[pt] Esta dissertação pretende investigar as formas de figuração do tempo histórico nacional presentes na História da Revolução de Pernambuco em 1817 (1840), de Francisco Muniz Tavares. Ao interpretar a revolução pernambucana de 1817, Muniz Tavares a concebeu como uma tentativa de antecipação do futuro da independência que expressava uma assincronia entre Pernambuco e os demais espaços do Brasil. Isso porque a independência de 1822 foi compreendida como o crescimento de um germe da emancipação cujo plantio já teria se dado de modo precursor na revolução promovida em solo pernambucano, então interpretada como um prenúncio do futuro no passado. Para além disso, em sua narrativa do movimento de 1817, este letrado propôs uma leitura da história brasileira bastante crítica à colonização portuguesa, por vezes entendida como um passado ainda presente mesmo após a independência. A identificação do que, em sua perspectiva, seriam marcas do período colonial, como a escravidão e o atraso de parte dos brasileiros, produziu um modo de conceber o tempo histórico nacional que enfatizava as assincronias entre os diversos espaços e grupos que compunham a nação e no qual a suposição de um movimento temporal autônomo e animado pelo progresso coexistia com a permanência de passados indesejados. Isso originou uma visão menos harmônica da temporalidade nacional cuja apreensão nos permite complexificar e tensionar as análises relativas ao cânone historiográfico oitocentista, visibilizando narrativas dissonantes acerca da história brasileira. / [en] This research aims to investigate the forms of figuration of a national historical time on Francisco Muniz Tavares História da Revolução de Pernambuco em 1817 (1840). Interpreting the Pernambuco revolution of 1817, Muniz Tavares conceived it as an attempt to anticipate the future of independence that expressed a non-synchronicity between Pernambuco and Brazil. This is because the Brazilian independence was understood as the growth of a germ of emancipation whose planting would have already taken place in a precursory way in the revolution promoted in Pernambuco, then conceived as presage of the future in the past. Furthermore, in his narrative of the Pernambuco movement, this author proposed an interpretation of Brazilian history that was quite critical of Portuguese colonization, understood as a past still present even after independence. The acknowledgment of what, in his view, would be marks of the colonial period, such as slavery and the absence of progress on the part of Brazilians, produced a way of conceiving the national historical time that emphasized the non-synchronicity between the different spaces and groups that were part of the nation and in which the assumption of an autonomous temporal movement pervaded by progress coexisted with the permanence of unwanted pasts. This produced a less harmonious view of national temporality whose understanding allows us to enrich and tense the studies related to the 19th century historiographical canon, revealing dissonant narratives about Brazilian history.

Ce mémoire a pour ambition de comprendre comment et en quel sens l’idée de « classique » est repensée au XIXe siècle. Alors que l’Ancien Régime intégrait le classique dans un système de représentation relativement cohérent, au sein duquel sa fonction, son rôle et sa pertinence étaient clairement établis, la notion devient brusquement problématique aux lendemains de la Révolution. La France révolutionnée est marquée par une expérience du temps inédite et une nouvelle relation à sa mémoire culturelle qui font éprouver aux lettrés la nécessité de redéfinir leurs rapports au classique. Après avoir clarifié le sens général de la notion avant la Révolution, l’étude se penche sur trois grands « moments » de la dynamique de redéfinition du classique au XIXe siècle. Il s’agit d’abord de voir dans quelle mesure l’historicisation du passé dans les premières années du siècle conduit les lettrés à refuser la fonction de modèle à imiter traditionnellement associée au classique, et à l’envisager désormais en vertu d’une rupture entre le présent et l’« avant-soi ». La partie suivante s’attache aux reconfigurations du canon littéraire par la lancée romantique, et montre comment ces métamorphoses de l’horizon culturel amènent les lettrés à déterminer de nouvelles modalités d’appropriation du classique. Une dernière partie tente de voir de quelle manière la pertinence et la portée de la notion sont révisées une fois de plus dans le contexte de l’« institutionnalisation » de la distance critique entraînée par la scientifisation des études littéraires dans le dernier tiers du XIXe siècle. Inspiré à la fois par l’histoire des idées et l’histoire culturelle, ce mémoire se propose de saisir son objet dans une perspective de longue durée. Outre un large corpus secondaire délibérément éclectique, cinq auteurs sont interrogés plus spécifiquement : Ballanche, Stendhal, Sainte-Beuve, Renan, Lanson. / This master’s thesis aims to understand how and in what sense the idea of "classic" was rethought throughout the 19th century. During the historical period of Old Regime in France, the classic was incorporated into a relatively coherent system of representation, within which its function, role and relevance were clearly established. However, the notion suddenly became problematic in the aftermath of the French Revolution. Revolutionized France was marked by an unprecedented experience of time and a new relation to its cultural memory which made literati feel the need to redefine their relation to the classic. After clarifying the general meaning of the concept before the Revolution, the study examines three major "moments" in the dynamics of redefining the classic in the 19th century. First, the analysis intends to determine the extent to which the historicization of the past, in the first years of the century, led the literati to refuse the classic its traditional function of a model to imitate and instead, to consider it in the perspective of a rupture between the present and the past. The following part explores the reconfigurations of the literary canon by the romantic movement and shows how these metamorphoses of the cultural horizon led the literati to determine new modalities of appropriation of the classic. The final part attempts to see how the relevance and scope of the notion are revised in the context of the "institutionalization" of critical distance brought about by the scientification of literary studies in the last third of the 19th century. Inspired by both intellectual history and cultural history, this dissertation sets out to grasp its subject matter from a long-term perspective. In addition to a large, deliberately eclectic secondary corpus, five authors are questioned more specifically: Ballanche, Stendhal, Sainte-Beuve, Renan, Lanson.