O que é e como é a σωφροσύνη (ό τι ἐστι καὶ ὁποȋόν τι ἡ σωφροσύνη)? Esta é a questão que Sócrates propõe a seus interlocutores, Carmides e Critias, examinarem juntos no diálogo de juventude de Platão, o Carmides, diálogo tentativo ou de exame (πϵιραστικός). Σωφροσύνη é fazer todas as coisas ordenada e calmamente (τò κοσμίως πάυτα πράττϵιν καὶ ἡσυxῇ)? É um sentimento como pudor ou reserva (άἰδως)? É cuidar de suas próprias coisas (τὸ τὰ αὑτοῡ πράττϵιν)? Σωφροσύνη seria fazer coisas boas (τῶν ἀγαθῶν πρᾱξιν)? Ou, ainda, conhecer-se a si mesmo (τὸ γιγνώσκϵιν ἑαυτόν)? Seria ciência das outras ciências e ciência de si mesma (ἐπιστημῶυ ἐπιστήμη ἐστὶ καὶ αὐτὴ ἑαυτῆς)? Ou seria, finalmente, o conhecimento do bem e do mal (τὸ ἀγαθόν καὶ τὸ κακόν)? Como em outros propriamente chamados diálogos socráticos de Platão (no Laques é a coragem, no Eutífron é a piedade) nos quais se examina se uma virtude particular é conhecimento, no Carmides trata-se de examinar se a σωφροσύνη é conhecimento. Se é, é conhecimento de quê? E qual é, para nós, o benefício desta virtude, concebida como conhecimento? Estas são algumas das questões examinadas por Sócrates neste diálogo. Este trabalho pretende acompanhar passo a passo esta que é a primeira investigação (ἐξέτασις) socrática acerca da σωφροσύνη nos diálogos de Platão. Ou, dito de outro modo, este trabalho pretende acompanhar o passo a passo do filosofar socrático no diálogo Carmides. / What is it and how is σωφροσύνη (ό τι ἐστι καὶ ὁποȋόν τι ἡ σωφροσύνη)? This is the question that Socrates proposes to his interlocutors, Critias and Charmides, examine together in the dialogue of youth of Plato, the Charmides, tentative dialogue or examination (πϵιραστικός). Σωφροσύνη is make all things orderly and quietly (τò κοσμίως πάυτα πράττϵιν καὶ ἡσυxῇ)? Its a feeling like modesty or reserve (άἰδως)? You take care of your own things (τὸ τὰ αὑτοῡ πράττϵιν)? Σωφροσύνη would do good things (τῶν ἀγαθῶν πρᾱξιν)? Or even know himself (τὸ γιγνώσκϵιν ἑαυτόν)? Would be science of other sciences and science of herself (ἐπιστημῶυ ἐπιστήμη ἐστὶ καὶ αὐτὴ ἑαυτῆς)? Or would it be finally the knowledge of good and evil (τὸ ἀγαθόν καὶ τὸ κακόν)? Like in others properly called Socratic dialogues of Plato (in the Laches is the courage, in the Euthyphro is the piety) in which examines whether a particular virtue is knowledge, in the Charmides it is examining whether σωφροσύνη is knowledge. If it is, is knowledge of what? And what is, for us, the benefit of this virtue, conceived as knowledge? These are some of the issues examined by Socrates in this dialogue. This work intends to follow step by step this is that the first Socratic investigation (ἐξέτασις) about σωφροσύνη in the dialogues of Plato. Or, put another way, this work intends to follow step by step the Socratic philosophy in dialogue Charmides.

Louis Delaporte est un personnage méconnu de l’histoire de l’étude de l’art khmer en France. Il a cependant occupé, entre sa première mission aux ruines khmères, en 1873, et sa démission du Musée indochinois du Trocadéro, en 1924, une place centrale dans l’archéologie de l’Asie du Sud-Est. Cette thèse fournit un premier éclairage sur le travail entrepris par Delaporte pour faire connaître l’art khmer, et constituer une collection d’œuvres devant servir de base pour son étude. Des sources inédites (correspondance familiale, documents de travail conservés par la famille Delaporte et le musée Guimet) permettent de retracer le parcours professionnel de Louis Delaporte, de sa première visite sur le site d’Angkor, en 1866, au développement du Musée indochinois du Trocadéro, entre 1884 et 1924. Si la concentration du travail de Delaporte autour de l’art khmer est fortuite (sa première mission aux ruines khmères a ainsi été conçue comme l’étape initiale d’un voyage plus large d’exploration du Tonkin), il développe cependant dès son retour en France une stratégie réfléchie pour assurer aux œuvres rapportées de son séjour une place de choix sur la scène scientifique française. Grâce à la création d’un très vaste réseau, dans l’administration aussi bien que dans les milieux scientifiques, Louis Delaporte devient ainsi, dès les années 1880, un personnage incontournable dans l’étude des monuments khmers. Faute des connaissances nécessaires, il ne réussira cependant jamais à s’imposer comme le fer de lance de l’archéologie khmère, et se concentrera plutôt sur le développement d’une collection destinée à devenir, en France, indispensable à qui s’intéresse à l’archéologie khmère. / Louis Delaporte is an underrated character in the history of the study of Khmer art in France. Between his first travel to the Khmer ruins, in 1873, and his resignation from the Musée indochinois du Trocadéro, in 1924, he held, however, a central position in the archeology of Southeast Asia. This thesis provides a first insight into the work undertaken by Delaporte to make Khmer art renowned, and provide a collection of art works meant to be the basis of its study. Unpublished sources (family letters, working papers kept by the Delaporte family and the musée Guimet) help relate Louis Delaporte’s career, from his first visit to Angkor, in 1866, to the development of the Musée indochinois du Trocadéro, between 1884 and 1924. If the focus of Delaporte’s work on Khmer art is born of fortuitous circumstances (his first travel to the Khmer ruins was designed to be the inital step of a broader exploration trip to Tonkin), he however developed a conscious strategy to ensure the works of art he brought back became prominent in French scientific circles. Thanks to the creation of a vast network, in the administration as well as in scientific circles, Louis Delaporte became, in the 1880s, a key character in the study of Khmer monuments. Due to his lack of knowledge, however, Delaporte never succeded in becoming the spearhead of Khmer archeology, and focused instead more on the development of a collection designed to become, in France, essential to whoever had an interest in Khmer archeology.