L’objet de cette thèse est d’étudier comment les auteurs français de la Renaissance perpétuent et font évoluer un corpus de représentations de la peste en mêlant imitation, expérience vécue et invention dans leurs écrits. Ce corpus repose sur des récits et des descriptions de la peste issus d’œuvres majeures de l’Antiquité (l’Iliade, la Bible, l’Histoire du Péloponnèse, les Géorgiques) et du Moyen Âge (le Décaméron, la Chirurgia magna), le plus souvent traduites en français, et parues pendant la première moitié du XVIe siècle.La première partie de ce travail s’intéresse à ces traductions, qui se lisent comme des œuvres à part entière (allégories des guerres et des troubles religieux à la Renaissance), mais sont également des sources d’inspiration pour les auteurs de nouveaux écrits sur la peste.La seconde partie se penche sur ces créations. Les auteurs, qui se mettent parfois en scène comme des survivants de la maladie, reprennent les images du corpus déjà établi, en les adaptant à leurs propres fins. Nous mettons en évidence la répétition des images d’œuvre en œuvre (l’influence du corpus existant sur Clément Marot, Michel de Nostredame, Pierre Boaistuau, Ambroise Paré, Michel de Montaigne et Agrippa d’Aubigné ; l’influence des prédécesseurs sur leurs successeurs), tout en analysant leur fonction dans chaque nouveau contexte.Il ne s’agit pas ici de traiter de la peste historique (de nombreuses maladies appartenant à de nombreuses époques, rassemblées sous un nom générique), mais bien de l’imaginaire lié à un fléau unique, merveilleux, considéré comme la « main de Dieu ». La peste devient un genre littéraire codifié, fort reconnaissable, à la fin de la Renaissance. / The object of this thesis is to study how French Renaissance writers perpetuate and develop a corpus of plague representations, through imitation, personal experience and invention in their writings. This corpus is based on plague narratives and descriptions from major works of Antiquity (including The Iliad, The Bible, The History of the Peloponnesian War, The Georgics) and the Middle Ages (The Decameron, The Chirurgia Magna), often translated into French and published over the course of the first half of the sixteenth century.The first part of this work focuses on these translations, which may be read as works in their own right (allegories of war and religious unrest during the Renaissance), but are also a source of inspiration for authors of new plague writings.The second part of this thesis focuses on these creations. The authors, who sometimes depict themselves as survivors of the disease, borrow images from the pre-established corpus, adapting them to their own purposes. We highlight the images that reappear from one work to another (the influence of the existing corpus upon Clément Marot, Nostradamus, Pierre Boaistuau, Ambroise Paré, Michel de Montaigne and Agrippa d’Aubigné; the influence of predecessors upon their successors), while analyzing the function of these images in each new context.This work does not deal with the historical plague (the many diseases, from numerous eras, gathered under a generic name), but rather with the representations linked to a single, marvellous affliction, considered to be the “hand of God”. The plague becomes a codified, highly recognizable, literary genre at the close of the Renaissance.

This thesis explores the relationship between the many literary texts referring to the deaths of Ugo d'Este and Parisina Malatesta, who were executed in Ferrara in 1425 in accordance with an order by Niccolò III d'Este after he discovered their incestuous relationship. The texts are divided in three categories: (1) the fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Italian novellas and their translations; (2) the seventeenth-century Spanish tragedy; and (3) the nineteenth- and twentieth-century Romantic works. Although these categories divide the various texts chronologically, they also represent a thematic grouping as the texts within each category share common themes that set them apart from those in the other groups. While the various texts all tell the same story, each approaches the tragedy slightly differently based largely on the audience for which it was intended. Thus, the time and place of each text greatly affects its telling. Still, the fact that substantial differences exist between texts that were produced in both geographic and temporal proximity suggests that these are not all-determining factors. Although scholarship exists analyzing individual texts, a comprehensive study of the literary accounts relating to the tragedy has never been undertaken. Rather than detracting from the story, the differences put forth in each of the literary texts enrich the global reading experience by offering many perspectives on the tragedy. In addition, these differences influence how the reader reacts to each of the other texts. Familiarity with one version of the story changes the way a reader approaches the others. A parallel reading of the different versions of the story also shows the power culture has on interpretation. Texts referring to a singular event from one time and place sharply contrast with those that are the product of other circumstances.