the real one in the writings of Montengón, included mixing business with pleasure, the travels and the meta-narratives of interpolated novels. Lastly, opposing the bustling and dangerous city to the quiet and peaceful countryside is almost a permanent feature in Montengón’s novel, in the light of Menosprecio de Corte y Alabanza de Aldea by Fray Antonio de Guevara

Defence date: 23 September 2006<br>Examining board: Prof. Laurence Fontaine (EHESS) ; Prof. Dominique Margairaz (Université Paris I) ; Prof. Denis Woronoff (Université Paris I) ; Prof. Bartolomé Yun Casalilla (European University Institute)<br>PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017<br>« La circonférence d'une vie » Connu comme notable de l’Empire depuis la brève notice que lui avait consacrée Georges Viard2, Jean-Jacques Guyenot (1745-1824) doit à Denis Woronoff d’être sorti de l'anonymat dans lequel l'histoire l'avait longtemps relégué. C’est l’un des maîtres de forges haut-mamais qu’il étudia dans sa thèse sur l’industrie sidérurgique entre Révolution et Empire3. En 1998, Thomas Mambrini poursuivit dans le cadre de sa maîtrise l’exploration des activités sidérurgiques de Guyenot, dont l’itinéraire singulier fait figure d'exception parmi les dynasties de maîtres de forges en Champagne4. Quelques années auparavant, D. Woronoff m’avait fait découvrir une autre facette du personnage, celle du premier commis de la commission des péages, intéressé dans le même temps à la perception des droits de propriétaires illustres. Tour à tour commis de la monarchie administrative et maître de forges pendant la Révolution, il devint concessionnaire de canal sous l'Empire avant de subir à la fin de sa vie un revers de fortune.