O célebre livro de cozinha atribuído ao romano de nome Apício (século I d.C., provavelmente) e intitulado De re coquinaria pela erudição moderna do século XIX, chegou até nós unicamente por meio de três manuscritos medievais datados dos séculos VIII e IX, dois deles provenientes dos mosteiros de Fulda e Tours. Dado importante, porém pouco explorado, tendo em vista que o receituário aparece muito mais associado às cozinhas da Roma Imperial do que aquelas da Idade Média. Partindo da hipótese de que a cópia dos manuscritos apicianos por homens da Alta Idade Média esteja ancorada a aspirações particulares ao momento dinâmico do Renascimento Carolíngio, esta tese procurou traçar o enquadramento sócio-cultural que explica a reprodução e a incorporação do receituário pelos homens e pelas cozinhas de alguns ambientes sociais do período. Para tanto, foi necessário investigar o pensamento altomedieval sobre a comida, a disponibilidade e o acesso ambiental e cultural aos ingredientes apicianos e os mecanismos que possibilitaram estabelecer um locus para a sua incorporação. / The famous cookery book assigned to a Roman called Apicius (probably 1st century AD) and entitled De coquinaria by 19th century modern scholarship have come down to us only through three manuscripts dated from 8th and 9th centuries, two of them written at the monasteries of Fulda and Tours. Important aspect, although little discussed. The recipe book is normally associated to Imperial Roman cuisine than to medieval one. Assuming that the copy of apician manuscripts by men of the Early Middle Ages is anchored in the aspirations of the dynamic Carolingian Renaissance, this thesis examined the socio-cultural framework that explains the reproduction and the incorporation of the recipe book by men and by cuisines related to certain social environments of that time. For this purpose, it was necessary to investigate early medieval thought about food, environmental and cultural availability and access to apician ingredients and, finally, the mechanism that made possible to establish a locus for its incorporation.

O célebre livro de cozinha atribuído ao romano de nome Apício (século I d.C., provavelmente) e intitulado De re coquinaria pela erudição moderna do século XIX, chegou até nós unicamente por meio de três manuscritos medievais datados dos séculos VIII e IX, dois deles provenientes dos mosteiros de Fulda e Tours. Dado importante, porém pouco explorado, tendo em vista que o receituário aparece muito mais associado às cozinhas da Roma Imperial do que aquelas da Idade Média. Partindo da hipótese de que a cópia dos manuscritos apicianos por homens da Alta Idade Média esteja ancorada a aspirações particulares ao momento dinâmico do Renascimento Carolíngio, esta tese procurou traçar o enquadramento sócio-cultural que explica a reprodução e a incorporação do receituário pelos homens e pelas cozinhas de alguns ambientes sociais do período. Para tanto, foi necessário investigar o pensamento altomedieval sobre a comida, a disponibilidade e o acesso ambiental e cultural aos ingredientes apicianos e os mecanismos que possibilitaram estabelecer um locus para a sua incorporação. / The famous cookery book assigned to a Roman called Apicius (probably 1st century AD) and entitled De coquinaria by 19th century modern scholarship have come down to us only through three manuscripts dated from 8th and 9th centuries, two of them written at the monasteries of Fulda and Tours. Important aspect, although little discussed. The recipe book is normally associated to Imperial Roman cuisine than to medieval one. Assuming that the copy of apician manuscripts by men of the Early Middle Ages is anchored in the aspirations of the dynamic Carolingian Renaissance, this thesis examined the socio-cultural framework that explains the reproduction and the incorporation of the recipe book by men and by cuisines related to certain social environments of that time. For this purpose, it was necessary to investigate early medieval thought about food, environmental and cultural availability and access to apician ingredients and, finally, the mechanism that made possible to establish a locus for its incorporation.

Théodulf d’Orléans (∼ 760 ?-821) est un évêque et un érudit de la Renaissance carolingienne qui participa activement aux réformes de son époque. Il laissa une abondante œuvre poétique en latin, composée d’environ soixante-dix poèmes pour un total d’environ quatre mille sept cents vers. La thèse en propose, dans le premier volume, une étude systématique qui suit l’ordre d’une collection médiévale connue grâce à l’editio princeps publiée en 1646 par J. Sirmond. Cette étude entend analyser les poèmes de Théodulf en les mettant en relation avec le contexte intellectuel, culturel et historique de la Renaissance carolingienne. Elle s’attache également à mettre à jour les sources patristiques de Théodulf. Partant des nombreux cas de paraphrases d'extraits d'Isidore de Séville, de Grégoire le Grand ou encore d'Augustin, elle s'efforced'en dégager les enjeux, non seulement exégétiques, théologiques ou encore ecclésiologiques, mais aussi poétiques. Le second volume contient une nouvelle édition critique des poèmes de Théodulf, fondée principalement sur l'editio princeps et sur une collation nouvelle d’une soixantaine de manuscrits. Cette édition est accompagnée de la première traductionintégrale en français des poèmes de Théodulf. Un triple étage de notes permet d'éclaircir certains passages, de relever les références scripturaires et d'indiquer les sources classiques et patristiques. Les annexes qui terminent le second volume ont pour but de faire le lien entre l'étude et les poèmes. La thèse, en associant étude, édition, traduction et annexes, s'efforce ainsi de rendre accessible une poésie subtile et complexe, qui illustre le caractère protéiforme de la Renaissance carolingienne. / Theodulf of Orléans (∼ 760 ?-821) was a bishop and scholar who, as part of the Carolingian Renaissance, actively engaged in the reforms of his time. He left a copious poetical oeuvre in Latin, comprising some seventy poems for an approximate total of four thousand and seven hundred lines. This thesis presents, in the first volume, a systematic study which follows the order of a medieval collection, known to us thanks to the editio princeps published in 1646 by J. Sirmond. This study aims at analysing Theodulf's poems by relating them with the intellectual, cultural and historical context of the Carolingian Renaissance. It also endeavours to bring to light Theodulf's patristic sources. Starting with the many paraphrases of extracts from Isidore of Seville, Gregory the Great or Augustine, it purposes to discover what is at stake in this practice, exegetically, theologically, ecclesiologically, but also poetically speaking. The second volume comprises a new critical edition of the poems, based for the main part on the editio princeps and on a new collation of some sixty manuscripts. This edition comes with the first complete translation of Theodulf's poems into French. Three layers of notes are used to clarify some passages, document the scriptural references and indicate the sources, classical as well as patristic. The appendices that close the second volume aim at establishing a link between the study and the poems. By associating study, edition, translation and appendices, the thesis endeavours to give a better access to a complex, subtle poetry, one that illustrates the protean quality of the Carolingian Renaissance.

On conserve un nombre inhabituellement élevé de manuscrits ayant appartenu à la bibliothèque du chapitre cathédral de Lyon au IXe siècle, dont bon nombre ont été personnellement utilisés ou produits par le principal acteur de la vie intellectuelle lyonnaise de l’époque, le diacre Florus (floruit v. 825–855). Comme on connaît par ailleurs plusieurs grandes compilations rassemblées également par lui, Florus représente pour nous une double occasion particulièrement rare d’étudier la bibliothèque d’une école cathédrale carolingienne et les méthodes de travail d’un intellectuel de ce temps. Les comparaisons et les nombreux recoupements que permet cette situation étayent et alimentent notre connaissance des livres qu’on utilisait et qui circulaient à l’époque, mais aussi des hommes qui les lisaient et les échangeaient, et des conditions dans lesquelles le travail de Florus a pu passer dans la tradition manuscrite des Pères (première partie). Ces analyses nous peignent Florus un homme de son temps, formé dans un certain milieu à de certaines méthodes, mais que son expérience et ses goûts poussèrent à faire évoluer, tout au long de sa carrière, ses propres méthodes au service de ses propres projets (seconde partie). Un travail d’historiographie est aussi proposé, qui n’avait pas encore été entrepris, et qui fait apparaître les voies de la redécouverte de Florus au cours du XVIIe siècle, puis au XXe. La place de Florus et de sa bibliothèque d’usage, dans l’histoire intellectuelle et dans l’histoire de la transmission des textes antiques, en ressort mieux circonscrite et qualifiée plus précisément, en même temps que se dévoile le cours de sa propre évolution intellectuelle. / An unusual amount of manuscripts that belonged to the Cathedral library of Lyons in the IXth century has been preserved, among which a number were firsthand used or produced by its prominent intellectual figure, the deacon Florus (floruit ca. 825—855). As we also know several large compilations that were gathered by the very same, Florus represents a rare double opportunity to investigate both a Carolingian cathedral library and the work methods of a Carolingian scholar. Numerous comparisons and crosscheckings can strengthen and supply informations regarding the books that were used and circulated at the time, but also regarding the men that read and circulated them, and clarify how Florus’s work on the Fathers has spread in the manuscript tradition (first part). Such analyses depict Florus as a man of his time, who was educated in a certain environment and to use certain methods; but who was then driven, all along his career, by his own experience and taste, to evolve his own methods in the pursuing of his own projects (second part). A historiography study is also held, which was never undertaken before, and reveals the how and why of Florus’s rediscovery in the XVIIth century, and then again in the XXth. Florus’s part and his work library’s, in the intellectual history and in the history of ancient texts transmission, is thus better circumscribed and more precisely described, as is unvailed the course of his own intellectual evolution.