Search

During the summer of 1907, France experienced one of its largest social disturbances since the Revolution, as the winegrowers of the Languedoc-Roussillon led a mass protest movement that paralysed the region and challenged the state. Although the Grande Révolte evoked references to the Albigensian Crusade, and juxtaposed North and South, it never fully represented a moment of Occitan regionalist rising. The failure of the cultural organisation the Félibrige to fully engage with protesters led to a fissure between political and cultural expressions of Occitan identity that marked the movement thereafter. By combining linguistic anthropology and historical analysis, the authors are able to foreground a key aspect of national identity formation as it occurred in 1907. Considering the impact of the Grande Révolte on the identity and language of the Midi offers us an insight into the development of regionalism both within and beyond the borders of the French nation. Pendant l'été 1907, la France vécut de grands troubles sociaux auxquels l'État dut faire face, à savoir la Grande Révolte des vignerons du Languedoc-Roussillon qui glaça la région. Bien que la Grande Révolte ait évoqué des références à la Croisade des Albigeois et ait juxtaposé le Nord et le Sud, elle n'atteignit jamais le niveau d'un vrai soulèvement régionaliste occitan. Le manque de coopération entre l'organisation culturelle du Félibrige d'un côté et les manifestants de l'autre provoqua une fissure entre les expressions politiques et culturelles de l'identité occitane, qui désormais marquerait le mouvement. Les auteurs allient l'anthropologie linguistique et l'analyse historique afin de souligner un aspect principal de la création d'une identité nationale en 1907. Prendre en considération l'impact de la Grande Révolte sur l'identité et les langues du Midi nous donne un aperçu du développement du régionalisme en France et hors de France. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

About 2,800 volunteers of the American contingent of the International Brigades, generally known as the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, served in Spain from 1937 to 1939. After the fall of Barcelona at the end of January 1939 many ended up in French refugee camps. This article draws on first-hand eye-witness accounts to paint a picture not only of the withdrawal from Spain after the fall of Barcelona in January 1939 but also of conditions within the camps in France. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1934 French politics became polarized in a bitter struggle for the soul of France between Jeanne d'Arc and Marianne. In the course of the war in Spain, the positions taken by the Left and Right did not change; they simply hardened. Socialist doctrine was grounded in pacifism, but now it had to confront fascism. The Right, in its many varieties, was pro-appeasement and pro-Mussolini, and did its best to close its eyes to Italo-German rapprochement; Hitlerism was viewed as a terrible danger, but it was still the lesser ideological evil. Toulouse provided a fine observation point on Spain, and its varied press included the centre-left La Dépêche, of international renown. Among its writers, Heinrich Mann and Émile Vandervelde expressed an excessive pro-Republican optimism (as did Léon Blum in Le Midi Socialiste). L'Express du Midi called for volunteers for Franco, and Franco fumed at the poor response. Guglielmo Ferrero meanwhile warned that Europe was now plunged into the greatest intellectual and moral confusion in all its history. With Franco's victory, what all sides came to realize was that France now faced hostile forces on three frontiers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Alphonse Aulard (1849–1928) institutionalised and professionalised the practice of history. Beyond this undisputed contribution, however, Aulard's place in historiography remains contested. Scholars' perceptions that anti-clerical and radical-republican commitments skewed his research findings, and that he chose narrowly to study history as a series of constitutional, institutional and political developments in stark contrast with his student Albert Mathiez, have divided opinion regarding the beliefs and significance of Aulard. Yet Aulard's work and the cultural and political contribution it made have become a source of inspiration for a generation of scholars now studying revolutionary and European history. Based for the first time on an examination of his private papers, professional activities and oeuvre in tandem, this article revisits Aulard, and, using a post-analytic hermeneutics, re-reads his work in order to show how in his age Aulard advanced a demonstrably original contribution to historical research. He likewise left behind him a neo-Jacobin legacy more attentive to raison d'état than party division and championing international, liberal democracy and human rights. Multifaceted commitments therefore both explain the content of Aulard's oeuvre and help to understand contemporary developments, and suggest future directions, in historical enquiry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

D'une façon générale, l'enseignement de l'histoire a acquis une légitimité sociale du fait que l'étude du passé est censée délivrer aux élèves des clés de compréhension du présent, c'est-à-dire du temps où ils vivent. Mais ce topos ne dit rien du sens que donnent à cette expression les historiographies scolaires, inscrites dans des sociétés où l'expérience du passé a configuré le rapport qu'elles entretiennent avec les diverses facettes du temps. On peut donc se demander de quelles significations, selon les contextes et les aires géographiques, est chargée cette généralité, en d'autres termes historiciser la notion même "comprendre le présent". C'est ce questionnement qui a été appliqué à l'enseignement de l'histoire en France, pour la période 1870–1940 – celle de la Troisième République – où il a représenté, sept ans durant, un des piliers de la formation des élèves – masculins – de l'enseignement secondaire. Les républicains, arrivés au pouvoir après la défaite de 1871 contre la Prusse, entendaient en effet dispenser à la jeunesse française, appelée à constituer les futures élites de la nation, de solides connaissances historiques. L'enjeu était de taille: dans un pays affaibli et, de surcroît, divisé politiquement, il s'agissait de rassembler, autour de la nation et des valeurs républicaines, les forces du pays. Quel statut a donc donné au présent cet usage scolaire de l'étude du passé alors que les historiens, dans le contexte de professionnalisation de la discipline historique qui caractérise au 19è siècle les États-nations, posaient les règles de la critique érudite et affirmaient leur volonté d'élaborer une histoire qui ne servît que la "Vérité"? Nous avons ici distingué deux niveaux: d'une part celui des programmes et autres textes officiels complétés par les publications des historiens qui, à la fin du 19è siècle, dominent le paysage historiographique. En effet, Gabriel Monod, un des fondateurs en 1876 de la Revue historique dont l'objectif est de créer en France une école historique, Ernest Lavisse et leur cadet Charles Seignobos s'impliquent tous également dans la renaissance des études historiques savantes et dans l'organisation de l'histoire scolaire; d'autre part, les auteurs ont exploité les articles et rapports des revues pédagogiques, les cahiers d'élèves, les témoignages recueillis spontanément ou non, toutes traces qui, en nous introduisant à la connaissance de l'histoire enseignée, élargissent le spectre des sources de l'histoire de la discipline. Car si la périodisation établie par les programmes fait de l'étude du présent l'aboutissement de la connaissance du passé, il importe de se demander à quelles pratiques du présent a donné lieu ce que Lavisse appelait "la théorie de l'enseignement"? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article approaches international feminisms in historical comparative perspective by looking at three feminist federations, called national councils of women, that were established in France, Italy and Portugal in 1901, 1903 and 1914, respectively. All of these organisations emerged from the International Council of Women, which had been founded in Washington in 1888 'to stimulate the sentiment of internationalism among women throughout the world', as an attempt to build a collective women's identity. The comparison between France, Italy and Portugal during the first three decades of the twentieth century must take into account the fact that the last two countries faced authoritarian regimes (fascist and Salazarist dictatorships, respectively) while, by contrast, France spent the period considered in this article under the Third Republic. After examining the origins of these three national councils of women, the focus will be on their common agenda, taking into account the national contexts to which they had to adapt themselves. The aim of this article is to contribute to the history of transnational feminisms and to a comparative women's history of the twentieth century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]